Did they flip flop on Internet Voting?

[sfecap]

Online vote triggers worry

State Dems aim to spur caucus turnout; critics fear the digital divide

By Charlie Cain / Detroit News Lansing Bureau


LANSING -- Despite substantial criticism -- including fears of hackers and the silencing of minority voters -- Michigan Democratic leaders are holding to their plan to allow Internet voting in the Feb. 7 caucus that will select a presidential favorite.

The plan, which is being challenged by seven of the nine Democratic presidential hopefuls, would for the first time allow Michigan voters to use the Internet in a public election. Arizona, the only other state to try online voting, used it in the 2000 Democratic presidential primary -- and saw turnout increase more than six-fold over 1996.

Critics of the Democratic Party's plan fear it would bring into play the "digital divide" -- the gulf between wealthy and lower-income Americans in access to and everyday use of computer technology.

(snip)

One of the presidential candidates not challenging the online voting plan is former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, who according to recent polls is leading the crowded field in Michigan. Dean, by mining the Internet for campaign contributions and volunteer campaign workers, has emerged thus far as the most computer-savvy of the candidates.

Lansing pollster Ed Sarpolus said Dean's acceptance of the concept of online voting comes as no surprise. In a survey last week of 400 likely Democratic caucus voters, Sarpolus found 25 percent of Dean's supporters said they would use the Internet to cast their votes. No other candidate had more than 14 percent of supporters who said they would vote online. "Mr. Dean clearly has the Internet advantage and that explains why these other Democrats, who supported the Internet voting as recently as July, now see they have something to fear," Sarpolus said. "Internet voting could result in a total shift in who controls the outcome of the primary election.

"Instead of senior citizens, union members and party rank-and-file having control, this could be the first time that younger generations could determine the outcome of a presidential caucus."

(more)

http://www.detnews.com/2003/politics/0310/14/a01-297592.htm


Who's wired


According to the U.S. Commerce Department:

46.1 percent of U.S. white households have Internet access.

23.6 percent of Hispanic households are online.

23.5 percent of African-American homes are wired.

12.7 percent of households with incomes of $15,000 or less have access.

86.3 percent of homes with family earnings of $75,000 or more are wired

[Feanorcurufinwe]

1. No way to tell from the article

all we have is Mr. Sarpolus' statement: " these other Democrats, who supported the Internet voting as recently as July" without any quotes or references to back it up.

In contrast this is what a REAL flip-flop looks like:

"We have to stop terrorism before peace negotiations"
http://www.forward.com/issues/2002/02.11.22/news3.html

said he didn't "believe stopping the terror has to be a prerequisite for talking."
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/10/elec04.prez.dean.mideast/

[sfecap]

4. Kerry did. Here's what his flip flop looks like:

Kerry signed the manifesto,

"A New Agenda for the New Decade":



Return Politics to the People

At a time when much of the world is emulating American values and institutions, too many Americans have lost confidence in their political system. They are turned off by a partisan debate that often seems to revolve not around opposing philosophies but around contending sets of interest groups. They believe that our current system for financing campaigns gives disproportionate power to wealthy individuals and groups and exerts too much influence over legislative and regulatory outcomes.

The time for piecemeal reform is past. As campaign costs soar at every level, we need to move toward voluntary public financing of all general elections and press broadcasters to donate television time to candidates.

The Internet holds tremendous potential for making campaigns less expensive and more edifying and for engaging Americans directly in electoral politics. We should promote the Internet as a new vehicle for political communication and champion online voting.

Goals for 2010

Introduce voluntary public financing for all general elections.
Allow properly regulated voter registration and voting online.
Implement civic education courses in every public school.

Source: The Hyde Park Declaration 00-DLC9 on Aug 1, 2000


http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=128&subid=174&contentid=1926

(New Democrats = DLC)


Or how about this one?


Candidates Views On E-Voting Change

POSTED: 12:31 p.m. EDT October 10, 2003

LANSING, Mich. -- Talk about an electronic flip-flop.

Recently, eight Democratic presidential candidates sent a letter opposing Internet voting in Michigan's Democratic caucuses. But three of the eight who signed the letter have supported electronic voting in the past.

In May, Rep. Richard Gephardt of Missouri told an NAACP voting group he'd support Internet voting among other ways to get more people to the polls. And senators John Kerry, of Massachusetts, and Joseph Lieberman, of Connecticut, signed on to a 2000 Democratic Leadership Council statement of principles that endorsed the use of Internet voting.

http://www.wral.com/technology/2546190/detail.html

Looks like Kerry agreed with the DLC...but when it doesn't work in his favor, he flip flops.

Interesting.

[dsc]

5. I can see their defense now though

things changed with the disputed election. I think that would be tenuous at best especially given the racial aspects of the criticism not. BTW was the NAACP in favor of our opposed to the internet voting?

[sfecap]

6. They way I see it is that they are afraid

of Dean's Internet presence.

Looked like a good idea until Dean came along.

I don't know how I feel about it. The Dem Party in Michigan likes the idea in the primaries...

There's good and bad about it I guess.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

8. Supporting, in 2000, online voting as a 'goal for 2010'

is a lot different from saying Michigan should use internet voting in this upcoming primary. But I suppose that is a distinction that will be lost on you...

[Nazgul35]

10. so when and where do you start...

in 2012? If your goal is to get there, ie score a goal = achieve, than you have to start somewhere and sometime...it's 2004, how many states have tried this to date? One?

Is moving towards a goal for you waiting until the clock is down to 5 seconds then throwing a hail mary pass from your own one yard line?

Please, perhaps you should be able to be distinct about what a goal means and how to achieve it....

[DrFunkenstein]

16. Let's Compare Quote And Insinuation

Quote: "We should promote the Internet as a new vehicle for political communication and champion online voting."

Insinuation: "We should use the Internet right now while major inequalities exist."

There may come a day when the Internet can be effectively used, but that day is not upon us.

I have my own doubts about even its future use, because there is no way to account for confidential voting. Would a college kid vote for the Green Party if their Democratic father was standing over them?

[dsc]

2. I'll be honest

I don't like internet voting. I think it is prone to security problems and I would need those explained to me. But I fail to see why those without computers can't mail ballots in (like this plan lets them do). I would do that just to have the paper record.

[JohnGideon]

3. On-Line Voting Is A Mistake

We cannot allow on-line voting to take place without speaking out. It is a security issue. There is no verifiable record of anyones vote. This is as bad as using touch-screen machines as far as hackability, security, and software problems. It will also disenfranchise a large population who do not have computers.

[DannyRed]

7. Actually,

Saying this:

"It will also disenfranchise a large population who do not have computers. "

is only accurate if internet voting REPLACES standard voting methods...it does not. It adds to the current methods...meaning MORE ways to vote.

Security is a different issue.

It all depends on where the votes go to be tallied...if they go directly to Secretary of State's offices via secure servers, accompanied by unique identifiers and printed records in the hands of individual voters, then it is potentially MORE secure than BBV, which is administered by privately held corporations who control the code, the machines, the records, and the counting...

[Mairead]

9. To a certain degree it does disenfranchise...or at least water down

Consider: if under the old scheme you got 2000 well-off and 2000 poor all voting their respective issues, and then you add some voting methodology that changes the turnout to 4000 and 2500, it seems to me that the net effect is to dilute the votes of the poor. No?

[mbali]

13. It gives an advantage

to those who already have an advantage.

In my view, this is the equivalent of providing personal voting machines to each homeowner enabling them to vote from their living rooms while leaving everyone else to traditional voting methods. Yes, people who don't own property could still go out and vote, but is it fair to expect them to have to make extra efforts to do so while making it easier for the more affluent to cast their vote.


For example, those without internet access are more likely to have jobs that do not allow them to come in late or leave early or take long lunches without substantial consequence. They are less likely to be able to just hop in the car and drive to the nearest polling place. They are more likely to have obligations and distractions that make it difficult for them to focus much attention in advance on how to exercise their right to vote. Yes, they still have the right to vote, but they have to make an extra effort to exercising that right, effort that is not required by people with more resources.

Instead of putting more resources toward helping those who already have an advantage, why not invest those resources in making it easier for people already facing difficulties?

[dsc]

14. But that isn't what Michigan is doing

as has been stated something like a billion times. They are also permitting a five week window to mail in ballots. And yes, even poor people get mail. You and others continually and falsely claim that this is internet only and it just isn't.

[Mairead]

18. You're smarter than that, aren't you?

Or aren't you? I'm really beginning to wonder, because if you can't see how offering an immediate-gratification method that privileges the well-off over the poor...if you really, truly can't see how that's unfair, then you're embarrassingly dim.

[dsc]

19. So it is the immediate gratification that is the problem?

Of all the goofy arguments I have heard on this issue this is one of the goofiest. Let's review the record.

One this program was unamimously agreed to by the Michigan State Democratic central committee which not only is cochaird by an African American it also has proportional representation for African Americans.

Two, this program did three things. One it increased the number of polling places to at least 400 (a low number in my opinion), permitted mail in voting (with the ability to request ballots via phone), and permitted internet voting.

Three, every candidate agreed in principal with internet voting until just a few weeks ago.

For the record, I think internet voting is a bad idea unless there is verifyable security. But to say this plan is racist, which is what you and others are saying, is absurd.

[DrFunkenstein]

15. I Have Said I Agree With This And That Dean Is Not A Racist

However, I also likened this to putting twice (or 3x) the amount of polling places in white neighborhoods. It doesn't disenfranchise, technically, but it creates a separate and unequal situation.

[Upfront]

21. Bull

You can still vote in the same ways we always did plus the internet. Let me ask you, are we a party that wins when more people vote, or are we not? You can go to a polling place, use a paper mail in ballot, or the internet. It could not be more fair. If you feel as strong about your choice as I do mine, you will vote come hell or high water. To say that is unfair is bull shit, period.

[Nazgul35]

11. So the Move-on primary was crap?

It wasn't done properly? Do you know anything about the specifics of the Michigan primary safeguards or are you just making assumptions?

What specifics do you have about what is wrong with the upcoming primary and how does the Michigan program fail to answer them?

Having said that...I personally am going in person to my caucus to vote....

[Mairead]

12. It didn't meet the standards required for a real vote, no.

Anyone with appropriate resources could have had multiple personae in play.

[Pez]

17. i read a report on touch-screen voting done recently (verrrrry bad)...

...and the votes were reversed because the people monitoring it PLUGGED THE CHORDS INTO THE WRONG SOCKETS!@#%$~ that wasn't even on purpose; they had no agenda... it was a test. imagine. pfft.

i don't like internet voting either; no matter who it benefits in the dem primaries you KNOW teh pukes will walk away with saddam~style approval ratings. "oh gee, they all voted for BUSH INC.! what a triumph for democracy and technology!!! oh glorious day."

it also distracts from the real problems we face with voting locations. there should be a uniform voting booth across the nation. we never have any problems here in nyc; why don't they pick a place that has a simple, working method and just make a billion of those?

[Upfront]

20. No

The state Democratic party wants it, but could be over ruled by the DNC. Hope it stands because more people will vote.