Requiring the Purple Finger would go a long ways in stopping people from voting more than once!
Good Hunting... from Varmint Al
Of course, the wackos think that Bush stole the election through Diebold...
Does this mean the proposed "felon" source string and the illegal immigrant voter protection string will be able to be viewed as well?
-PJ
If the dems want to spend Bush's second term as they did the first--pissing and moaning about how they weren't REALLY defeated--they can go right ahead. This is where we see Hillary start to get tangled in her dance steps as she tries to placate the lefty base without getting too mixed up with the Dean wing of the party apparatus.
And of course another government regulatory agency will be born, in need of funding, blah blah blah.
That makes it much easier for union thugs to enforce voting for the "correct" candidates. Lets say that 100 feet away from the polls, union thugs "ask" people leaving the polls to show them their receipts.
Open source for voting machines has got to be one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard. If you want to GUARANTEE that software hackers (hired by Democrooks or whoever) will fully understand how to attack or compromise a voting machine, make sure they have full access to the source code to expose exactly how they work. Idiotic.
Did they manage to find room to squeeze that one in?
"to be open and readable by the public" - like MDCCLXXVI, right?
Hillary and company are going to spend the next four years farting around with measures and attempted bill writing that under-radar undermine the voting process. She is nothing but a self-serving, opportunistic, snake oil selling skank who will stop at NOTHING to get into position of ultimate power. I loathe her.
Sure, let every hacker get hold of the source code and object code (to the person who asked "who reads object code?" the answer is hackers. Don't discount the fact that the hackers could be insiders.
Paper receipts that are allowed to leave the building have two major problems. First, they can be used by groups to audit your vote and reward or punish the voter accordingly. Look for the RATs to decide to get better bang for the buck with their "walking around" money.
Second, because there is no legitimate chain of custody, imagine a candidate showing up with boxes of receipts that contradicts the certified vote? Chaos galore! If they insist on computer voting, then the receipts should be placed in a ballot box and be treated just like any other form of ballot. Those puppies will be deucedly hard to count and after the first recount, the SOE will demand a switch to mark-sense (fill in the oval) ballots.
The problem with the electronic voting machines, this time around at least, is that the Democrats had no way to arrange for recounts.
Without recounts, they have no means of delaying the final results and no means of cheating by spoiling the ballots after election day.
Who can doubt that many or most the the Florida chad anomolies were caused by the Democrat poll operators themselves, poking rods through stacks of pro-Bush ballots so as to spoil them? Or just consider the recent recounts in Florida State.
Think of the trouble they could make if they forced recounts in EVERY state.
The only way to stop Liberal, Left-wing ambitions and the madness they represent; is to stop voting for Democrats.
There can be no reason; no excuse, good enough to do so.
Good Hunting... from Varmint Al
If votes are recorded in any sort of alterable medium, then one must have faith that the medium was not altered surreptitiously.
If votes are recorded in a manner that is not directly observable, then one must have faith that the votes are in fact being recorded as cast.
I think my favorite idea for recording votes would be to have a machine, largely transparent to the voter, with a reels of colored paper tapes, one per candidate plus a few for "checksumming". Each tape would feed from an opaque magazine, through a punching mechanism visible to the voter, and into another opaque magazine. Before the election, the start of each tape would be signed by members of all parties and each tape would be prepunched with a set number of holes sufficient to reach from the puncher to the edge of the takeup magazine. Then, after each voter selects candidates and pulls the big "I'm done" lever, the tape of each selected candidate would get a hole punched in it and be advanced 1/4". Additionally, the "checksum" tapes would get holes punched in them according to some suitable method(*).
At the end of the election, the tapes would be removed from the machine and signed at the other end by members of all parties. Counting the number of votes for a candidate would be a simple matter of counting the number of holes and subtracting the number that were prepunched.
(*)If there are 63 candidates for office, there should be six "checksum" tapes, labeled "1", "2", "4", "8", "16", and "32". After each voter marks his selection, counting each candidate as "1" and the checksum tapes as indicated, the total value of all punches must equal 63. In this way, the total value of all punches on all tapes must equal 63 times the number of voters, plus the number of initial punches.
Anyone else like the idea of such a machine? It would seem immune to any type of fraud other than fictitious or double voters, and any voter using it would be able to see that their vote was in fact counted correctly.
first off, the secret ballot is going to stay that way
Transparency is fine. But Congress should load up the bill with riders to correct Voter Fraud.