How we should run elections...

[geo]

Hi all,

As many of you know I have been knee deep in California data since Mr. Madsen commented on the likelihood of fraud here in my home state. I am going to take a few minutes from reading and rant a bit about what I feel would fix every ounce of this non-sense before the next election. It is very simple.

Use vote tracking.

Here is how that translates out. Here in CA we have the California Public Records Act, backed by a recent (Nov. 3rd) amendment to our State Constitution that guarantees the peoples' "right to access." The first step in any state seeking true election reform would start by getting better sunshine laws (see Bev Harris' most recent post on her FOIA requests).

Next, ballots should have serial numbers on them (with bar codes for the machine to scan the serial number). This would allow you to track your vote after the fact and make sure it was counted accurately.

And this could work WITH the machines. The machines run through the ballot with the voter, show a results screen, and then print the results on the ballot to be verified by the voter and then cast by hand. The machine would also print out a small receipt like that of a cash register that prints a summary of the choices made, and gives a date, time, location, vote number (to show how many votes came on that machine before you) and serial number (for tracking).

The voter walks away with a receipt from the machine and a receipt from the ballot with the serial number. The machine results can give the quick tally for the media, and the paper ballots can be counted in case the computer results are at all in question.

Next, citizens should be allowed 100% access to voting records, and counties should be encouraged to post ballot search engines on the web to give voters a chance to audit their own vote (at least), and their own precincts.

Something like that anyway. What do you all think? Imagine how auditable a system like this would be? And the technology is not all that much different. If major retailers can print receipts and track their inventory, why can't we track our vote?

Just some thoughts... :)

Warmly,

George

[ogradda]

1. it's a great idea

and you're right. we should be able to track votes. lord knows we track plenty of other stuff.

[unblock]

2. this would work well to prevent fraud, but it's a terrible idea

you just can't have a system where people leave the voting booth with an itemized list of the choices made.

people could then buy other peoples' votes, using the receipts as proof, or worse, people could be extorted (e.g., wives of abusive husbands) into voting one way or another.

i like the idea of the machine generating an itemized paper ballot that the voter can review while still in the voting booth, though, and a receipt with a serial number but NOT an itemized list would also be useful.

one further step would be to let the voter "sign" the paper ballot. obviously they need not put their true name, but rather simply any identifying mark that they also put on their own receipt to further guard against paper ballot tampering. this wouldn't prevent "overvote" or "spoiling" forms of tampering, but it would prevent outright substitutions.

[geo]

5. same conditions exist with absentee ballots, and with Oregon's

entire system (which seems to be holding up pretty well).

It is a good point you make though. If you read through what happened in the Ukraine, you'll see a wide spread effort by employers to control the vote by forcing employees to hand over their absentee ballot. What you say does happen, just not here so much.

I think part of the reason it doesn't happen here is that the penalties for such things (let alone the cultural backlash to anyone who was caught) is severe. This is jail time and sure media coverage. Even the MSM couldn't resist the sensational element of a wife or husband forcing each other to vote, employees being being threatened with their jobs if they didn't vote a certain way, vote payoff scams, etc.

Although the same thing you describe is true of absentee ballots and the system in Oregon, I think the point you make should be well taken if we are going to kick around the idea of the ideal election system.

I think my answer would be tougher penalties for violations; penalties in line with the penalties associated with treason (because that's what messing with the vote really is).

Thanks for the response! :)

Warmly,

George

[Zeebo]

3. There is a system out there that does what you propose...

It is called the TruVote System. The founder was recently killed in a car accident. I've been trying to research further what the current status of the company is. A system like this really needs to be pushed hard. We all need to put the same intensity at getting a new voting system and a change in the laws as we are putting into investigating the alleged fraud in 2004. Google TruVote to learn more.

[geo]

4. cool!

I'll check it out. :) -G

[jamboi]

6. Additional ideas (from Avi Ruben and from me)

I think it was Avi Ruben that suggested having the booth computer used to just be a highly efficient ballot marking machine, ie you make your choices, it marks your ballot and we (hopefully) eliminate the mismarked ballot problem. You can check to make sure it marked the ballot properly. You then carry the marked ballot over to where the paper is collected and tallied.

My addition to this excellent suggestion here's mine: Keep a running paper tape tally (also inspectable by the voter as their vote is marked) in the booth machine. Also keep a separate paper tape trail at the precinct counting machine. These paper tapes can be cross-compared. It makes it hellish to fake.

So what do y'all think.

[geo]

8. it can be done just like a cash register tape...

as the voter gets their receipt the "register" tape gets updated with the same info. :) -G

[jamboi]

14. exactly! The tape needs to be under glass or plastic so its visible but

not alterable.

[trudyco]

7. Good Idea with couple more thoughts...

... the registration lists should be posted to the public prior to elections. Maybe get rid of same day registrations?

The poll books should be immediately posted to the public (who voted) and the signatures available for public inspection. Failure of an election official to offer this say within ? a week? would be a felony.

And it should be noted if the person voted absentee, early vote, or provisional. All votes, by number, should be available to the public immediately.

This may lead to some buying of votes but that's minor compared to the potential fraud in using electronic systems to vote and no tracking.

Recount laws should be updated to allow for a greater difference between 1st and 2nd place, although at least the spoilage rate should go down if all votes are electronic and people are given a time period to contest and revise their vote. Recounts should be allowed to happen within time to overturn the electoral selection. They can be electronic or hand recounts.


I wouldn't have the receipt show how you voted, just your tracking number.

Media tallies wouldn't be available until after the polls are closed in the West coast (or maybe even Hawaii). The media can still rely on exit polls and I think that's always a good sanity check for fraud. No adulterating the exit polls.

trudyco

[geo]

9. questions...

I like the visibility of registration data prior to the election, but how do we let people verify that they are registered in an easy way without giving up their privacy? As it stands now, registration data is available to the parties, and you can verify your status by calling the registrar of voters in your county. How would you improve on the syste, while maintaining a reasonable level of privacy (not that these records are truly private now).

Also, the tracking number vs. a full receipt with tracking number. If you give someone just a tracking number, how would they be able to prove what their vote was that day if someone switched their vote? They wouldn't even know their was a problem with vote switching without such a detailed reciept and tracking system. Would there be another way to remedy the possibility of vote switching if we only provided voters with a reciept.

And the difference between first and second place: would you recommend instant run off voting or some other system.

Thanks for the added discussion. This thread is kind of fun. :)

Warmly,

George

[Eloriel]

10. Another thread --

with a slightly different focus (yours is exclusively on machines at this point), but feel free to join it. I'm going to kick it -- it's still not locked or archived.

INVITATION: Let's Think Tank Election / Voting Reform
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=75403&mesg_id=75403

[shraby]

11. Have Federal elections separate from

State elections. No state propositions or candidates on the Federal election ballot. This will simplify the Federal ballot and Federal laws about recount time before certification, voter suppression, provisional ballots, registratrion, etc. can all be standardized throughout the country.
For state elections, each state can have jurisdiction.

on edit:
I prefer paper ballots marked with pen then deposited in a box sitting in the middle of the room. When the box is full, another can be placed atop the first one. When the polls close and everyone has voted, the boxes are emptied in full view of observers and counted. After they are counted, the totals posted and then phoned in to the county. The ballots are then placed back in the boxes and locked and sealed. The keys to the boxes can be put in a safe deposit box at the bank (which takes 2 keys to open) and 2 different officials can each take one. In order to open the box at the bank to retrieve the keys to the ballot boxes, they have to sign a paper to open the safe deposit box and it takes two officials with the keys to the deposit box in order to open it.

[geo]

15. very cool. Thanks! :)

:) -G

[Rosco T.]

12. There IS a simple way to make e-voting actually work...

I think this is the Australian system...

1) Voter uses the touch screen type system to vote. It does the normal thing you should expect (ie. simply count the votes).

2) after voter CONFIRMS his votes on the screen (and not before) the machine prints TWO paper 'receipts' with a sequential number on it. This number is recorded IN the e-tally in the machine and on the paper receipt. The VOTER then has the ability to CONFIRM the receipt(s) match his intended votes.

3) the voter gives ONE receipt to the POLL WORKER who places it in a locked BALLOT BOX. The VOTER keeps the other.

Normal Action: The Machine e-tallys are read.

Recount Level 1: The receipts in the BALLOT BOX are OPTICAL SCANNABLE. They are 'machine counted' using a scanner.

Recount Level 2: Hand count of the receipts in the BALLOT BOX visually.

Auditability Level 1: Compare the 'ballot seq numbers' on the BALLOT BOX recepits to the recorded numbers in the machine.

Auditability Level 2: If some 'glitch' is suspected, have random sample of voters bring in THEIR COPIES to compare to e-tally's and the BALLOT BOX receipts.

[geo]

16. very nice :)

:) -G

[rumpel]

13. brilliant

[GuvWurld]

17. Create Conditions That Allow Legitimate Elections (where none now exist)

There are some excellent ideas in this thread. I do not mean to discount any of them. I do encourage you all to consider whether the US more closely resembles a fascist state than a democratic one. That is to say, the conditions do not currently exist for us to have legitimate elections where our chosen candidates then represent us with the Consent of the Governed. There is currently no BASIS for confidence in the legitimacy of the results reported from US elections. Here are eight fundamental changes identified in the No Confidence Resolution as necessary to create a new BASIS for confidence. Any one of them on its own would be good, but insufficient to establish this BASIS.

1) all private corporations are divested of ownership in election machines, and
2) clean money laws keep all corporate funds out of campaign financing, and
3) any future mechanisms for voting conform to a uniform national standard and produce a verifiable audit trail for every vote, and
4) all votes are cast on the same day, designated as a national holiday, with the exception of absentee ballots which will be granted to applicants meeting a narrow list of federally determined criteria, and
5) all votes are counted publicly in the presence of citizen witnesses and credentialed members of the media, and
6) equal time provisions are observed by the media along with a measurable increase in local, public control of the airwaves, and
7) presidential debates contain a minimum of three candidates, and are run by a non-partisan commission comprised of representatives of publicly owned media outlets, and
8) ranked choice voting, also called instant runoff voting, is implemented for federal elections (see H.R. 5293);

[GuvWurld]

18. Kick (eom)

[suston96]

19. Simplify!

Many great ideas here and a combination of any of them which include a parallel or redundant system (going on at the same time as the actual election) and an easily auditable process, will certainly be better than what we have now.

That is what those numbered receipts will do.

Years ago in the service my African-American pals would say to me: simplify! Simplify!

The more technical an election is, the easier it is to corrupt.

The more simple it is, the more difficult to corrupt!

Simplify! Simplify!

[stirringstill]

20. Goal: No Technolgy but Paper and Pen

Paper ballots and hand counts in public. Period. It will take a couple of days, but so what. This is how they do election in Germany. As little technology as possible as a filter of the voter's intent.

Warning, just because there is a print out showing how you voted, does not mean that the tally at then end of the day will be correct and to verify this one would require a hand count.

Paper printouts are better than nothing because they can be audited, but one must suspect fraud and suspicion can be suppressed by perception management through the media. Also an audit can can be blocked in the courts or through other routes as well.

Paper. Counted by hand.

[suston96]

21. Simplify!

Paper. Count by hand.

I agree.

You cannot get any simpler than that.

We don't need results by the 11 oclock news!