Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share on Reddit Tell A Friend Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites
OpEdNews Op Eds

Election Forum, continued

By       Message Jerry Lobdill       (Page 1 of 1 pages)     Permalink    (# of views)   1 comment

Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

Author 3748
- Advertisement -
You'll get no disagreement from me on this, Paul. My personal preference is old-fashioned ballot boxes and hand counted paper ballots. It is , as Holt, himself, has observed, significant that it is computer professionals who often view computerized voting with the most jaundiced eye. Note, for example, the paper by David Dill et all recommending the use of dice to generate random numbers.

If we could have this discussion as a prelude to a decision to begin the use of computers in voting systems I would advise--don't use computers. I would say we need to stop the media from promoting a horse race atmosphere regarding our elections. Prohibit any such hype by law. Take as much time as is needed to conduct paper ballot elections with precinct hand counts and announce no preliminary results. Consider calling citizens to serve as election ballot counters just as citizens are called to jury duty. Make election day into an election weekend or an election week if necessary with mandatory time off to vote. Make recounts and audits much more public and frequent.

But we haven't been given the opportunity to participate in a public discourse on this before voting machines were permitted (foolishly). Now we are in a completely different situation. We are trying to ameliorate a disaster and prevent further damage from occurring as we craft an appropriate replacement to the hideous system that has been thrust upon us.

There isn't just one way to go about this. Does anyone think that by demanding instant junking of machine voting and a return to paper ballots we can make it happen? Does anyone think that even if we prevail in a campaign to do away with these things tomorrow that we can expect instant relief? Does anyone think that the Holt bill cannot be modified to help us prevent another stolen election as we move forward with a parallel attack on electronic voting machine systems?

If the Holt bill cannot be modified to be of some value in preventing further bleeding while we remove the cancer, then OK, let's try to torpedo it. But let's evaluate what will likely happen next before we take that route.

My involvement in election audit design research was prompted by the complete inadequacy of prescribing a mandatory X% audit. That part of the Holt bill is in dire need of modification. I didn't jump into it because of any conviction that computers are the cat's meow. Quite the contrary. What other parts of that bill must be modified to give us a tool to staunch the bleeding over the next two years or whatever it takes to excise the cancer? Or is it entirely useless?

Let's stop the defensive discussions and try to figure out if and whether we can come to consensus about how to proceed from this point.

Jerry Lobdill, an election integrity researcher in
Tarrant County, TX.


- Advertisement -

View Ratings | Rate It

Jerry Lobdill is an election integrity researcher in Tarrant County, TX.

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon Share Author on Social Media   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.

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -

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

Election Forum, continued