5. Count 10% of randomly sampled ballots of 100% of vote counts
I couldn't give a darn which method is used as long as at least ONE method is used in every election jurisdiction. These five methods all have pros and cons. Some are more politically viable than others. Some may be resisted more by election officials who seem apt to resist any audits of their work, than others. Some can only be used with certain voting systems. Some require different amounts of resources and different procedures. All require auditable voting systems with VVPRs and all have more commonalities than differences. Any one of the five would ensure the integrity and accuracy of our election outcomes if executed with proper procedures and citizen oversight.
This is what I propose: Let us form a new group of activists to work on a project to explain ALL the possible methods (I can count FIVE so far) that could be chosen to verify the integrity of election results using hand counts of VVPRs; give the pros and cons of each method; and ask that our US legislators pass ANY ONE of them – or a general requirement that states use AT LEAST ONE of the available methods of verifying the integrity of election outcomes.
I invite anyone who agrees with the following five ground rules to join a discussion group to work on this project. If you agree that:
1. We need sufficient publicly observable and verifiable manual counts of VVPRs in every election to assure the accuracy and integrity of election outcomes because all voting systems are created and implemented by human beings 100% of whom are not 100% infallible and 100% honest.
2. We will not mischaracterize or wrongly attack any of the five methods for ensuring election outcome integrity just because we have a preference for one particular method.
3. We will point out the flaws or cons of all of the five methods of ensuring election integrity only after studying and understanding them first. (We agree to do due diligence by reading and asking questions before pointing out alleged problems with any of the five methods.)
4. We will help describe and work on a paper explaining all of the five methods to ensure the integrity of election outcomes; assisting in our own areas of expertise.
5. We will act with integrity and be honest and stick with the facts.
You do not have to be an expert on all five methods. If you would like to join a work group of election integrity activists who agree with the above, in order to explain the possible solutions to ensure election outcome integrity, please send an email to
fix-elections-somehow-subscribe@uscountvotes.org
and be sure to reply to the confirmation email. (We can form a Yahoo group instead if people would prefer but for now, please subscribe to this list.)
However, please do not subscribe to the list if your aim is to shoot down any of the five methods rather than to help accurately describe how each of them would work to ensure the integrity of elections.
Any which way we can do it, we need to ensure the integrity of US elections by 2008!
---- Kathy Dopp http://electionarchive.org National Election Data Archive Dedicated to Accurately Counting Elections Subscribe to announcements by emailing election-subscribe@uscountvotes.org
"Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day," wrote Thomas Jefferson in 1816
Founder and President of US Count Votes, dba The National Election Data Archive and volunteer for honest, accurately counted elections since 2003. Masters degree in mathematics with emphasis on computer science. Has written numerous academic and scientific papers with computer scientists, statisticians, and mathematicians on election integrity topics, inluding how to calculate minimum manual audit amounts necessary to ensure election outcome integrity.
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
