Voting rights groups BLOCK talk of machine-free elections

[Amaryllis]

I don't know if anyone has posted this article by Lynn Landes before (it's below my comments here; please bear with me for a moment as I express my angst).
Are our own voting rights groups doing us a disservice?

As I look at the various bills, I keep feeling like we are putting bandaids on a festering wound. The more I read of Chuck Herrin
chuckherrin.com
and others, the more I don't want voting machines, period. If you haven't read Herrin, you owe it to yourself to check him out. A republican computer security expert, he is one of the most outspoken critics of e-voting. He says there is no way to make e-voting secure.
(And e-voting costs more than any of the other methods, just as an aside here.)

People keep saying we have to accept machine voting; it's here to stay, and we have to do the best we can to make it secure because there is no way we can get acceptance of paper ballots.This article puts a different slant on the issue.

What if we had a massive grassroots effort demanding paper ballots? I am working with a lot of activists in my area, and even though we all want paper ballots nationwide ( I am fortunate to live in Oregon, where we do it the old fashioned way: Paper ballots!) we keep getting told by those in the know that this will never fly, so we reluctantly accept that this is true, and proceed accordingly. Every fiber in my being resists this. Maybe it isn't true. Is it true? Is is only true if we accept that it's true, because we keep getting told that it's true? Read this article and see what you think.


Electronic Voting

Voting rights groups 'block' talk of machine-free elections

By Lynn Landes
Online Journal Contributing Writer


December 17, 2004—So much for a free and fair exchange of ideas. At conferences and hearings across the country, traditional voting rights organizations have successfully blocked any serious debate on machine-free, paper-only elections. It appears that our well-entrenched so-called 'voting rights' organizations, including the NAACP and ACLU, haven't absorbed the lesson from America's election debacles. They would rather invite the industry-funded National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) to speak at their conferences, than invite researchers and activists who will argue that the machines must go.

The Dec. 7 conference in Washington, DC, Voting 2004: A Report to the Nation on America's Election Process, sponsored by Common Cause, The Century Foundation, and LCCR (Leadership Conference on Civil Rights) was no exception. Instead of fighting for the peoples' right to a paper ballot and a hand count, the conference adopted the VerifiedVoting.org and Congressman Rush Holt's (D-NJ) prescription for voting integrity. It is beyond worthless.

It gives people false hope, instead of a sensible solution. Holt's legislation calls for ballot printers and audits. First, that leaves the machines in the voting process—ready, willing, and able to malfunction, break down, or not show up—causing chaos and confusion. Ballot printers won't fix that. Second, it proposes spot audits, which leaves the counting of ballots in the hands of the very election officials who prove with each new election how truly inept or completely evil they really are. And third, the only time paper ballots will be counted is in case of a "close" election, ensuring that perpetrators of vote fraud will steal a sufficient number of votes to avoid triggering a recount.

At the conference, I privately asked Rep.Holt about the shortcomings to his legislation. He looked like a deer caught in the headlights. When I asked what happens when the machines malfunction (ballot printers and all), Holt said something about "emergency ballots". When I asked what "emergency ballots" were, he said that it's up to the states. It was obvious that he is not accustomed to tough questions. That's strange, I thought. I've been communicating with Michele Moulder of Holt's staff for the past two years. So how could he be so unprepared to defend his legislation?


More
http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/121704Landes/121704landes.html

[ChrisPhx]

1. I agree & refuse to be an activist for

solutions to the wrong problems.

Finally I wrote up this petition to say that. For personal reasons I can't use my own name and email address. Please see:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x330246

[sacxtra]

12. I FEEL YA

I know I am already on the top of their lists.

;o)


So what.

Nobody has the right to vote?

Were in a "sometimes" three tiered, "sometimes" two tiered; when they want to allow us voice, government?


Either this intolerable situation gets fixed or it's over.

It's really that simple.

REMOVE:
electronics
electricity
digitized data
and those fscking insecure networks.

[ChrisPhx]

13. Been there done that

Worked on the campaigns. Clark. Kerry.

Tried to alert people re the tabulator.

I just see no point in joining in a movement to change stuff that isn't going to be a real solution.

At least if we lose for that reason, I won't have tried and hoped someone somewhere with power and clout was addressing the real issue.

Exit polls say Kerry won, there is an easy way to alter vote totals on machines and tabulators made by Bush supporters and/or other Republicans.

1 + 1 = 2 in my arithmetic.

Not playing in base 10, binary, or hex; while the other side plays any old way it wishes to.

That's my thinking now.

Will it matter or will W have led us into WWIII by then and none of it matters.

[kster]

2. I am with you

paper ballots hand counted. Why we should except e-voting with a paper verified ballot is beyond me.If we were helping out an honest e-voting company that is honestly trying to have fair elections, had a couple mistakes and we were working with them to fix a couple of problems I could see it.

But we are working with companies who outright stole elections,and we should forgive all that and tell Diebold and the rest, just put on paper ballots and then we will trust you the next time.

WTF get rid of the culprits, go paper only, for the time being.

If we let them stay, I'm willing to bet that they already have a plan to steal the next eletion even if we do end up getting voter verified paper ballots.

[sacxtra]

7. WTF get rid of the culprits, go paper only, for the time being.

Not just the TIME BEING.

FOREVER.

[countmyvote4real]

3. Thoughtful article on paper trail machines vs. paper only.

Along with the ways that we tabulate the votes, there are several other aspects of voting reform that should be addressed:

1. The Electoral System is totally out-of-date as far as “balancing” the sentiments of a particular class. There’s a whole lot more people here, everywhere, than there were when the thirteen colonies counted a slave as 3/5 of a person and women didn’t get vote. A true democracy should not have to average or balance their votes.

2. We desperately need campaign reforms and measures that will not burden the process itself, the courts and the campaign media with additional costs that prohibit all candidates from seeking office at any level. Instant Voter Runoff seems like a silver bullet to me.

What follows is from:
http://www.instantrunoff.com/

Instant runoff voting (IRV) is a voting reform that asks the voter to rank the candidates in order of preference. It is a simple, common-sense reform that will greatly improve our democratic process.

IRV has many benefits including giving voters a wider range of choices, eliminating the spoiler factor with third-party candidates, saving taxpayer money, and decreasing negative campaigning.

http://www.chrisgates.net/irv/


http://www.fairvote.org/sf/robmessage.htm

[sacxtra]

8. I'm SICK of these Bullsh1T Articles

They all try to FSCK EVERYONE.

The FACTS ARE:

Electronics and digitized data, and insecure networks have NO FSCKING PLACE IN AMERICA!


FEEL THE LOVE BAY-BEE!!

[sacxtra]

11. I AGREE PARTIALLY

IRV has some good ideas

Jessie Jackson has a great plan.


HOWEVER.

Not with electronics, digitized data, and insecure networks.


IT JUST WON'T FLY


HAHAHAHAHA.

[Helga Scow Stern]

4. Something stinks. And now Common Cause is endorsing

the Grope's plan to "redistrict" California?

[kster]

5. I don't know

enough about it,but I know something smells.

[sacxtra]

9. YOU DONT KNOW YET?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
MUahahahahahahahahaha!


IT IS 03wn3d

(while I got your attention, have you considered firing up that old 486 and making a firewall out of it?)


hmm...


have ya?

[sacxtra]

10. LET EM REDISTRICT

Who cares?!


As long as WE HAVE removed

electronics
digitized data
insecure networks

EAT BAY-BEE!!

[sacxtra]

6. I have ALSO TOLD YOU electronics, digitized data, and insecure networks ar

I have ALSO TOLD YOU electronics, digitized data, and insecure networks are NOT APPROPRIATE for elections in the United States Of America.

You will just have to look for what I said.


I will NOW go so far as to say that EVERYONE that is SUGGESTING that we STILL USE ELECTRONICS is an enemy of the Unites States Of America.

IF you really want to HELP, then you will take MATTERS into your OWN HANDS and file a ELECTION/FRAUD (They're friggin vague) COMPLAINT FORM in your local precint. MY local precint is the 5th Congressional District. Sacramento, California.

I WONDER WHERE YOU AND YOURS IS?


EAT THAT BAY-BEE!