Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend

Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites (# of views)   1 comment
OpEdNews Op Eds

Do election integrity activists want a "perfect" reform bill?

By       Message Jody Holder     Permalink
      (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; , Add Tags  (less...) Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

- Advertisement -

Do election integrity activists want a "perfect" reform bill?

The term "perfect" or "perfection" is a distractive term from the main

- Advertisement -

issues. What is "perfect" is relative to what is the goal and how to

attain it. When it comes to elections in our country the perfect election would

result in the winner of the majority of votes being sworn into office.

That will supposedly be a result of the citizens choosing their representatives

- Advertisement -

by a deliberative process, the person best suited for the job. In the real world that does not happen very often. No human endeavor involving hundreds of

thousands of people, multiple jurisdictions and laws, can ever arrive

at "perfection".

There is a major difference between the secret act of voting and the

secret process of counting those votes. Making the process of counting

completely transparent does not mandate that we lose the secrecy of how we voted. If the counting process is completely transparent and subject to citizen

oversight in a timely manner, it will result in challenges when the process is subject to abuse or manipulation by those conducting it. Most states have evolved election related laws that have been created as reactions to abuse of the process. Unfortunately, almost all of those laws are under the civil code, not the criminal code, and there are inadequate consequences if the law is not followed. Many of the laws connected to the needed checks and balances for checking the accuracy of the count are ambiguous, weighted towards the expediency of those administering the election, and unfriendly to any citizen or candidate challenging the results.

- Advertisement -

There was a reason that the California legislature chose to codify an

audit "to assure the accuracy of any automated count." At some time it

recognized that electronic means of counting votes was subject to error or

Next Page  1  |  2


- Advertisement -

View Ratings | Rate It

Jody Holder is a California voting activist.

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

Go To Commenting
/* The Petition Site */
The views expressed in this article 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)

Why Candidates Should NOT Concede Before All the Votes Are Counted

Shame on Them! CA. Election Officials Attack Their Chief

Representation by the Consent of the Governed?

Made in China: Et Tu, Diebold?

Secretary Bowen's review of voting systems

Do election integrity activists want a "perfect" reform bill?