Miami Herald- Better Votes, On Paper, by Robert Steinback

[KaryninMiami]

"Nothing is more important, for the world's pre-eminent democracy, than assuring the sanctity of each vote."

ELECTIONS- Better votes, on paper

Robert Steinback, Miami Herald

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/columnists/robert_steinback/11377424.htm

Sometimes, low-tech is best.

Who wouldn't prefer hand-cranked ice cream to the mass-produced stuff that comes in supermarket cubes?

Every car I've ever owned has had a manual transmission.

As much as I am dismayed by the outsourcing of telephone service jobs, I'd rather talk to a human being in India than a machine programmed to ''understand'' my verbal responses.

Technology is cool, don't get me wrong -- I rarely use my land-line telephone at home, now that my cellular has been permanently sutured to my belt. I can do research that used to require hours in a library with single mouse click.

But applying technology to a process doesn't always mean progress.

No better example exists than computerized touch-screen voting machines, which haven't made elections foolproof or credible beyond doubt. While certainly superior to the hanging-chad-prone punch cards of the 2000 election, touch-screen machines are costly to operate, ripe for mistakes by untrained operators and poll workers and vulnerable to intrusions by hackers and intrigue by schemers.

Worst of all, computer voting machines deny critics, reporters, attorneys general and historians the chance to recheck results -- which undermines the confidence any citizen can have in what are billed as free and fair elections.

Administrators in Miami-Dade and Broward counties, where goofed-up elections have now ruined the careers of three county elections supervisors in barely two years, are cautiously opening their eyes to the light -- studying whether to drop touch screens for paper ballots.

Nothing is more important, for the world's pre-eminent democracy, than assuring the sanctity of each vote. Why can't we have a single nationwide system, with optically scanned paper ballots -- as easy to fill out as a Lotto ticket -- printed locally and sorted by bar coding to custom-fit each of America's 170,000 precincts? The ballots could be counted within a few hours -- hardly an imposition on the populace if it serves to reaffirm democracy itself.

Best of all, the paper ballots would survive to be counted again, and again if necessary. And to guard against the odd warehouse fire that might use ballots as kindling, the counting machines could generate receipts that could be stored separately for the benefit of posterity.

Thwarting fraud

Switching to optically scanned paper ballots obviously won't end all attempted subterfuge to distort elections -- but low-tech vote-counting systems make fraud attempts more labor intensive, and thus more readily detected. Paper ballots can be forged or lost, for example, but attempting to swing elections using such methods almost surely requires a team of conspirators, and likely would leave a trail of evidence. With computerized voting machines, a hacked line of code can instantly alter thousands of votes.

We may never find out what Walden O'Dell, CEO of touch-screen voting machine manufacturer Diebold Inc., meant when he told Republicans in a 2003 fund-raising letter that he was ``committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year.''

We may never learn the truth behind the affidavit of computer programmer Clinton Curtis alleging then-Florida Rep. Tom Feeney -- now a U.S. congressman -- asked the software company for which he worked in 2000 to design an undetectable computer program for flipping touch-screen machine votes.

We may never know for sure if Nov. 2 exit polls that projected John Kerry winning several states he ultimately lost were themselves biased -- or whether they were accurate, exposing tampered election results. The victors, after all, never question the score -- or the scoring.

But wouldn't it be nice in the future not to have to ask?



(Sorry this is so long guys but it was too good and too important to snip! KA)

[eomer]

1. Very cool.

Steinback in the past has either ignored the election problems or has been dismissive. At least he now acknowledges the exit poll discrepancy and the fact that no one knows whether the vote count is accurate.

[Jo March]

2. Well, this line jumped out at me

"...the counting machines could generate receipts that could be stored separately for the benefit of posterity."

We don't need receipts. We need VVPB. I hope that's what he means. I think that it is but whenever anyone mentions paper "receipts" it makes me nervous.

[eomer]

3. The full quote is...

"Best of all, the paper ballots would survive to be counted again, and again if necessary. And to guard against the odd warehouse fire that might use ballots as kindling, the counting machines could generate receipts that could be stored separately for the benefit of posterity.

So he is talking about paper ballots (optical scan) and then makes a fairly obscure point that if the paper ballots burn up in a fire that there might be an additional paper record from the counting process.

But the important point is that he, along with the County Mayor and County Manager, is talking about paper ballots.

Of course we would rather have paper ballots counted by hand but realistically paper ballots with optical scan together with improvements in recount law is way better than where we are at now.

[Jo March]

4. I agree that it's heaps better but, like I said in my post

anytime that I see the word "receipts" I get nervous.

I understood his analogy. I'd just rather not hear "receipts."

On edit: Because "paper receipts" starts to creep forward and it can soon replace "paper ballots."

[eomer]

5. Good point.

With the tricky creeps we are up against you have to watch for every sneaky way they can get you.

[Jo March]

9. And they will try to sneak it past people

Andy Stephenson has taught me well! :)

Again, people think that the paper receipt is the equivalent of what they get at an ATM. They think that if they have a piece of paper showing that they voted, then they are golden. Wrong. In the event of a recount, a ballot is required in the event of a recount.

Remember, there are legal definitions of a ballot. They may vary by state (like the weight of the paper, how the voter must mark them, etc).

Just be aware.

Ballots = legal.

Receipts = false sense of security

Again, if receipts are 100% better than what is currently in place, then I'm for that. We just have to push for the best reforms that we can get: VVPB

[Wilms]

7. What is the difference between a reciept and a ballot.

Are their legal precedents, or is it just a problem with terminolgy (which, because of the generated confusion, could be bad enough)?

[Jo March]

8. A ballot can be legally counted

A receipt basically shows that you did vote. In the case of a recount, you need a physical, legal ballot. A receipt doesn't have the legal weight that a ballot has.

A "paper receipt" can be simply a report that says: 850 votes; 800 for Kerry, 50 for *.

A paper ballot can be legally counted. It shows your votes: Vote ID 12345 - President = Kerry; Senator = Bowles, etc.

A receipt just proves that you did vote but not necessarily who you voted for.

These asses are sneaky, guys. I don't even want to hear the word receipt because people think that it is like an ATM receipt which you can take to the bank to prove that you pulled $20 out of the bank. However, it has the legal standing of a gnat.

Ask for what you want: Paper ballots that can be counted by hand and can be reviewed by the voter before committing AND will trump the machine totals in the event of a recount.

Paper receipts <> paper ballots

In the case where there is no paper anything, however, I'll take a paper receipt if it's the best election reform provided.

[kster]

6. Kick.........n/t

[KaryninMiami]

10. Kick..........................

[keepthemhonest]

11. Hey Karyn

we are going to try to get this article blasted across tothe foreign media with the help of Tom McIntire.Along with the news about Paul Lehto's Lawsuit.

[tommcintyre]

12. kick