Wed Aug 1, 2012, 10:18 PM
Wilms (21,631 posts)
NH Editorial about renewed call for parallel hand counts and a recount
Testing electronic voting systems is worth a shot
Posted: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 12:15 pm | Updated: 11:52 am, Wed Jul 18, 2012.
In 2010, residents of several New Hampshire communities — including Jaffrey, Peterborough, Rindge and Swanzey — asked their town moderators to call for parallel hand counts of ballots so they could be compared to the electronic results.
In some communities where hand-counts were requested moderators chose not to hold them after a memo from Deputy Secretary of State David Scanlan recommended that town officials proceed with caution on the matter. Scanlan wrote that, while the law allows moderators to use hand-counts to verify electronic results, pressure from special interest groups to get moderators to run elections in a certain way is “inappropriate.”
Now some of the residents who asked for the parallel counts want the 2010 ballots to be made available so they can retroactively check the electronic results. Some are also planning to request a hand count be performed during the upcoming 2012 elections.
We think it is reasonable for some communities to perform hand counts to check the accuracy of the electronic system, provided the process is not unnecessarily burdensome. It is allowed by New Hampshire law, and if the results show that the electronic count is accurate it may help quell the concerns of those who claim the electronic system is inaccurate. If, however, the count shows a discrepancy in the results it would shine a light on a problem that officials can address appropriately. Regardless of the outcome, it can’t hurt to run a test and make sure the system many communities rely on during elections is working as intended.
1 replies, 440 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
NH Editorial about renewed call for parallel hand counts and a recount (Original post)
Response to Wilms (Original post)
Wed Aug 1, 2012, 10:36 PM
Politicalboi (10,690 posts)
1. They can still cheat
When they show the votes match for a few elections, then they rely only with the electronic because they were never wrong before. Hacks are hacks and it's always a risk.
I think they need to give us 2 weeks to vote and have secure buildings and treat them with all kinds of security and camera's. Build size of buildings with population. They could only be used for elections, with safes and camera's and a tally that's visible to all.
DMV here in Ca take an electronic fingerprint for ID. Get those into voting so ID is never wrong. And have an electronic display of how many votes casted each day till election night.
What did WE know, and when did WE know it. Thanks Tweety.