0 votes

** Paper ballots verses electronic voting @@

What is the penalty for tampering with election results??
Why didn't Ron Paul receive more votes ?? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ecdkCVD7mM
Who owns """Election central""" >>>> ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, NEW YORK TIMES, WASHINGTON POST. <<< >>>Now you know.

What can we do to stop the msm from adding up the vote totals ???

After the election polls close the state elections office's give them the election results from the states central system our good MAIN STREAM MEDIA EMPLOYEES WITH THEIR COMPUTERS tabulate the totals and give the nation the results.
Do you trust the main stream media to count the vote totals and provide correct results?? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwovSqXWKQ8
learn more at http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

An idea

Just wanted to share an idea I had for a voting system.

I'm not good at explaining it, so sorry if it sounds kind of technical.

Registered voters would come in to the poling place to vote, and be presented with a paper ballot card.
This paper ballot would have a detachable section with a serial number, say #00089. They would mark this paper ballot, and the detachable section would be given to the voter, while the ballot itself was read by an automated reader.

After the votes were tabulated and posted that night, the voter could get onto a free website, and type in their ballot number (#00089). It would show who that specific ballot voted for, and which district that number voted in. There would be no connection between the voter and the ballot.

People who had not voted could review the votes, and look at how the ballots were totaled at the State, District and Precinct level. They could even type in random numbers and see how those individual ballots were marked (according to the scan).

If the voter saw a discrepancy, they could call an automated 1-800 Number and voice their complaint. To do this, they would need to disclose their voter registration number, their ballot number, as well as who they had voted for, and who the system said they had voted for. This would NOT change the vote. It would simply be registering a complaint.

Allowing for individual voters to compare their vote against the actual record would create a quality control process within an automated system which is unpredictable and entirely random.

Although no votes would be able to be changed, the number of complaint calls to the 1 800 number would be publicized. After a certain percentage of complaints, it would become obvious that a recount was needed.

Problem:
There is the possibility of a forced recount, especially in a close election.
(Recounts are expensive, time-consuming and a sign the system doesn't really work that well.)
Looking back at the Gore vs. Bush election (and assuming it was NOT rigged), if enough of the Gore voters called in and complained that their votes were wrong, and submitted their actual voter ID with someone else's ballot number (that was shown to have voted for Bush by checking the online system), a recount might be initiated. It would take a LOT of people trying to subvert the system across the state for such a recount to take place.

Other than that, I think the system is fairly sound.
What do you all think?

"Always vote your principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." -John Quincy Adams.

I'd be happy

with just holepunched paper ballots put in a clear guarded box with a delegate from each candidate assigned to watch the vote count at the end of the night.

Voter Action met with US House Admin Committee today

You may be interested in this message & webcast (link below):

Wed. April 9, 2008
Voter Action's John Bonifaz will appear as a witness before the US House Administration Committee tomorrow for a hearing on voting rights problems identified to date via the 866-MYVOTE1 hotline this primary election season. Along with John, the Committee will hear testimony from nationally-syndicated radio talk show host Tom Joyner, Ken Smukler, President of InfoVoter Technologies, and Greg Moore, Executive Director of the NAACP's National Voter Fund.

View the ARCHIVED webcast as they discuss the 2008 Presidential Primaries and Caucuses and "What we've learned so far".

On issues ranging from voter registration to high-tech disenfranchisement, communities are working to become part of the solution to help improve the elections process. The MyVOTE1 Hotline has received thousands of calls through the primary season so far. Testimony will cover what the government can do to respond to existing reports and how it can support ongoing oversight and monitoring efforts.

For more details or to watch the ARCHIVED Webcast, click here.

http://cha.house.gov/view_hearing.aspx?r=21