"For those who don't understand how fully observable, precinct-based, Election Night hand-counting

[midnight]

of hand-marked paper ballots works, one need look no further than those polling places in New Hampshire where the entire process is a matter of civic pride and community participation. We are not speaking about the centralized, behind-closed-doors, party-boss-counted paper ballots of the days of Boss Daley in Chicago or Landslide Lyndon in Texas."

·"Hand counted paper ballots are the best available technology for conducting accurate, transparent, and observable elections," John Washburn, a Republican/Libertarian-leaning election integrity expert from Milwaukee says. He has testified before the U.S. Election Assistance Commission on computer voting system requirements and he is no "Luddite," as opponents to computerized democracy have long been derisively characterized by those who stand to profit in the e-voting industry. Washburn happens to be a long-time computer expert and programmer."

"Yes, if hand-marked, hand-counted paper ballots are good enough for "conquered Nazis," Kenya, many citizens of New Hampshire (the site of our 'First-in-the Nation' Presidential Primary Election), and for elections when you absolutely, positively have to know the correct results, aren't they good enough for every election, every time?

It's time to demand that we begin moving forward, toward Democracy's Gold Standard for all elections. Now. Not after computers have made voters completely irrelevant. It's time for us to insist on pilot projects --- not of new, even higher-tech vote-counting computers --- but of publicly-overseen, hand-counted paper ballots at every precinct in our own localities, with the ultimate goal of extending that Gold Standard to all of America."

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7417

Just a few good paragraphs from this 2009 article about moving forward towards Democracy's Gold Standard for all elections.. I wish it was in place here in Wisconsin just in time for the recall election... Several ballet bags torn open during the last election in which Kathy Nicholas found thousands of missing votes for the Republican Prosser. With all the other criminal activity going on here in Waukesha and throughout the state these measures are what is needed...

[Gidney N Cloyd]

1. I have never heard a good argument against paper ballots.

If we're so desperate for instant gratification then fine, go ahead and scan them to get the "first draft" count but then immediately at closing begin the official public hand count.

[dragonlady]

2. It would be ideal, but the logistics could be a problem

In the United States we tend to have many candidates on the ballot. For example, the spring election here could feature a few state-level candidates (Supreme Court, attorney general, secretary of state, etc.), a dozen judgeships to fill, members of the city council, county board, and school board--we're talking about upward of 20 different races, plus a referendum or two. The counters would need to be prepared to work for quite a while, and the rest of the population to wait for results.

[annabanana]

3. Logistics would only really be a problem to

a media that demands an instant answer.

I think we should wait at least a week before the results are announced

[midnight]

11. Exactly...

[Igel]

4. Only 20?

One recent year I counted upwards of 90 different races or measures on the ballot I filled out. It seemed interminable, esp. when some of the races had two candidates but others had 4 or 5. The guy next to me just walked away from his, half-way through. I told the poll workers, they said they weren't allowed to submit his ballot for him. So I did. They objected to that, too, but it was too late for them to do anything but squawk.

The races went from national to state, county and city, as well as various kinds of smaller jurisdictions. Some partisan, some non-partisan.

There had been early voting. Anywhere from 5 to 15 precincts would be mixed in a single early voting location. The computer kept the e-ballots straight and sorted them. I can only imagine a group of 5 poll workers trying to deal with and hand out that many different ballots, then have them all sorted into the right stacks.

Then, since Texas also has caucuses, we'd have to have the lists of who voted for which party's nominee available 20-30 minutes after the polls closed so we could conduct the caucus. This would, of course, also include the early voting people.

Hand counted ballots. Right.

[byronius]

5. Canada counts every election by hand, on paper ballots, within a few days.

Organization. That's all. Worth it.

If Republicans have a chance to steal or cheat, they will steal or cheat. It's part of the ideology.

[mwooldri]

7. that's why the poster upthread stated we need the "bubble sheet" voting method...

they work OK for school examinations... and if the scan goes wrong - well the paper sheet is the actual vote.

Given that the USA runs elections where you vote on everything from local dog catcher to President and everything in-between, "scantron elections" are the only realistic option I can see to manage these effectively.

In close-ish races, then paper counts should be mandated (say, less than 5% difference).

The other (and most obvious) way of solving the multiple race problem is to have multiple voting days. My idea would be that there would be the same election day each year, but federal races, state races, local races and judicial races would have to be held on different years. I'd also change it so that the federal house is voted in every 4 years and the federal senate is every 8 years - same thing for states with two elected chambers. This way, come an election day, a voter would be given a handful of voting papers of obviously differing colours, and they can hand mark their ballots with x's or 123's (for proportional systems).

[midnight]

9. I see your point... However, the problems from not counting by hand seem

far more damaging than doing extra work and providing more visibility...

[zipplewrath]

6. Computer generated paper ballots

I have no problem with the use of computers for voting. You can scroll through the choices, potentially accessing information for one to use in making final decisions. And I have no problem if the computer wants to check for "spoiled" ballots some how, such as double voting. It can also alert you to the fact that you haven't voted for something.

But when you're done, print out a "completed" ballot and hand that over to the vote counters. THOSE pieces of paper are the ballots that get counted. You check them over one last time prior to handing them in, because they are the ballot.

[Politicalboi]

8. The government should build

Specific buildings for voting and counting. Your idea is good and we should have a paper ballot to make sure it was correct. I think they should take head counts coming in, and going out, and they MUST match the total votes cast. And we should have the whole month of October till Nov to vote. Even make appointments.

[midnight]

10. Counting heads coming in and making sure they match the no. of votes is good and could be verified

via a receipt.... Like the kind our ATM issue...