Top Scoops

Book Reviews | Gordon Campbell | Scoop News | Wellington Scoop | Community Scoop | Search

 

Challenge To Opponents Of Electronic Ballots Ban

A Challenge to Opponents of a Ban on Electronic Ballots


Seeking Just One Democracy-Serving Reason to Keep DREs Allowable Under the Holt Bill
Any takers?...

Guest Blogged on Bradblog.com by Ellen Theisen of VotersUnite.Org

I challenge anyone to put forward an actual disadvantage of amending Representative Rush Holt's bill (HR 811, "The Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007") to ban electronic ballots. With a few moments' thought, I can list five bad things (which opponents might anticipate) that such an amendment would NOT do and fifteen good — actually, critical — things it WILL do.

Is there even one way in which electronic ballots serve our democracy better than true paper ballots?

I claim that an amendment banning electronic ballots has LOTS of advantages and NO disadvantages — for our country and its democracy, anyway. And I challenge anyone to think of a democracy-serving reason why NOT to amend it. "The bill won't pass with the amendment" doesn't count. I'm looking for a genuine disadvantage of the amendment.

Here's what I see. Tell me if I've missed something….

The amendment WILL NOT:

1. increase the number of jurisdictions that have to update their equipment under HR 811,

2. nor diminish HR 811’s accessibility requirements for people with disabilities or language needs,

3. nor increase the appropriations required for HR 811 or the costs incurred by the states,

4. nor delay elections results,

5. nor increase the work of election directors. On the contrary, some New Mexico clerks even said that after they eliminated electronic ballots, they had the smoothest election ever.

The amendment WILL:

1. simplify poll worker training and enable people who aren’t computer experts to work effectively at the polls. With over half a million poll workers in the field on election day, we can’t require all of them to be computer experts.

2. prevent ethnic profiling from being accomplished INSIDE the voting booth by machines that require a voter to choose their language.

3. prevent long lines at polling places.

4. prevent another Sarasota. If something goes wrong in an election — and it will — we will be able to find out the cause of the problem.

5. eliminate vote-flipping, where a voter’s selection changes on the screen before their very eyes.

6. allow elderly voters and others who are not computer-savvy to vote in a way that makes sense to them and doesn’t cause anxiety or embarrassment.

7. reduce the need for vendor technicians to solve problems in the field on election day.

(The list has gotten long, so this is just a reminder that I'm listing what an amendment requiring a ban on electronic ballots WILL do.)

8. simplify the testing and certification process managed by the EAC.

9. reduce the operating costs of election offices across the country.

10. allow implementation of HR 811 by 2008 because the technology is already available, rather than not yet invented.

.....and the most important ones....

11. allow every voter to verify the ballot that is counted, rather than merely verifying a screen or paper representation of their ballot, which may or may not match the one that counts.

12. enable voters to know that their votes were recorded as they intended.

13. increase voter confidence in election results by enabling meaningful observation of ballot handling and counting.

14. allow audits on questionable elections to be conducted by ordinary citizens, rather than requiring formal studies by teams of computer technology experts.

15. restore simplicity to our elections.

So, what's a reason — even ONE reason — NOT to amend the Holt bill to ban electronic ballots?

*** # # # ***

© Scoop Media

 
 
 
Top Scoops Headlines

 

The First Attack On The Independents: Albanese Hobbles The Crossbench
It did not take long for the new Australian Labor government to flex its muscle foolishly in response to the large crossbench of independents and small party members of Parliament. Despite promising a new age of transparency and accountability after the election of May 21, one of the first notable acts of the Albanese government was to attack the very people who gave voice to that movement. Dangerously, old party rule, however slim, is again found boneheaded and wanting... More>>


Binoy Kampmark: Predictable Monstrosities: Priti Patel Approves Assange’s Extradition
The only shock about the UK Home Secretary’s decision regarding Julian Assange was that it did not come sooner. In April, Chief Magistrate Senior District Judge Paul Goldspring expressed the view that he was “duty-bound” to send the case to Priti Patel to decide on whether to extradite the WikiLeaks founder to the United States to face 18 charges, 17 grafted from the US Espionage Act of 1917... More>>

Digitl: Are we happy living in Handy's Age of Unreason?
In 1989 Charles Handy wrote The Age of Unreason. It's a book that looked forward to a time where telecommuting would be an everyday reality. We live in that world today, although we use the term working from home. The book contains other predictions that were on the money... More>>


Dunne Speaks: Roe V. Wade Blindsides National

Momentum is everything in politics, but it is very fragile. There are times when unexpected actions can produce big shifts and changes in the political landscape. In 2017, for example, the Labour Party appeared headed for another hefty defeat in that year’s election until the abrupt decision of its then leader to step aside just weeks before the election. That decision changed the political landscape and set in train the events which led to Labour being anointed by New Zealand First to form a coalition government just a few weeks later... More>>

Digitl: Infrastructure Commission wants digital strategy
Earlier this month Te Waihanga, New Zealand’s infrastructure commission, tabled its first Infrastructure Strategy: Rautaki Hanganga o Aotearoa. Te Waihanga describes its document as a road map for a thriving New Zealand... More>>


Binoy Kampmark: Leaking For Roe V Wade
The US Supreme Court Chief Justice was furious. For the first time in history, the raw judicial process of one of the most powerful, and opaque arms of government, had been exposed via media – at least in preliminary form. It resembled, in no negligible way, the publication by WikiLeaks of various drafts of the Trans-Pacific Partnership... More>>