Screw the Machines!!!--A Pure Paper Election Model--Make it Better!!!

[autorank]

This is my very best thinking. Read the whole thing, if you care to, and make it better. Screw the machines and the "networks" and the behind the scenes stuff.

1) Free and fair elections, transparent and open to all.

a) Motor voter registration
b) Other easy access registrations
c) Any ID will do that has a picture or is deemed appropriate.
d) No "new" ID's, no voter ID's
e) Early voting starting the Saturday and Sunday prior to the constitutionally mandated date all over the country.
f) Elections administered by non-elected officials supervised by independent auditors (as in multiple auditors).

2) To meet that goal, there is a simple solution:

a) Paper ballots marked with a stamp in a closed voting booth.
b) Hand counts of paper ballots by volunteers without a strongly identifiable partisan bias; with partisan representatives looking on.
c) Public announcements of precinct total published in a variety of media (including the internet).
d) Public transmittal of the announced results to tabulation center(s).
e) Visible presentation of the results received at the central tabulator facility via television, the internet, etc. with a check by each precinct and party precinct representatives.
f) Totals that everyone can live with, verify, and know occurred.
g) Preservation of the ballots indefinitely in appropriately monitored facilities.
h) The use of symbols or pictures for those who can't read and the ready availability of those ballots and the use of voting machines to accommodate the handicapped (we certainly have enough now.

No levers, no punch cards, no scan tron ballots, no DRE's, no mediation at all...just paper, an ink stamp, and a private place.

3) General political awareness through public awareness of the need for change NOW including the use of any and all available means to raise that consciousness.

4) Specific political awareness of the fact that election fraud in 2000 was a race crime ("felons" list) and resulted in a stolen election and that it's been a race crime as long as we've had "spoilage" and continues to be one right through Ohio. It's not exclusively a race crime by any means but it is primarily. The use of any and all available means to make this point.

5) Support of all types of election monitoring including: private foundations or other forums to evaluate elections, equipment, etc.; political parties or non partisan groups to implement audits; exit polls designed to catch fraud (although the paper ballot process, with full participation would make this an after thought.

6) A recognition that voting rights is a potent issue that crosses the political spectrum.

[FogerRox]

1. Its late-- Im going to bed-- after this kick

then I;'ll be back to read it in its whole

[autorank]

3. "Sleep", what on earth does that mean?

:)

[Usrename]

14. Elections without computers?

What would George Washington think about a silly idea like that!

Still could get overvotes though, bigtime problem in close ones. There's no reason not to optically scan em at the precint as they are cast, then do the hand count when the polls close. I'm thinking belt and suspenders. It does seem warranted. Especially after the history in my state with the overvotes. 20% in a precint in Duvall in 2000, I think.

[kster]

2. K&R.nt

[GuvWurld]

4. I support a full platform of changes...good stuff

There is no one single reform that will restore democracy so it is important that we imagine in detail what that will require. Actually, I will be more specific than restoring democracy and call for ensuring conclusive election outcomes, creating a basis for confidence in the results reported, and establishing an accountable government that represents us with our Consent. I hold these three criteria as the collective litmus for whether an election reform platform is comprehensive enough.

[autorank]

5. The broader picture is anxiously awaited...

And the Arcata example is the new paradigm for governmental reform. It is an exciting concept but, more importantly, it represents an elegant conceptualization and cure for our dreadful condition, if that's not too strong an endorsement.

I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired of the stupidity. It's time for some simple, direct answers. The obfuscation and dalliance, the intellectual dishonesty, the feigned ignorance of the facts by our so-called leaders shows that they do, indeed, have feet of clay. It's time for change. Nobody will do it for us. We had better be the leaders we were waiting for or we're screwed.

[texpatriot2004]

6. This sounds great to me. Kick and Recommended. n/t

[paineinthearse]

7. KISS

Keep
It
Simple,
Stupid!

Works for me!

[texpatriot2004]

8. That's a good way to approach things, KISS...keep it simple n/t

[GuvWurld]

9. To what end? How do you define success? (eom)

[FogerRox]

29. define success--------

Currently -------

Ballot Spoilage rates--
1)DREs--2% to 20%
2)Punch cards 2%
3)Levers 1%
4)Opscans 1/2 %

Paper ballots scanned by opscans are the most accurate--- thats my initial benchmark.

DO you think we can hand count paper ballots with more accuracy?



I do

[GuvWurld]

33. I see goals differently, it seems

Ensure conclusive outcomes.

Create a basis for confidence in the results reported.

Establish an accountable government to represent us with our Consent.

autorank has the right idea in that we need to outline a platform of changes. My bit is that the parts of the platform must synergize to the point of achieving the three points above. I've been working on something that specifically addresses this. Check out this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2118949

[FogerRox]

43. My post # 29 just states facts

and then asks the question -- can hand counted do better-- of course the answer is yes.

and post # 29 looked at things --micro--

While this is MACRO--
Ensure conclusive outcomes.

Create a basis for confidence in the results reported.

Establish an accountable government to represent us with our Cons




AS I said that was an initial benchmark-- as in the current state of Accuracy, as defined by numbers.

SO by the numbers-- that would be a starting point, to measure sucsess from-- in that narrow sense

Conclusive outcomes--- people dont trust Computerized voting, they know its not accurate, thusly distrust. make the vote tallies accurate-- then maybe they can be trusted.
If the vote tally is accurate and trusted--- it is an conclusive outcome-- right?

SO re-establishing trust in the voting system is possibly the only way to have a conclusive outcome.

ACCURACY ! ! !

[Febble]

10. Spot on, autorank!

I support this completely. It seems to me to be exactly what is required -no more, no less (except I don't know what motor voter means....)

And regarding your point 2, essentially what you have here is what we have in the UK, and also in Canada and Australia.

In the UK, bank tellers usually do the counting - they have the right skills and the right attitude to valuable pieces of paper - ie. that they are important and the books have to balance!

The count is also done under the scrutiny of bipartisan volunteers, and in addition, members of the public are present, although behind ropes. Counts are public occasions, and TV cameras are present. They usually happen in town halls or school gyms.

A further advantage of hand-marked, hand counted paper ballots, to my mind, is that they are dirt-cheap - so no queues and no rationing.

If you make a resource expensive, the poor will lose out. Voting should be as cheap and clean as fresh air and drinking water.

Just my two pence (and recommend)

[autorank]

20. Bank tellers...perfect, and they're very fast.

Why do we know these things and why do they ignore the well known easy fixes?

[Febble]

22. Hand counting paper ballots in the UK

&imgrefurl=http://www.highland.gov.uk/landaintra/corporate_services/elections/elections/ukparl2001/webcam.htm&h=241&w=321&sz=14&tbnid=xz4PBFi96z4J:&tbnh=85&tbnw=114&hl=en&start=4&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dreturning%2Bofficer%2Buk%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DG">The nation's TV and Press look on as Candidates and Election Agents scrutinise the democratic process.

AND we have our new government installed by next day.

[sandnsea]

11. Most of that is in the report

Too bad you only read what the media told you and now what the report said itself. Any picture ID, the report calls for free picture ID's at the state level so that anybody can have a picture ID, that's the whole point of them. Conyers is calling for the current system where electric bills or anything like that is good enough for residency ID. The report also calls for studies for early voting and mail-in so that any problems are corrected before they might be implemented. It calls for non-political election panels. It calls for the code being placed in escrow to be made available for inspection in the event of a challenge. It calls for almost everything voting rights advocates have wanted, except for hand-counted ballots and no ID registration. It's a shame people are letting this opportunity to focus on election reform get away by focusing only on the photo ID's.

[Usrename]

12. So how would volunteers register new voters?

The mechanics have to be explained to me. The photo ID, I mean.

[sandnsea]

13. Not complicated

Fill out the form, look at the ID. The report also recommends registrations have numbers and receipts so that they can be monitored and not thrown away, etc. It would also mean any group that took batches of registration cards would be recorded to further prevent registration fraud.

I don't think a photo ID ought to be necessary to vote, I just think it's a mistake to call the entire report a sham over one small part of it. This report is a very good foundation to move forward from.

[Usrename]

15. Sorry, should have been more specific.

How can volunteers issue the photo ID? I think the problem is that a lot of people don't have photo ID and have no convenient way to get one. Seems like if the volunteer could snap a photo and then mail them the ID with the registration card then this problem would be solved.
It is a HUGE problem in my opinion and shouldn't be minimalized. Sen Obama mentioned the Atlanta voters as a good example of the magnitude of the problem. They don't have any place in their own county to obtain a State photo ID. Seems like a manufactured hardship to supress the vote to me. Unless someone can convince me I am wrong.

[OnTheOtherHand]

17. it depends

The C-B report says that states "should undertake their best efforts to make voter registration and ID accessible and available to all eligible citizens, including Americans with disabilities." I really don't think the ID is intended, by most of the C-B members who supported it, as a manufactured hardship to suppress the vote.

But you are right, too: it _is_ a huge problem that shouldn't be minimized. In the end, what matters isn't what C-B recommends, or even what Congress mandates, but what states actually do.

[autorank]

19. There's "deliberate" and "deliberate"...???

Do I think that all of them sat down and said, how do we suppress the vote, NO. A few, well, you never know. But when you issue a report with political impact and you fail to mention the main factor -- the absolute urgency to clean things up, NOW, then your failure is "deliberate" in my view because you are either arrogant or ignorant. I don't think they're ignorant, to a large extent, I believe that they just think we've got time and we'll just play it safe.

The crisis in confidence that will occur in 2006 when we have a magnification of 2004 all across the country will harm our system of governance and induce elements into the equation that will be truly frightening. This could have been averted. On edit: THIS CAN BE AVERTED!

But what do you expect when the staff director for Carter Baker was a signatory on the 1998 letter calling for the invasion of Iraq to stop WMD. Not good judgment.

[autorank]

18. Carter Baker blew it -- deliberately

First, I did read the report. Second, there was nothing original in it. Third, the inclusion of a recommendation that hearkens back to Jim Crow exclusions totally negates the stated goal of the report.

In my state, no ID is needed, that's the Constitution state of Virginia. Our system works just fine. A verifiable ID agreed upon in a state is perfectly acceptable.

If you want to understand the depth of the fatal mistake C-B made, take a look at this.
--------------------------------------------
This is from DU User Anaxarchos and a little group which may be familiar:


http://www.vanishingvoter.org/Releases/release111104.shtml

The number one reason (one third of the sample) for not voting is not "voter apathy" as the press would have it, but "Because I moved recently and hadn't’t registered at my new location" (32%). Also look at "Because I didn’t have any way to get to the polls on election day" (20%), "Because I didn’t quite know how to go about registering to vote" (13%), "Because I thought I was registered, but when I went to vote I learned I wasn’t and could not vote" (6%), "Because I was worried that my right to vote would be challenged and I would not be allowed to vote (3%), etc. Overall, the difficulty of registration and voting logistics issues trump political issues 120% to 83% (respondents were allowed to cite multiple reasons).

To quote the study, "In many democracies, registration is renewed automatically when a registered voter moves to a new residence. America’s registration system, which places the burden of registration on the individual rather than, as in Europe, on officials, depresses turnout in other ways, too. One in eight of non-voters with an interest in voting said they simply do not know how to go about registering."
---------------------------

What did Carter Baker not do:

1) They FAILED to focus on the urgency of electing fraud problems--2000, 2002 (GA), 2004 are outrages. We don't need a nicely bound report, we need people to take the tons of evidence already there and cry foul and fix the problem

2) They acted like the typical inside the Beltway Commission (metaphorically speaking, "the Beltway is everywhere'). They acted like we can just meander through this, no sense of urgency.

3) They failed to insist on an aggressive expansion of the franchise.

To Carter - Baker: This is a democracy, everybody of age, has the right to vote. Make it happen or get the hell out of the way and let others do it. Don't act like this is some sort of civics project that you, the elites, can take your damn time with. The country is sinking into a dire crisis. It's time to act.

[FogerRox]

28. Any picture ID, the report calls for free picture ID's at the state level

In New Jersey they are talking about voters having to go to Moter Vehicle to register.
Currently you can go to any Town Hall. HUGE DIFFERENCE, this item is now in the trash.

Next--

It calls for the code being placed in escrow to be made available for inspection in the event of a challenge.

Bad----- ANY IRREGULARITY beyond-- lets use lever machines and opscans as a precedence------ 0.5%-- triggers an automatic release of code from escrow. & come on -- do the math 0.5% ballot spoilage is really a lot--- how many ballots get lost at 0.5% spoilage rate for 1 million votes cast?

Early voting-- get real--- too many irregularites have already cropped up. Early voting is an opportunity to suppress--- lets give the poltical opposition 2 extra weeks to hound voters--- I DONT THINK SO

Election day should be a National paid Holiday.


just my 2 cents-- + or - 7.29%

[sandnsea]

50. See how it is

We vote for two or three weeks in Oregon, I forget which. We don't have any problems. Some leftie somewhere says something's a problem, and suddenly the overwhelming facts on the ground no longer matter. The anecdotal incident is all that gets repeated and that's a piss poor basis for legislation.

If I were to support any kind of photo ID for voting, they'd have to be available for free at many locations in a community. City hall, the library, welfare office, unemployment office, etc. But all I'm saying on that is that it shouldn't be the only focus of this report, there's a good foundation in there if we use it right. But obviously we won't because Democrats only know how to bitch.

[In Truth We Trust]

16. Paper ballots NOW!!! Hand counts NOW!!! Impeachment NOW!!! nt

[autorank]

34. In Truth I Trust!!!

:patriot:

[mgr]

21. One of the things missing is to address when a recount is needed.

One should suggest that the Inauguration be held in April, with electoral college voting in March; thus certification can be held up to allow for a proper recount.

Mike

[diva77]

23. Nice work! but have question about 1 f)

) Elections administered by non-elected officials supervised by independent auditors (as in multiple auditors).

In CA, the appointed RoVs have been buying the DREs then heading for the hills...why non-elected officials in your model?

[autorank]

24. I'm open but if elected, then contributed to, therefor beholden.

There is a suggestion aoove that bank tellers can count the vote. Now that's simple and brilliant. Pay them independently of their bank and do that. Who runs that, a finance division of the county government, maybe the tax assessors or some traditionally independent arm of the government supervised through full transparency by account or other firms selected by the parties or some objective selector(s).

I said 'make it better' and let me know your thoughts. But we don't need any more Blackwells or Kathlene's.

Thanks for the question.

[autorank]

32. diva77, Did the response to the question make sense?

[diva77]

36. yes, thanks (altho. there is room for debate) ...but I have another

question: what is the recipe, step by step, for implementing this plan?

[autorank]

38. WELCOME TO DU!!! (sorry, forgot)

Your direct, no b.s. questions are refreshing.

Well, there's retail and wholesale.

On the retail side, I think that this is a model and the solution provided can fit in nicely

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2118949&mesg_id=2118949

This actually passed in Arcata, CA. Remember how many Patriot Act resolutions of disapproval passed, 200 or so in cities across the country. If this kicked in like that, there would be a follow through from the resolution because the cities are intertwined with the counties, which run elections usually and influential at the state level.

On the wholesale side, we need a champion who will both say "the emperor has no clothes" -- meaning the 2000, 2002 and 2004 elections were a joke AND there is a simple plan that can be implemented. There needs to be quick build of awareness for a population inclined to believe the worst (and the truth).

The steps are easy. They have the voting booths. They've counted paper in many areas in recent memory. It's just a matter of adapting this and having people show up to count votes and watch votes being counted. They do it in England and Canada (with paper), we could just give them a call;)

[diva77]

56. Thanks for the warm welcome, Autorank!

[Nederland]

25. No

Getting rid of computers entirely is a bad idea. Paper ballots are a good way of ensuring that the vote is accurately counted, but there are many very very good reasons to have those ballots created by a computer. For example, computers can:

1) Digitally sign ballots to prevent fraud.
2) Validate ballots to eliminate over-voting and under-voting.
3) Act as a check on human counters.

In other words, don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

[FogerRox]

27. 3) Act as a check on human counters.

Please reconcile that statement with the facts--

Pennsylvania- nov. 2004 3 counties using Unilect DREs had undervote rates as hi as 7.29%---- While counties using Optical scanner had undervote rates as low as 0.29%, & All counties using levers came in under 1.0%

New Mexico- Nov. 2004 undervote rates as high as 10% to 20% in Jurisdictions using DREs

I think we can safely say item number 3 can be thrown in the trash.

You see -- once a computer makes an error-- the ballot information is lost--- its gone.

But with a paper ballot--- I think you get the drift by know

[Nederland]

41. Read the post again

You didn't read what I wrote. I never suggested not having paper ballots that were hand counted. I merely said that the human count could be "checked" by computers. If the computer count differs from the human count, people could go back to make sure they didn't make a mistake (which BTW, happens quite frequently).

[FogerRox]

44. computerized voting counting can produce a 20% ballot spoilage rate

What spoilage rate does Human counting produce?

Politics aside

[Nederland]

54. 0.89%

Please understand that I'm not advocating DRE devices. I'm advocating computer generated hand counted ballots. The reason is simple: studies have shown that hand counted ballots are not as accurate as optically scanned ballots. Here is one such study:

http://www.vote.caltech.edu/media/documents/wps/vtp_wp11.pdf

The beauty of computer generated hand counted ballots is that they provide the best of both worlds. During voting the computer will help reduce spoilage rates. After voting you can hand count ballots and run them through a machine counter and make sure the results match. When results don't match, you repeat the process until you figure out what went wrong.

[autorank]

30. The baby is still born...sorry, it has to go!

Once you have alterable instructions via any computer, either on site or remotely, you have trouble and you lose confidence. I used Diebold ATMs in the 80's. They worked great, I got a paper receipt, and I NEVER had a problem. Their machines for voting had a 19% error rate in a recent test in CA, their best machines to seal the deal. Sorry, they're gone. This is fool proof. If the county board of elections people find this "onerous" as one of them stated, too bad. We'll get new people.

No more computers, machines or other intermediaries to our votes (except when called on by voters who need some assisted device voting; we've got a surplus).

[Nederland]

42. Link?

Do you have a link to the 19% number? Frankly I find it hard to believe that a voter verified computer generated ballot produces an error rate of 19%.

[FogerRox]

45. Febbles study

should be at the US count votes site

I never said squat about about VVPB

Then Google the "Shamos-report" go to last page

The difference between opscans at arouond 0,5% and Unilects @ 6-7% is exponential.

These DREs are NO FUCKING GOOD

I agree with Autorank and the Gov, its about confidence-- without that, we dont got squat.

Please lets get up to speed on DREs, they suck, by every measure that could be utilized.

Diebold ATMs use open source code -- the banking industry demands it. Why then do all DREs have corporate owned propriatary software?

These DREs are NO FUCKING GOOD

They are designed to cheat, they have a front end and a back end, yet if your accountant had 2 sets of books, you would call the police, right?

These DREs are NO FUCKING GOOD

[Nederland]

55. Now I see the problem

I never said squat about about VVPB

Correct, you never did. I did.

Go back and read my post #25. Just so there is no confusion please understand what I am advocating: Computer generated paper ballots.

NOT DREs.

[autorank]

47. Here you go-20%. Tri-Valley Herald - BradBlog,VotersUnite.Org

Blogged by Brad on 8/4/2005 @ 1:03am PT...

Diebold Tests in California Even Worse Than Originally Reported
20 Percent of Machines Failed Massive Mock Election, Twice the Failure Rate Originally Reported

Perhaps if Diebold spent more on engineering, and less on "bribing" Elections Officials and buying off Lobbying Groups for the Blind , they'd be in better shape. Updating our previous...

Perhaps if Diebold spent more on engineering, and less on "bribing" Elections Officials and buying off Lobbying Groups for the Blind, they'd be in better shape.

Updating our previous report on the rejection of Diebold in the state of California by Republican Secretary of State Bruce McPhereson after some 10% of Diebold's touch-screen voting machines reportedly froze or jammed in a mock election recently, it now seems that the failure rate was actually twice as high.

As reported by the Tri-Valley Herald:

Diebolds problems worsen
Mass test shows nearly 20 percent of touch-screen machines crashed

Diebolds latest electronic voting machine, desired by dozens of counties nationwide, fared worse in the nations first mass testing than previously disclosed, with almost 20 percent of the touch-screen machines crashing.
...
hen Diebold representatives trucked in 96 brand-new TSx machines, and local elections officials voted on them July 20 in a San Joaquin County warehouse, nearly twice as many machines froze or crashed as had paper jams.
...
In all, 19 machines had 21 screen freezes or system crashes, producing a blue screen and messages about an illegal operation or a fatal exception error. A Diebold technician had to restart the machine for voting to resume. Ten machines had a total of 11 printer jams. Almost a third of all machines in the mock election had one problem or another.

[Nederland]

53. This is Diebold

is anyone really surprised that they suck?

[yowzayowzayowza]

65. Bunk.

Diebold ATMs in the 80's. They worked great, I got a paper receipt, and I NEVER had a problem.

I financed my 80s collegiate engineering daze werkin at a bank on those ATMs. They screwed up all the freaken time; both receipt & audit printer jams, dispensing errors, comm link probz, etc, etc, etc. The reason YOU never had a problem is cuz the bank buried the costs of those errors to reap ATM fees and teller automation savings.

Once you have alterable instructions via any computer, either on site or remotely, you have trouble and you lose confidence.

Not if ...

1. every counting device faces an audit of a random set of hand counted ballots in every election, and

2. computerized tabulation is only an adjunct to manual collection of totals from the audited counting devices.

I appreciate you passion for this issue, but automation is not necessarily insecure.

[FogerRox]

46. I'll be more direct

this you--
Getting rid of computers entirely is a bad idea

this is me-
Getting rid of computers entirely is a good idea

got it?

[Nederland]

52. Yup

Curious that you don't address any of my points though.

[FogerRox]

59. OK- Computer generated paper ballots.

Like a Populex?

Or -------

[Nederland]

64. Yes

From what I've read, Populex is on the right track.

[Joe Chi Minh]

26. No substitute for what you propose, autorank.

Pencil, paper and a big cross in the box of your choice. Also, I think there should be draconian and extremely well-publicised sanctions against persons found to have been knowingly involved, directly or indirectly, with vote suppression in any form; the higher the person in the vote-suppressor hierarchy, the more draconian the punishment. The enormity of the crime demands it, imo.

[autorank]

31. Sir, I thank you! Always a pleasure.

From the land of William Wallace and a passion for freedom come words of wisdom.

"The enormity of the crime demands it."

[In Truth We Trust]

35. Nightshift kick for truth- Great post Autorank!!!

[autorank]

37. Thank you so much. Go Sox!!!

[passy]

39. Great post !

Short of reforming the electoral college this is a good step toward making America the beacon of Democracy it once was.
I have to say that I also want those cool-looking transparent ballot boxes, they look good and give the voter the added assurance that the election is clean and transparent.

[freedomfries]

40. ANY picture ID= poll tax

why add a picture ID requirement to your great list of free and fair, transparent and open election procedures?
ANY picture ID requirement is by its very nature unfair, as it is going to disenfranchise ca. 10% of the electorate, those too old, too sick or disabled, to poor or too busy and stressed out to go out and do what it would take to get one. That's why these 10% loyal Democratic voters for the most part, don't have a driver's license in the first place.
This whole "voter fraud"/picture ID debate has been a smokescreen erected to block public debate on the real scandal of the '04 elections.
Please check the key paragraph in John Conyers' recent Letter to Congressional Leadership:
"The simple fact is that many minority and poor voters do not have the time, money or need to purchase a drivers license. In fact, over ten percent of eligible voters in the last election did not have a photo ID. They vote by presenting other means of identification, e.g. a voter registration card, utility bill, or affidavit."
Link to sign the letter:



http://johnconyers.com/index.asp?Type=SUPERFORMS&SEC=%7B99FFEEE4-D8DC-4CD8-992B-9EB3A4F0123A%7D

[autorank]

48. Transparent ballot boxes...can we have Biondi Blue?

:hi:

The Electoral College does suck, doesn't it. A bit partial to the forces of 'containment.'

[passy]

57. One more thing about transparent boxes.

I just found out that the ones they use in France also have a counter.
To insert your ballot you have to push a lever that turns a counter therefore you always know how many ballots is supposed to be in each box, kind of foolproof.

[kster]

49. Kick.nt

[autorank]

51. Get to bed kick for Kster!

:evilgrin:

[Einsteinia]

58. Yes, BUT let's not forget Nevada--

where we learned having paper is not enough--

we must also have an airtight mandatory audit protocol.

Here's one to ponder (a work-in-progress) and if you have a better idea go to
http://www.califelectprotect.net and click on the Gold Star on the left hand column for a brochure explaining a "call for submissions."


Gold Star Audit Protocol (in honor of those who have given their lives in the name of democracy)

All state elections shall have (at the State’s expense):

• PAPER BALLOTS: Accessible, voter-verifiable, individual paper ballots on archival paper (that can be kept for years as proof the election result).

• HAND COUNTS: A manual audit which relies on human eyes.

• STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT SAMPLING: Select a minimum of 5% of all precincts (and precincts cannot exceed 1000 voters). Within these selected precincts, audit 100% of the paper ballots; or in their absence, the paper trails.

• GENUINELY RANDOM: Genuinely random selected samples (not at the discretion of by election officials).

• PUBLIC OVERSIGHT: Each political participating political party may form delegations to witness every step of the election process. Results of each tally posted publicly on a public-accessible posting at the precinct site, as well as on a public-accessible portion of the Secretary of State's website in a comma-delimited format (e.g. a format that may easily be extracted into a word processing or spreadsheet software), BEFORE the data is transferred (e.g. to the county’s central tabulator).

• RECOURSE: Any discrepancies between the machine tally and the audit Gold Star audit protocol shall require the State to repeat this Gold Star Audit protocol; however, each time the sample size shall increase by 10%. The final result of this audit process supersedes the finding of the initial tally and is binding.

[autorank]

60. This is excellent. It is very clear and there is no reason not to do it.

I'm at the Elections Summit in Portland. I'm sure they'll discuss it or I'll bring it up.

Great stuff. Of course, it's from California.

[FogerRox]

61. HOw about Election day= national holiday

[Einsteinia]

63. I hadn't thought of including that in the protocol, but

perhaps it should be. I'll add it to the proposals. Thanks!

[autorank]

66. How about elections Sunday, Monday, Tuesday for president and

Monday and Tuesday during off years. Make it easy.

Did you see my post to the daily news re: the TN judge who said hiring drivers to take the handicapped to the polls was much cheaper than electronic machines, thus he ordered so. Apparently, handicapped voters are very happy about this.

[Einsteinia]

62. Thanks, I do appreciate that. . . I regret I

can't make it up to Portland.

[autorank]

67. We'll have a nice summary for you and every body else soon.

[Febble]

68. Custody of ballots

between election and recount. Often violated.

[Einsteinia]

69. good, I'll add it.

thanks

[Febble]

70. And should have said:

between election and first count too!

In the UK ballot boxes are signed and sealed at the polling station (=precinct) and transported by car to the count (usually a school gym or town hall) where they are opened under scrutiny. If a recount is required it follows the first count pretty well immediately.

[kster]

71. kick.nt