VotersUnite: Voting should never be done electronically. PERIOD.

[Carolab]

http://www.wheresthepaper.org/VVPBnotEnough.htm

<snip>

CONCLUSION. It is simply wrong to assert that VVPB (even with open source code and random recounts) will save the day. It cannot safeguard against:

- Bugs – inadvertent or not – in the software.
- Inadequate testing.
- Laughable certification process.
- Legal restraints on fixing software bugs in a timely manner.
- Legal restraints on fixing software bugs before an election.
- Intimate involvement of vendors in the electoral process.
- Computer novices running electronic elections.
- Security procedures developed by officials who are befuddled by computers.
- Malfunctioning hardware.
- Nonexistent input/feedback process.

The only way to get a fair election is to have a transparent election. Electronic elections, by definition, are NOT transparent. And that's on top of all the other problems.

Votes should never be recorded electronically. Period.

[unblock]

1. having built a career on software and automation

i've always maintained that elections never fit the profile of tasks in great need of automation.

they don't happen every day, they do require evidential verification, they require complete understanding by the most technologically illiterate, they require full access and understanding be people with a wide range of disabilities, and they require 100% correctness the first time (it's impossible to correct errors).

i don't really have much of a problem with automation assisting in the initial count (optical scan, e.g.) but any recount should be done by hand based on physical evidence.

[Carolab]

2. The problem is fraud committed in the initial count isn't discoved

UNLESS there is a recount, and that happens only if there is a close margin--thereby encouraging "cheating bigger".

[unblock]

3. true, though there are protections for that

the idea that you only get a recount if the initial tally is close is just plain stupid.

ohio's idea of doing a small sample and comparing the manual vs. machine tallies is much better. though, obviously, that, too, is subject to manipulation.

[BeFree]

6. Manipulation, indeed

As you are aware, manipulation is all to easy. Someone in a whole 'nother state can manipulate the E-votes in, say, Florida.

Let there be no question, no division, no other resolution, but to be rid of E-voting. The complications are far too numerous, the technology far too secret, and the owners far too private for any of us to have faith that E-voting is accurate. Sure, it could one day be made accurate, but today the evidence shows we should have zero faith.

[Junkdrawer]

4. Blackwell is recommending an all-optical scan solution for Ohio...

provided, I believe, by Diebold.

Now, do you think he would do that if there weren't ways of manipulating that system?

Oh, and the Republicans in the Ohio state legislature are going to restrict, if not close, the any-candidate-can-request-a-recount "loophole".

Look, since 1980, when the Urosevich Bros. began their successful, extreme R/W funded quest to take over vote counting in the US, our vote counting system has become more and more corrupt. Hand counted paper ballots may well be the only way to get these leeches out of the system.

[ladjf]

5. This post by "unblock" is a very astute observation about

voting processes. The argument is as simple as that. No need for long winded dissertations. (1) Verifiable votes, i.e. transparency (2) no need for high speed as the elections don't occur that frequently.

Either we are able to move to such a manual process of Democracy remains DOA.

[unblock]

7. glad you emphasized the "no need for speed" part

it's absolutely insane that the media, egged on by the banana republicans in 2000, kept up with the whole "crisis" crap while the votes were supposedly being counted, acting as though it's a constitutional crisis if we don't know who definitively won before we go to sleep election day.

sheesh.

there's a reason why the election is the first tuesday in november and the president elect doesn't get swornin until january 20. indeed, the original swear-in date was march 4.

the founders wanted actual votes counted, counted fairly, and they wanted public confidence in the election process. there is NOTHING to suggest that they thought haste was remotely important.

[Raksha]

21. Re automation assisting in the initial count

>>i don't really have much of a problem with automation assisting in the initial count (optical scan, e.g.) but any recount should be done by hand based on physical evidence.<<

I don't have a problem with it either, PROVIDED the machine tabulation is only a preliminary count to give the media, kind of like an exit poll. But a machine tabulation should never, EVER be the "official" count. That should always be done by hand in the presence of witnesses.

[NationalEnquirer]

8. You know what sucks...

I was one of those SCREAMING for electronic voting, after our chad experience down here in Florida.
Now I understand the saying "becareful what you wish for"...
I feel so fuckin stupid.
It is almost as if the Republicans used our own fears against us to get these crappy machines in!
Everyone I know LOVES the machines, of course, none of them will listen about fraud.
Limp Democrats I call em...

[Junkdrawer]

9. You are not alone. John Conyers, Common Cause and many, many others...

did the same thing. As you probably know, HAVA was pushed through by liberal Democrats. In 2000, very, very few people (myself included) knew about the Urosevich Bros., Diebold or ES&S.

http://www.la.indymedia.org/news/2004/11/118589.php

I think it's literally the case of every one assuming that it was somebody's job to keep an eye on these things.

[understandinglife]

10. For oh so many things, like exchanges of views here at DU, ...

....the net & computers are invaluable, in fact, essential.

But, when it comes to voting, I am a paper-freak.

My view is simple.

Paper registration. Paper poll books. Paper ballots. Humans look at the paper ballots and record on paper the votes. All votes are tabulated, on paper, by each County and then by each State. All paper records for any "National" position -- executive or legislative -- are archived by the National Library of Congress.

The cost is trivial. How much does a 500 lb. 'smart bomb' that kills an entire family in Iraq compare to whatever it costs to print ballots; hire nonpartisan vote counters; pay room and board for independent, international observers; and, pay the lease expense for a Library of Congress supervised storage facility that maintains, indefinitely, the full record of how each citizen participated in the American franchise of democracy.

Paper all the way. People at every stage. Multiple, independent observers. Whatever the cost, it is the most important investment of any tax dollar; it's the cost of knowing, unambiguously, that the government we elect is the government that we will hold accountable.

Anything less means "We The People" most definitely did not meet OUR responsibility for ensuring "A More Perfect Union."

Peace.

"Prove My Vote Counts, Now"

[Zan_of_Texas]

11. Excellent piece -- read the whole thing! eom

[Hugin]

12. I vote YEA!

You can mark it down in stone... or brass... or
concrete... or something non-volatile.

"I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice." --Phil.i.18

To put it mildly.

NGU...

[Hugin]

13. Let's forget those lame online polls and get to work on the real thing.

Count the votes where it counts!

[Bill Bored]

14. You go Prag!

I've posted a number of threads on this with sample letters, etc.
We all need to send them to the appropriate lawmakers, and those who would obstruct such laws.

If you don't agree with VVPBs and random audits, then ask for what you want. 100% audits, or 100% hand counts or whatever. Anything is better than the status quo, but of course there's a greater likelihood of success if you are willing to compromise and still have reasonable certainty that the vote will be accurately counted. Right now, at best, it's a crap shoot.

And this has to be done at the state level because the feds may not come through. I wouldn't be surprised if they mandate the paper ballots with no auditing, and leave the auditing up to the states. So the effort has to be two-pronged.

The people to write to are:

Good guys:
Senators Harry Reid and John Ensign. They authored the latest Senate bill for a paper ballot, S2437. Other bills of this type were S1980 and S2313.

The Senate Rules Committee is where these bills ended up. Never voted on.

House:

Rush Holt of NJ (Author of HR2239)

Mr. KING of Iowa, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mr. AKIN, Mr. HERGER, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. PITTS, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. COLE, Mr. CAMP, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, Mr. BARTON of Texas, Mr. NORWOOD, Mr. SHADEGG, Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mr. WELDON of Florida, Mr. LINDER, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. UPTON, Mr. PAUL, Mr. GIBBONS, Ms. HARRIS, Mr. BASS, Mrs. MILLER of Michigan
(who introduced HR4187)

The Committee on House Administration is where these bills ended up. Never voted on.

Bad guys:
Senators Bill Frist, Trent Lott, Mitch McConnell.

House: Mr. Ney, Mr. DeLay and Mr. Hastert.

They are the Republican leaders and committee chairmen who blocked these bills.

Then write to your own reps at the state and federal level.

[Hugin]

15. Thanks Bill...

One must also remember Sen. Chuck Hagel may not
be one of "the good guys." due to his connection
with voting machines.

[Bill Bored]

23. True but I don't he can singlehandedly block legislation. n/t

[sandnsea]

16. Good luck with that

How much time do you want to waste on trying to go back decades to hand counting ballots? 2006? 2008? 2012? How many elections can be stolen with machines while people are standing around yelling for something that's never going to happen?

We've got people on DU who don't even know the difference between paper ballots and paper trails. There's just too much to do without muddying the issue even more with promoting hand counts. Just how much progress would MLK have made if he'd demanded reparations back in 1965? None. You've got to focus on what's realistic. Hand counts are just not realistic. Get the damned machines fixed. Get registration reform. We haven't got that much time.

[Hugin]

17. There are several Industrialized Nations...

Who only HAND COUNT PAPER BALLOTS and they are
able to get their results out within two days.

In one of those countries... It's illegal NOT to vote.

[sandnsea]

18. This is the United States *sigh*

What the fuck is it about living in the United States that people don't understand? :shrug:

People in THIS country will think it stupid and beneath them to go to hand counted ballots. That is reality. Why oh why do people not understand where the fucking hell they live.

:argh:

[ivorysteve]

19. "Get the machines fixed"?

I would quote Chuck Herrin, from his power point presentation off his site http://www.chuckherrin.com, as a response to that one:

"Fraud perpetrated by computer will always be possible by designers, developers, hackers, end users, and anyone else with local or remote access, and it will always be harder to detect than someone stuffing 1,000 ballots into their sweater.

Information Security experts, programmers, academics, auditors, and voters are screaming for paper and a system they can trust. Experts are not afraid of technology, rather, we know its limitations, and we are telling you en masse that computers are NOT suitable for securing our Democracy.

It is irresponsible and reckless to run “trade secret” software in our elections. You have seen SOME of the problems – what else is being hidden from our view?

Our elections are NOT business opportunities for corporations – they are vital to public trust, and corporate shareholder obligations present a DIRECT conflict of interest with providing the best systems possible."

[Hugin]

20. Thanks Ivorysteve... Made my day. :) n/t

[Bill Bored]

24. I agree and I like the MLK analogy too. n/t

[Junkdrawer]

25. Good Luck fixing the machines...

Right now, the Urosevich Bros. control 80% of the vote count. And, as we've seen from Ohio, the other 20% ain't exactly honest either.

At best, if we can get spot checks, "fixing the machines" will initiate an endless cat-and-mouse game of regulation and work around.

- How big should the spot check be?

- When should the spot checks be done?

- Who decides what is "random"?

- How much time lapses between the announcement of the "random" precincts and their hand count?

- Who looks after the "ballots" between the election and the spot check?

At worst, the "paper ballots" will be machine counted and then locked away unless the cheaters screw up and only steal by 0.05%.

We won't get honest elections until we purge the cheaters from the system. And that means hand counts.

[bardgal]

22. I AGREE X INFINITY, and have been screaming this FOREVER!

Nor counted electronically. PAPER ONLY/HAND COUNTED with TONS OF PUBLIC OVERSIGHT!

[IndyPriest]

26. Carolab (or others): How big is "VotersUnite"?

Are we talking a couple hundred folks or a few thousand or what? VotersUnite is not the only group pushing on this, I know. But what might the value be in attempting to form a united front on an issue like this?