Paper Ballots

[kster]

• What is the best guess as to how much time and effort a hand-counted paper ballot election would have taken?

Compare and contrast with the previous answers.

• Given that Canada hand-counted their last parliamentary election in four hours, do you feel that we are saving time by using electronic voting systems?

• How much faith would your voters place in the results of a hand-counted paper ballot election versus the current results, where according to a recent poll 25% of the American public feels that the 2004 election results are not credible and do not reflect the will of the American people?

From above, is 25% a significant constituency?

• How many votes would normally be lost during a hand-counted paper ballot election?

Compare that to how many votes were lost in the 2004 election.

• Given the fact that a recent CalTech/MIT study showed hand-counted paper ballots have the lowest average incidence of spoiled, uncounted, and unmarked ballots, what is the rationale for moving away from this system?

• How many people working in concert would it take to "hack" a statewide or national election using paper ballots?

• Can paper ballots be manipulated remotely when computers are not used for tabulation?

• Can paper ballots be manipulated remotely when computers are used for tabulation? (See How To Hack The Vote)

• What is more important to the voting process than vote integrity and auditing capability?

• What is the reason for not returning to hand-counted paper ballots, and why would that not be the right thing to do?

• What would be the problem with selling our voting machines to another state and announcing to the public that you are being proactive in protecting the integrity of their vote by going back to paper ballots until a voting machine company meets the normal security standards that are being used by the rest of the IT industry?

That's what Missouri is attempting to do (go back to paper ballots), and I'm sure their voters appreciate it.

As a voter, I know I would.

http://www.ejfi.org/Voting/Voting-37.htm

[merh]

1. Voting populations

Missouri's voting population of 2,348,223
http://www.fairvote.org/pr/super/2004/missouri.htm

22 million Californians eligible to vote
http://www.calvoter.org/issues/votereng/votpart/about.html

You just don't get it, do you? Our elections cannot be compared to Canada's. We have ballots that have dozens of elections on them. Local, State, Federal Candidates, tax initiatives, bond issues, amendments to state constitutions.

Hand counting is not practical in every state and if you want to turn off the people responsible for conducting elections, if you want to lose their backing and push them into the arms of the likes of Diebold, then push hand counts.

Personally, I am proud that my understanding of both the needs of the clerk and the dangers of Diebold enabled me to help the clerk defeat Diebold in my county.

Your pie in the sky dreams are hurtful to the election reform efforts, imho.

[kster]

3. I think I got it

we see how many people it takes to count the ballots for an election in Canada. And we do the math, so we know how many volunteers we need to count the ballots here in America. We have to make sure the clerks are not overworked, I agree with you there.

[merh]

4. You can't get enough people to volunteer to help with automated

voting systems. You can't get folks to come out to vote. Why do you think that the people who run elections have to worry about the costs associated with conducting an election?

The clerks are the ones that are responsible for the elections, they were elected to the posts, they take an oath and they are not going to rely on your promise to "supply the adequate number of volunteers". They can't rely on promises.

Let me ask you - how many times have you been able to vote in your lifetime? How many times have you volunteered to help on election day/night?

The promise of volunteers is nice, but clerks will not be able to rely on promises.

And even if you had the adequate number of volunteers, how do you propose to count 8 and 10 pages of ballots, per "voter", by the "hand count" means?

[FogerRox]

7. My county HIRES 2600 people to work the elections---

SO where you live everyone volunteers? Hmmmmm

[merh]

8. No, they don't - the county has to hire and that is the problem.

That is part of the costs associated with running elections and since tax cuts are the "meme" of most elected officials and since the feds have cut out grants to the states and counties, the election officials are stuck with the real world dilemma of having to work within their budgets!

Note: It is the OP that said that elections can be run by all volunteers. I know differently. :hi:

[kster]

13. Lets get the convicts

to count the ballots, what the hell thats who's counting them when we use the machines, the only difference with hand counts the convicts would have to count them out in the open.

[merh]

15. You have yet to answer my questions.

How many times have you voted in your lifetime?
How many times have you helped with elections?
Have you ever helped as a poll worker or a monitor?
Have you ever helped collect and safeguard the ballots?
How many elections have you had a hand in?
Have you ever be involved with organization of, preparation for and/or the conducting of an election?
Have you ever helped count paper ballots?
Have you ever been an election worker?

[kster]

16. Let me guess

you are a lawyer, or you are writing a book, I'm putting my money on lawyer , but you said you convinced your county not to buy diebold machines, which vote STEALING machines will your county be buying for the next election? And did that company release the SOURCE CODE to you? Just curious.

[merh]

17. Neither -- I am an INFORMED CITIZEN

which you might consider becoming if you want to be effective in helping in the election reform movement.

As you and I have had this running debate for weeks, you may want to check out my back posts.

My county has successfully used optiscans since 1999, they have the source codes and have had 4 challenged elections during that time. Each challenged election called for the hand counts and the hand counts matched the "official" count 100% - thus the optiscans used are 100% accurate or reliable. The county election official also has a system of auditing that helps to verify the accuracy of the system.

I HAVE WORKED elections for years, having been a volunteer for hand counts in my rather large county before optiscans were obtained. I KNOW what a circus hand counting can be, how difficult it is on those counting and those awaiting the counts. I KNOW of which I speak. Given the fact that you have failed to answer my questions, I can only assume you are an uninformed (ignorant) election reform activist. That is as dangerous to the efforts as is Diebold as you speak without an understanding of the practicalities of conducting elections and the all that is required (money, time, manpower, logistics) to properly conduct and election and count the votes.

:hi:

[kster]

19. Thank you for your service

"I HAVE WORKED elections for years, having been a volunteer for hand counts in my rather large county before optiscans were obtained."

We will need people with your background, to help us set up the hand counts.

Because people are learning about these vote stealing machines,and once the majority figures it out, AND THEY WILL, We will need people like you to help us set up the PBHC.

Would you do that if the PBHC people prevail? Because the first question will be, how did we count the ballots before we had the machines.

[merh]

20. Not all machines that count the votes steal votes.

That you think they do shows how uninformed you are and how little you actually know about the process.

Your hard headed position is more harmful to the election reform efforts than the machines you complain about - get a fucking clue! Stop with the sarcasm and the broad brush approach and take the time to learn something - to ACTUALLY KNOW about the process. Word of advice - go learn something! Your ignorance is very harmful!

[kster]

22. Intellectuals solve problems,

geniuses prevent them.
~ Albert Einstein

:hi:

[merh]

23. Intellects and geniuses both know to appreciate the nature of

the problems before they attempt to solve them. (You can quote me on that.) You should try that!

As I have said in the past, your ignorance is not bliss, it is dangerous to the efforts of election reform.

:hi:

[kster]

24. If only it could have been done

Take Action: Speak Out to Congress Now!
Insist on Hand Counted Paper Ballots for Federal Offices

http://www.votersunite.org/takeaction/federalpaperballot.asp

[merh]

26. You know, limiting hand counts to only federal elections still

falls short. Guess if you would bother to go the office of your election offical and ask them their opinion and if you would bother helping with the next election, from start to finish, you might better understand the process and recognize that insisting on hand counted paper ballots alone will not work unless the legislations provides for a lot more than just hand counts.

Your call of the wild falls on deaf ears unless you propose legislation that will provide for adequate funding, a system to require service (similiar to jury service) and one day set aside for only national elections. That day should be a legal holiday or a Sunday so that folks don't have to worry about missing work to vote. The funding would have to be more than just the HAVA bullshit funding, it would be guaranteed amount of federal funds based on the census figures of the community.

There is so much more that would be required before you could get the backing from the folks that you need (those that actually conduct elections) but that is a start.

As I have suggested before, go learn the process, go understand the needs and then, maybe then, you can be a voice of reason in the election reform efforts.

:hi:

[FogerRox]

29. M- which voting eqipment are you talking about--

DREs or Opscans?

I wish to get down to the bottom of who is uninformed around here. And who is actually taking a "HARD HEADED" position.

[merh]

31. I'm not taking a hard headed position, I am taking a practical,

informed position. Any of you that insist on HAND COUNTS ONLY are the hard headed people that have no clue about how elections are actually conducted. With the proper audits and quality control, optiscans work. Or do you think Howard Dean is hard headed too?

Go learn -become informed - go work with those responsible for conducting elections from start to finish. Discover what all is entailed in preparing for and conducting an election and counting the votes. Try to appreciate all concerns, budgetary, manpower, logistics, storage, security, et cetera. Watch the videos of the hand counts in Florida during the very limited recount of 2000. Go to the largest counties in your area, the largest in the country and ask them how they feel about returning to hand counts, going backwards in time, reverting to an ancient practice that is not practical, then you might learn that it is not me that is hard headed, but you and the others that insist upon HAND COUNTS ONLY.

:hi:

[FogerRox]

28. I really doubt the opscans matched 100%

In a small rural county, 50,000 peope voting, there would be at best 100 to 150 spoiled ballots according NATIONAL AVERAGES..

100% is simply not a realistic figure at the county level.

Google Shamos_report-- last page of the pdf --read the canvass report-- these results are typical.

[merh]

32. Just goes to show you how UNINFORMED YOU REALLY ARE.

They did match, 100% - each of the 4 times. So sorry to burst your bubble, if you like, pmail me and I will provide you with the telephone number of the clerk. She can provide you with the information you need to prove that your doubts are not only unfounded, they will prove how woefully uninformed and stubborn you are.

:hi:

[FogerRox]

42. how many ballots cast and what % of undervotes

If it is reported to 100% matching it was ---statistcally near impossible

The most accurate opscan county in Pa in the NOv 2004 election had an undervote rate of 0.29%--

See the Shamos report

Then Google the EAC and the FEC and start your education there---

ANd then if the Implementation of HAVA is delayed a year to 2007 -- you can thank me---

In fact why dont you contact Alfie Charles the VP of Sequoia and ask him if he remembers me and MY CREW-- that kicked Sequoia out of NJ. And maybe Cooke County Ill.

[merh]

45. Good for you!

Answer the questions presented in one of my posts so that I can fully understand how informed you are of the process. Or, do you just mess with a process without understanding how it really works?

:hi:

[FogerRox]

27. Then throw out your comment on Volunteers

[merh]

33. Nope, the counties use paid workers and volunteers.

And again, it was the OP that suggested that hand counts are possible because we can get more than enough folks to volunteer for the process.

:hi:

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[merh]

52. They use both.

Many counties use both. I would think you would know that, given you claim to be informed. I have not lied.

:hi:

[FogerRox]

6. I like to look at the pros & Cons of an issue--- SO I will add the unsaid

How much unwillingness-- to spend the money-- to hire the people--
to hand Count ballots---

Otherwise it is pratical-- you fail to mention that-- If I may correct you-- in the current environment, what is unpratical is spending the money to do the job---

Some bucks for the best democracy money can buy?

Or maybe spend 4 billion dollars on DREs? Would you like to take that 4 billion and see how far it gets in hand counting ballots? HOw many federal election cycles would it take to eat up 4 billions dollars?

Turn people off responsible for conducting elections? there are folks who look forward to that check in November, as a once year thing---

[merh]

12. It is not practical if elections are held the same way today that they

have been held in the past. The number of candidates and elections on the ballot make hand counting impossible. If elections were conducted as they are in Canada, with the ballots only containing the minimal number of candidates and not every friggin election for all local and state and national offices, plus initiatives and referendums, plus amendments to the state constitutions, plue bonding issues, then hand counting might be practical.

And sorry to burst your bubble, but the money is the most practical issue. Those who work elections are different individuals than those that were elected to offices that are responsible for how elections are run and how smoothly and efficiently the ballots are counted.

Please try to imagine election night being like the recounts in Florida. Do you remember the circus that was? That is what you are proposing if you expect every county in every state to switch to the hand counts. County officials went to automated systems because of the issues that evolved over the years. Those issues include, but are not limited to, the manpower necessary, the time it takes to conduct hand counts, the security necessary to protect the ballots, the space required to store the ballots.

When I say, turn off the people, I am talking about the elected office holders that have been responsible for conducting elections for years. They are a mighty strong lobbying group and you need to work with them to see true election reform.

[FogerRox]

37. I tell the County Freeholders how to vote -- yes or no ---on funding of

voting machine Purchases.

"When I say, turn off the people, I am talking about the elected office holders that have been responsible for conducting elections for years. They are a mighty strong lobbying group and you need to work with them to see true election reform."

You may have confused public officials for mighty strong lobbying group .

I threatened the Head of Elections in my state to decertify 6 DREs or face federal court.

I got the Liberty DRE certified in my state after said threats.

My research on HAVA section 301- caused the EAC to write an advisory on section 301

Google EAC-- its on the front page.

I'm sorry ----just what was it you did-- ?

[kster]

14. We could scale back on this

for money to hire people to count the ballots

http://costofwar.com/

[merh]

18. Sure we could - but wishes aren't horses and dreams don't always

come true and to be an effective election reform activist you have to DEAL WITH THE PRACTICAL aspects and not push pipe dreams and "not only ifs" and "maybes".

Why in the hell do you think counties went to automation in the first place? Because they were trying to find a faster, less costly, less time consuming and reliable means to conduct and COUNT the votes.

Conducting an election is one phase, counting the ballots another.

Learn all you can about every aspect of elections, become informed, then you might be able to help bring about election reform that will protect our votes.

[FogerRox]

39. they went what -- NO they bought DREs after getting lobby money--

and the the 4 billion HAVA dollars might have something to do with it----

YA forgot the 4 billion of HAVA moneyyyyyyyyyyy

Hello !

[ladjf]

2. I prefer paper ballots. However, there are ways to verify

electronic voting results.

[kster]

5. Yes, but it will take years

(someone in DU posted this article)

"I don't think with today's technology we can have a voting system that is fully electronic that can be trusted," said Avi Rubin, a computer science professor. He will head a new Hopkins center called ACCURATE, short for A Center for Correct, Usable, Reliable, Auditable and Transparent Elections"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050816/ap_on_re_us/electronic_voting

[FogerRox]

9. What is it that will take years?

VVPB laws?

DRE technology maturing?

[kster]

11. To get an

electronic voting system that can be Reliable, Auditable and Transparent,if it even can be done.

[merh]

21. They exist.

Your ignorance is showing. :hi:

[FogerRox]

38. they exist ? Really

Vendor, make model number please-- inform me --unload me of my ingnorance

NAme the voting machine you just refered to --- please--- it exists--- then name it

[merh]

41. I advised you that I would provide you the contact information if

you really want it - but after reading your posts I can see your only purpose is to pretend to care while casting aspersions.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[merh]

46. I have offered to provide you with contact information.

Now you succumb to attacks. That is really beneath you. I will not post any contact information in a public forum. I have no intention of allowing folks to be harassed by folks with ulterior motives.

You have not used any of my words against me. What you have done is use your anger and your words against yourself.

:hi:

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[merh]

51. I have made the offer.

I have not changed any subjects. I have been reasonable with you.

:hi:

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[merh]

56. I have made the offer.

:hi:

[kster]

57. Don't they have a website?

[merh]

59. I have offered to provide the information.

But now, that the posts have become irrational, I am not sure that I would submit the folks to the possible harassment. As can be seen from the posts, I am not sure if the inquiries would be rational or reasonable.

:hi:

[wli]

10. I don't care if we have to vote on stone tablets in cuneiform

ZERO COMPUTERS anywhere near the vote! Period!

[kster]

25. Meanwhile somewhere up north

oldie but a goodie.....

(snip) Computers are essentially impossible to secure from cheating. They all use
proprietary code, and it is impossible for anyone to be certain that there
isn't some fixed result in the machine itself. Once hooked up to the
internet, the problems associated with insecurity multiply enormously. It
is simply impossible to be sure of the results if a 'black box' is used. It
doesn't help that the actual machines produced by companies like Diebold
have even more obvious flaws, making them essentially useless unless the
desired result is to produce a cheating machine

http://sf.indymedia.org/print.php?id=1651149

[FogerRox]

30. I think this thread should be deleted or locked

Too much name calling among other things -- like disinformation-- and lack of any credible sourcing what so ever.

[kster]

34. I don't remember calling you

or anyone else a name and if I did I apologize. I try to stay away from name calling.

[merh]

36. There has been no name calling.

The posts are just discussions of the issues. Nothing volatile or harmful in any of them. I appreciate that you and I can disagree in a very reasonable manner. Thank you.

[merh]

35. Where is the "disinformation" you complain about?

I have offered to provide you with contact information and I have provided links relative to population discrepancies. I have seen no name calling (though I do recall someone alluding to the fact that I could be hard headed). This is a legitimate thread. Just because folks don't agree with your "information" doesn't mean that the lacks credibility.

I will ask you the same questions I asked the other poster above.

How many times have you voted in your lifetime?
How many times have you helped with elections?
Have you ever helped as a poll worker or a monitor?
Have you ever helped collect and safeguard the ballots?
How many elections have you had a hand in?
Have you ever be involved with organization of, preparation for and/or the conducting of an election?
Have you ever helped count paper ballots?
Have you ever been an election worker?

And I will ask a few additional questions.

What election officials have you discussed the election process with?
What was the size of that official's county?
Have you tried to understand all that is involved in conducting an election?

Locking a thread to hide from the truth contained in same seems silly.

:hi:

[FogerRox]

40. here ya go-- I fould some names infered and some outright ---

post 17-
Neither -- I am an INFORMED CITIZEN which you might consider becoming if you want to be effective in helping in the election reform movement.

---Infers uninformed citizen & ineffective my edit--

post 20-
That you think they do shows how uninformed you are and how little you actually know about the process.

Your hard headed position is more harmful to the election reform efforts than the machines you complain about - get a fucking clue! Stop with the sarcasm and the broad brush approach and take the time to learn something - to ACTUALLY KNOW about the process. Word of advice - go learn something! Your ignorance is very harmful!

post 26-
As I have suggested before, go learn the process, go understand the needs and then, maybe then, you can be a voice of reason in the election reform efforts.

post 31-
informed position. Any of you that insist on HAND COUNTS ONLY are the hard headed people that have no clue about how elections are

[merh]

43. Each one of those posts are legitimate replies to the posts.

I was questioned if I was a lawyer or whatever and in response I said I was an informed citizen.

If you would answer the questions as presented to you, then I might have a better understanding as to how informed you are.

As the other poster has not posted any answers to the questions, it is was legitimate to assume that he/she has not actually worked in the election process and is therefore, uninformed.

Knit picking posts and taking sentences out of context is just a lame attempt to support your weak argument that name calling and attacks are a part of this thread. It is also reminiscent of another poster that once frequented this forum in December. That poster's attempts to label everyone that differed with him as a "disinformation artist" had negative results. Please don't let that happen. Discussions and disagreements are a part of DU. If this thread bothers you, you are free to ignore it.

BTW - it is you that alluded to the fact that I was hard headed, you began that little exchange.

:hi:

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[merh]

50. That is a legitmate reply to the post.

It is not a lie.

:hi:

[FogerRox]

53. No its not

legitimate to assume that he/she has not actually worked in the election process and is therefore, uninformed.

#1 Election law in the land-- possibly the 1965 voting rights ACT & nothing to do with working in the election process--

Possibly the most popular election law currently: HAVA & nothing to do with working in the election process--

ITA test reports on certifiaction of voting Equipment, & nothing to do with working in the election process--


Why dont you google my name

Roger Fox

And Sequoia
or Advantage
or Freeholders
or NJ AG
or Voting machine demo
or Texas
or North Carolina
or wheelchair specs
or HAVA section 301

How dare you judge anyone in this manner

[merh]

55. The reason HAVA doesn't work is because of the failure of the

folks in the election reform movement and in the "technical" end of the election process to understand the needs of those that have to run the elections.

Sort of like a computer programmer writing a program without the imput of those that have to use the program.

A similar position can be taken relative to the Voting Rights Act. Grand plans and broad statments without ever knowing the practical aspects of the election process.

Have you ever had the responsibility (budgetary, time, manpower, et cetera) of actually preparing for and conducting an election?

Just wondering.

:hi:

[autorank]

58. "The Paper Ballot Challenge" lay it down, early and often...

...make them chicken out, then call them if they even look like they've stolen an election.

I'm sick of all this HAVA crap, verified ballots off of a stupid machine.

I started going to the polling booth when I was four. It had a curtain, a table, a paper ballot, and an ink marker. I watcher my mother vote in every election and I loved it. When I was 12, we argued a bit once on a vote, sotto voce, and I was appropriately chastised and told to behave. To me this was a great honor and privilege. I couldn't wait until it was my turn.

Then I moved back East and ran into f'ing machines, levers, switches...and I always wondered if my vote was really counted.
Now, it's stupid touch screens.

Simple solution -- paper ballots, neuteral counting open to all, reporting over the internet for all to see since the precinct data does not need to be secure. Therefore, the public can do a tabulation itself based on the pristine paper ballot totals. God, I love it!

Kester, thanks!!! UDAMAN