Will Push for IRV be nail in coffin of New York's lever machines?

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

PUSH FOR IRV/INSTANT RUNOFF VOTING WILL MAKE IT HARDER TO KEEP LEVERS.
LEVERS COULD DO IRV BUT IT IS DIFFICULT AND IRV PROPONENTS WANT COMPUTERIZED VOTING
This group boasts about being partners with vendors (internet voting vendor) and this group
sells election services as well.
Scotland switched to computerized vote counting because of adopting similar vote method.

Director of National Group that promotes IRV is very excited about New York's voting machines

Senate Bill Would Eliminate Primary Runoff
By Sewll Chan
Published October 5th 2009 in New York Times
...
Robert Richie, executive director of FairVote, a nonpartisan organization that
researches and promotes electoral reforms, said in a statement that he supported the idea of an instant runoff:

Now that New York is likely to move to new optical scan voting equipment,
instant runoff voting is a sensible alternative.
It’s been working well in elections in cities with diverse electorates like San Francisco
and London and adopted for upcoming elections in Oakland, Minneapolis, Memphis
and a growing number of other cities. It’s even going to be used to pick the best
picture Oscar this winter. We’ve found that voters like the idea of getting a definitive
winner in one round rather than two.

DR REBECCA MERCURI
warned about Scotland switching to a more complicated vote counting method>,
ditching hand counted paper ballots for optical scanners: "

IRV and other proportional balloting methods have been proven to incentivize
the introduction of electronic ballot
tabulation in places where none previously was needed or has existed, and they
further complicate what has become an increasingly closed
process for the determination of election results."

BRAD FRIEDMAN, liberal blogger CALLS IRV A VIRUS
Blogged by Brad Friedman on 6/2/2009

'Instant Runoff Voting' (IRV) Election Virus Spreads to Los Angeles
County
Joins 'Internet Voting' and 'Vote-by-Mail' schemes as the latest bad
ideas poised to further cripple American democracy
PLUS: IRV count fails in Aspen's first instant runoff election...
...the last thing this county needs is to complicate the math even
further by confusing matters with IRV's complicate scheme of ranked
choice voting where voters are asked to select a first and second
place choices, etc.

For that matter, unless, and until, we can simplify our election
procedures such that any and all citizens are able to oversee and
verify the accuracy of their election results, no jurisdiction in this
country should employ schemes like IRV, no matter how well-meaning
supporters of it may be in hoping to allow a broader range of
candidates and parties to have a shot at winning an election.

Along with the emerging nightmares of Internet Voting and Vote-by-
Mail, IRV is yet another one of the horrible wack-a-mole schemes being
endlessly advanced by advocates and profiteers who put winning
elections and making money off them, over the idea of transparent,
verifiable, secure democracy and self-governance expressed of the
people, by the people and for the people....
...more at the link http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7198

IRV ADVOCATE ATTACKS CA SOS BOWEN (2007) Take a look at how Stephen
Hill, formerly with Fair Vote attacks California SOS Debra Bowen - in
a prominent California newspaper - for implementing security measures,
because they would slow down the IRV election in San Francisco:

S.F. supervisors blamed for blocking new voting system
John Wildermuth, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, September 21, 2007

If it takes three weeks to count the votes in this November's
election, the Board of Supervisors should bear the blame, San
Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom said Thursday...
… The tough restrictions put on the use of the company's voting system
in San Francisco are borderline ridiculous given how few people are
likely to run into the problems with the ink, said Steven Hill,
director of the political reform program of the New America
Foundation.
"We're talking about people who drop the pen they're given in the
voting booth, don't pick up the pen and then grab another pen without
black ink," he said. "That's a pretty small group."

Bowen "is basically throwing the book at ES&S, but it's the city
that's bearing the brunt of it," Hill said.

FAIRVOTE "PARTNERS" WITH INTERNET VOTING VENDOR

Everyone Counts (E1C) has developed a very sophisticated online
election and survey product that handles multiple versions of ranked
ballot elections. E1C has allowed CVD to set up demonstration
elections with their system, and FairVote has partnered with E1C to
run private sector elections

FAIRVOTE IS AN ELECTION VENDOR:

*and before FairVote scrubs this, note I've already made a screen
shot*

The Election Services Group
We perform your elections.

Since 1992, FairVote has been dedicated to fair elections where every
vote counts and all voters are represented. As a catalyst for reform, we conduct
research, analysis, education and advocacy to build understanding of and support for more democratic
voting systems. Through our IRV America Program, we advocate instant runoff voting
(IRV) as an alternative to plurality elections and traditional runoff elections. Our Election
Services Group (ESG) also consults on electoral systems and implementation, with a focus on non-
governmental elections.

We provide full service consulting on all aspects of elections.
We have worked with organizations that include large companies,
small non-profit organizations and political parties. We are experts
in all aspects of elections,
including voting equipment, hardware, software, and procedures.
We can help you figure out the election solution that is right for
you.

Products

Simple Online, Electronic or by Mail IRV Vote: FairVote's Election
Services Group has
highlighted three options for implementing this method of IRV, as well
as the services and assistance
that we are able to provide.

Full Service Corporate Elections
General consulting on electoral design: Our consultants will work with
you to clarify the goals
of your election, select an appropriate electoral system.

Elections training: Our consultants will work with you to choose
balloting technologies that are right for you
and design any necessary voter education materials.
Referrals to technology providers: We are knowledgeable about election
technologies,
including mail voting, phone voting, Internet voting and hybrid
systems, and we can provide referrals
and recommendations about vendors.

Total solutions: We can assemble the necessary team to conduct all
aspects of an election at any scale.
Once you settle on the necessary parameters -- election design, voter
list, balloting technology and budget --
we will conduct the entire election from start to finish, from voter
education to certified election results.

Clients

ESG has had a wide clientele, including corporations, political
parties, and NGOs.
Our staff members have played key roles in providing technical
assistance with IRV implementation in San Francisco, CA; Ferndale, MI; Burlington, VT;
Berkeley, CA and many other jurisdictions.

Sample

Download a sample voting system education presentation we created for
a client

For a list of clients or to discuss a project, please contact Program
Director David Moon at 301-270-4616
or dmoon(at)fairvote.org.

While FairVote may be pleased if 20-30% don't understand IRV, the city
council was NOT pleased.
While FairVote may be glad that a "majority polled" liked IRV, this is
no better than the argument that big insurance companies use that a
"majority polled" like their health insurance.


IF THE MAJORITY LIKES POLL TAXES, LITERACY TESTS, 3/5 VOTERS, DOES
THAT MAKE THEM A GOOD THING?

[Stevepol]

1. I long ago gave up hope of finding any semblance of reason from those in our election system.

[Bill Bored]

2. Electon integrity advocates in NY are working to educate the uneducated about this stuff.

The uneducated include, but are not limited to, a number of so-called "good government" groups who still, after all these years, don't know the first thing about vote counting of any kind (much less the computerized kind), and perhaps a few misguided politicians as well.

The rest of us want to keep lever voting machines as our first priority, since the State Board of Elections and the Legislature have failed so miserably to provide for a proper manual audit of paper ballots counted by computers.

If we can't even write laws or regulations to audit a f#$^ing 2-candidate race well enough to know who won, how the hell are we supposed to know how won an instant runoff election?

This too shall pass.