Site Presented By
Saturday, Nov 7, 2009
We would have honest voting if American politicians and bureaucrats wanted it. We don’t, so why is everyone so surprised? Are we truly so naïve to think that all of this is unintentional?
Can anyone honestly examine the entire political system of the United States and not conclude that it has been totally co-opted from top to bottom?
Diebold controls billions of dollars in ATM transactions every day without allegations of fraud, but can’t design a transparent voting machine system.
I have worked with information technology for thirty-five years and I trust electronic voting about as much as I trust electronic slot machines.
Based on the NY Times poll today, Americans consider the following:
22. Think for a minute about issues and problems facing the COUNTRY. Which ONE would you say will be most important in your vote for U.S. SENATE?
10/27-31/06*
War /Iraq 26
Economy 11
Terrorism 7
Immigration 7
Defense/Military 3
Health care 5
Education 2
Jobs/Unemployment 3
Foreign Policy 4
Other 13
DK/NA 19
Try this, America:
#1: Fair (i.e. accessible), Auditable elections
#2: Corporate Money in Campaigns
#3: De-centralized news media ownership (and no ownership by companies in businesses other than news)
#4: Anti-gerrymandering law (districting reform)
Good night, and good luck, America.
What's the matter, did you have an epiphany or something?
The real question on Tuesday is whether the Democrats can win the election SO BIG that even the Republicans can't steal it.
I really think that the solution to this problem would be an open source system, designed jointly by all those on the internet who created the likes of Linux and other systems and programs.... encryption technology and such is at a level that a paper trail could be varified by each voter, if they are given unique alpha/numeric receipt that could then be inputed into the internet where they could see how their vote was counted...etc... really... it's up to all of us to take elections back from the corporations, and those that wish to usurp democracy.
First, let me say that I believe the most ideal voting system of all may very well be a touchscreen computer with a well designed and implemented VVPT. Touchscreens allow large text, different languages, etc, that can help more people vote independently. You combine that with the security of VVPT (basically, the computer just acts as a very consistent, neat bubble-fill-in tool so you don't have the ambiguously marked bubble or the hanging chad), and you have as good a system as you're ever likely to find.
However, the existing VVPT systems absolutely do not meet the criteria of well designed and implemented.
First of all, there is the policy issue. There is a very significant legal difference between a "paper trail" and a "paper ballot." Supposing an elections official suspects fraud in the electronic tally, and does a recount from the VVPT, and indeed, the VVPT record shows a different tally, there is nothing the offical can do about it! The paper trail does not have legal standing as a ballot of record, so that tally cannot simply be substituted for the electronic tally in case of mismatch.
Secondly, there are the technical and design issues. The paper printout is extremely tiny and not in a very friendly format. I've heard that some machines come equipped with a magnifying glass, just so people can do the VV of VVPT. Whether that's true or not, unquestionably, one would be useful.
In addition to the unreadableness of the VVPT, there is the issue that it completely ruins the privacy of your vote. When ballots get dropped into a ballot box, they are mixed up enough that you can't tell whose is whose (apart from maybe telling which are from early morning vs late evening by which are towards the top of the pile). But with the single long, continuous tape of paper used in VVPT systems, votes recorded in flawless order. The GOP polling place observers, who are there to challenge people's registrations and whatnot (and equally other observers), simply need to note the name of each voter that uses the machine. Then, when those same observers go observe the counting or auditing of the paper trail, they can reconstruct the match between every single vote and the voter, including the voter's full name, home address, and everything. A disaster for privacy. Be extra careful who you vote for on an electronic machine, if you ever plan on running for office later in life!
Finally, the current VVPT systems I've seen could still sneakily steal votes. When a voter examines the paper trail, and if they see an error, they can tell the computer. The computer prints out additional lines of information, basically saying, "disregard the above; here is the corrected vote." Unfortunately, with the continuous tape, there is nothing to prevent the machine from "correcting" your vote, after you have walked away by printing the additional information. This could be fixed by, for example, having the machine cut the paper and let it drop into a box after each voter votes. The voter would know that their voting was fully complete and their vote unchangeable.
Paper ballots, put in a locked box in front of several witnesses from all interested parties. After the polls close, those same paper ballots are counted, again in the presence of witnesses, and the results are known the same night. Old school. Low tech. Damned Canadians, them and their health care and their simple voting system. Computerization is NOT the answer, and it has nothing to do with handicapped access. It has to do with rigging the elections, not randomly or in particularly corrupt cities ( see Chicago), but everywhere. Until we change this we're screwed.
Manjoo has zero credibility on this subject. He can't even write a simple review of this doc. without managing to take a swipe at the people who've criticized his "research". Lines like "The film's other virtue is its commitment to the facts" sound innocuous. But the words that follow (along with links to Salon's archive) reveal his game. The funny thing is, Manjoo might actually be a great writer, if only he'd drop the petty "I'm smarter than you" tone of his articles on this subject. Salon readers deserve better.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The Maine fight was supposed to be the dress rehearsal for repealing California's Prop. 8 -- but gay marriage lost
Once one obtains Seriousness credentials in the Washington media, they are irrevocable no matter one's conduct.
Salon headlines in your mailbox
