60 online
 
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 36 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds   

First in the "Fooled Again" Series: Interview with Nancy Tobi

By       (Page 2 of 3 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page.   13 comments
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Joan Brunwasser
Become a Fan
  (89 fans)
A. We are challenging the use of these machines in our state. We are challenging their use and we are saying that we will find the community counters, so we can all enjoy democracy in New Hampshire the way it is supposed to be – without secret vote counting.

We are challenging the state because we don't believe that the optical scanners meet the constitutional requirement for sorting and counting in open meeting. That challenge is going to play out in the coming year in the legislature, with the Ballot Law Commission (which approves the machines) and, if necessary, in the courts.

The point of all this is to say that in New Hampshire we have this tradition of grassroots democracy, and we all believe we run clean elections. New Hampshire has more recounts than any other state in the nation. We make it easy and financially feasible to hold recounts. Our recounts have never revealed any problems with the scanners. But that doesn't mean our elections are safe. As long as we use those computers, they are not safe.

So our complacency in New Hampshire about our clean elections, even while we allow the use of secret vote counting, is coming to an end. It is coming to an end because of our challenges to the system that allows secret vote counting in 55% of our polling places.

We know that if any place can deal with this issue, it is New Hampshire. Because we know how to run clean, hand counted elections. We are already doing it. We just need to make it happen throughout the state now.

Q. What can we learn from New Hampshire, when the vast majority of us come from states that are decidedly bigger, more urban and more diverse?

A. It’s not the size of the state or even its population. All that matters in order to conduct hand count elections is that you have a reasonable amount of ballots in your polling place. Then you just need good management and good methodology. To hand count your election, you need to manage people, process, papers, and numbers. That’s it. Any good manager can accomplish this, and most of the polling places in the nation process a very manageable number of ballots. Good managers can reach out to their communities to recruit the right help too. A lot of schools have community service requirements now. Most states allow 17 year olds to work in the polls, so that’s a perfect fit.

Here are a few excerpts from my Hand Count Primer, which will be released and available online for free at OpEdNews and other sites at the end of this month. I think this will help clarify what I mean:

Nearly 100% of America's polling jurisdictions have hand counted paper ballot elections within living memory. And nearly 27% of America's polling jurisdictions are already utilizing hand counted, paper ballot election administration; it's simple, it's cost effective, and eminently do-able in every polling place in the country. The New Hampshire experience, described in detail in this Primer, proves this out.

Let’s go back to what we currently do in New Hampshire. Publicly observable hand counting works in large precincts. The average number of ballots processed through any polling place in the country is under 1000. But New Hampshire towns hand count up to 3,600 ballots on any given Election Night! And at a cost that is less than the average cost paid to private corporations to program a single machine in a single election. The costs of printing paper ballots, hiring local community hand counters, and even bringing in a specialized manager, if need be, are much lower than the investment in computerized voting equipment requiring continual upgrades, maintenance, and specialized storage space.

Transparent hand counting works with complicated ballots. New Hampshire's ballots are among the most complex ballots in the nation, because we have the largest citizen legislature and many multi-member districts. But we still manage to hand count 3-4 times the national average of ballots in any given polling place, and wrap up the counting to announce our results on Election Night.

Q. Your view, then, in a nutshell?

A. If New Hampshire can do this, with our large polling places and our complex ballots, then any place can.


Q. Let’s go back and talk about dollars and cents, so often the bottom line for those making these decisions. What evidence do you have about the costs of hand counting paper ballots? Where can people see this? Can you provide a link for our readers?

A. We have run some preliminary numbers on the costs of running hand count elections. This can be found in a presentation given by the NH Dept. of State last June, which is posted online here: http://www.democracyfornewhampshire.com/files/Hand_count_training_D-fest_July_5_2007.pdf

The Hand Count Primer, when it is released, will also have some number projections for the national cost for replacing all touchscreen systems with paper. We have cost projections for replacing with optical scanners or with hand count systems. Our projections show the cost for replacing with optical scanners at $1,170,821,250 and to replace with hand count we project those costs to be only $208,020,950. You can see the difference in cost savings right there.

Q. Before I let you go, I have two more questions in the “what makes you tick” department. First of all, why do you do this?

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Rate It | View Ratings

Joan Brunwasser Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Joan Brunwasser is a co-founder of Citizens for Election Reform (CER) which since 2005 existed for the sole purpose of raising the public awareness of the critical need for election reform. Our goal: to restore fair, accurate, transparent, secure elections where votes are cast in private and counted in public. Because the problems with electronic (computerized) voting systems include a lack of (more...)
 

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Follow Me on Twitter     Writers Guidelines

 
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Interview with Dr. Margaret Flowers, Arrested Tuesday at Senate Roundtable on Health Care

Renowned Stanford Psychologist Carol Dweck on "Mindset: The New Psychology of Success"

Howard Zinn on "The People Speak," the Supreme Court and Haiti

Snopes confirms danger of Straight Ticket Voting (STV)

Fed Up With Corporate Tax Dodgers? Check Out PayUpNow.org!

Literary Agent Shares Trade Secrets With New Writers

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend