Thom Hartmann: How America’s Voting Machines Are At Risk

[thomhartmann]

Stewart Acuff, Organizer/Playing Bigger Than You Are & Medea Benjamin, CODEPINK/Global Exchange/Drone Warfare & Neil Sroka, Democracy for America all join Thom. Lawrence Norden, Brennan Center for Justice. Outdated and older voting machines are breaking down - leading to long lines that discourage voters.

For more information on the stories we've covered visit our websites at thomhartmann.com - freespeech.org - and RT.com. You can also watch tonight's show on Hulu - at Hulu.com/THE BIG PICTURE and over at The Big Picture YouTube page. And - be sure to check us out on Facebook and Twitter!

[SmittynMo]

1. All of the items mentioned

are very critical in reflecting an accurate count. I would also like to mention that if we go to back to the paper ballot, that they are indeed digitally scanned, which can be altered much easier. The paper ballot is then your audit trail, which most likely will not be used. But at least it's an audit trail.

As important as it is to vote, it should be budgeted to have all machines be updated and tested annually, prior to implementation. All big businesses do this prior to placing any computer on the floor. Since the US is one of the largest businesses around, it certainly makes sense to have these machines tested prior to placing them out for use. Thorough testing should be done months prior to any election.
This is not brain surgery, and can be easily fixed with a minimal amount of money.

An old saying: You're only as strong as your weakest link. It sure sounds to me like the US has many, many weak links in the voting process, and MUST be fixed by the next election.

[INdemo]

2. Was it mentioned that

The election of 2014 was just too damn easy and Republicans were very confident before the first vote was cast.
Never mind about the excuse of lower voter turnout.

[Stevepol]

3. They mostly skirted the issue of malicious rigging of the vote count.

The fact that the final vote tally does not match the exit polls has been documented extensively in many books beginning about 2002 and continuing to the present. The final tally is nearly always tilted in a red direction, thus, the term "red shift." In fact, the polling companies themselves now "adjust" the final poll numbers to fit this systemic red shift when the machines are used, whether opti-scans of touch-screens.

I personally think, and I think that most statisticians that work with the numbers would say the same, that the machines are prepared at the factory to be easily tilted before the election and even in some cases (OH, 2004) during the election itself. This can be done through "memory cards" used to download results to be transferred to a central tabulator, at the central tabulator itself or just by local technicians. I think it's mostly done thru the upper echelons of the companies to reduce the chance of a whistle blower spoiling all the fun.

If these machines are to be used to count the vote, and as they observed, the opti-scans are being used more and more so that there will be a paper trail, then THERE MUST BE AN AUDIT IN EVERY ELECTION TO VERIFY THE VOTE. It would not be hard to check randomly chosen precincts accounting for 5% of the vote BY HAND and put the numbers through some simple arithmetics to determine how well the overall vote matches the smaller sample. If it doesn't match the vote close enough, THEN THE WHOLE VOTE SHOULD BE COUNTED BY HAND. If you don't have a way to VERIFY THE VOTE, YOU DON'T HAVE A DEMOCRACY.