auditable electronic voting system
I've read the all the web sites and all the threads here about vote fraud and how everyone wants paper ballots. Paper ballots would work and are certainly better than the current electronic system.
But I'm not sure hand counted paper ballots are the way to go. I'm thinking an electronic system that is secure would be better. I offer one such system here:
Get an electronic voting system, similar to the Diebold and ESS systems we currently have. But modify it to print a paper reciept with a list of candidates voted for and a random unique serial number. Tally the votes however you want (but it better be accurate or you'll get complaints, see below!)
Now this is the important part. Publish the votes! Not aggregates (county X voted 263 for Ron Paul, 21 for an insane candidate). Rather publish each individual vote. Serial number TM43582 voted for Ron Paul. Serial number RE42353 voted for John McCain. And so on...
Now, each individual that voted can look at the published vote, find their individual vote, and compare it to the receipt they have. In that way, they can make sure their vote was counted properly. Obviously, all the published votes have to add up. Equally obviously, if a published vote differs from a reciept, the voter can come forward and complain.
A secret ballot is maintained since the names of the voters are not associated with the published results. Only a random serial number is associated with the published result.
Not everyone will check to make sure their vote reciept matches the published results. But not everyone has to. If 10% of the people check the results and everything is OK, we can be pretty sure it was an accurate count. But if even 1 vote is off, that will get everyone to look at their vote and it will be easy to tell if there was fraud.
This system allows all the convenience of electronic voting and even better security than paper ballots. Self audited voting, what a concept!
Wild!
I had the exact same idea!
One addition:
In order to guarantee that additional "voters" cannot be added, each voting site needs to perform a head count throughout the day. When a voter comes in and identifies herself as eligible to vote, she is added to the tally. She then places her vote. If total votes!=physical bodies counted, then it would be obvious that votes were either added or subtracted.
Similarly, these tallies could be published for verification purposes. Thus, every vote is real, and every voter is guaranteed that their vote wasn't switched.
oversimplified example:
100 physical bodies are tallied as casting a vote. At the end of voting, the site reports 100 votes cast, 50 for X, 30 for Y, 20 for Z, all of which are printed for verification purposes when the votes are published.
Seems like it would work to me. Am I missing something?
Check out "The Fate Of Kings" at www.colindavidmusic.com and if you buy it, I'll donate the money to the campaign!
use a turnstile at the booth for the count
like an amusment park. With time stamp to line up with ballot time stamp.
_________________
Want Ron Paul? Register Republican Now
I think sequential numbers would help deter extra votes
But that is still the tough nut to crack. How to count only legitimate votes cast by eligible voters. But then again, paper ballots also has the extra vote issue. Maybe a fingerprint scan to start the ballot. Not identifying the user but used to ensure that a unique person cast the ballot. No duplicates allowed and all ballots had to have one. Just don't associate the person to the print to maintain privacy. Yuk, that sounds so stupid doesn't it.
_________________
Want Ron Paul? Register Republican Now
the sooner the better. I
the sooner the better.
I like this idea.
I can't believe people agreed to machines (deathbold) which have no accountability.
The slogan press on has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race. No person was ever honored for what he received. Honor has been the reward for what he gave.
- Calvin Coolidge
Now
can you get it done by November. This is a good answer. The problem with any solution is getting it approved and through the system. Move it.
This is close
Very close to what I've been working on software wise. My only issue is that there can still be false ballot made or false numbers. Without a checksum of some sort there is still no guarantee of a correct count.
In other words, this takes care of those wanting to make sure their vote is counted, but what about the extra votes thrown on there? That's my sticking point currently. There has to be a verification process for every vote, that verifies a valid voter. You don't have to show the voters name etc. But you do have to only show and count verified voters.
A system like this could provide real time counts; keep a full log of votes going in, changing, who changed it, etc.; and provide the voter with a little more confidence in their system. It could also very easily be done online. No more poll worries.