Friends of a United Nations controlled America, article 109 and the Global Government.
*We will drop off your international tax bill when we come to disarm you.
Posted on 08/16/2006 5:27:38 AM PDT by xzins
Pa. Sued Over Electronic Voting Machines
Voter advocates filed a lawsuit Tuesday seeking to stop Pennsylvania counties from using "paperless" electronic voting machines, saying that such systems leave no paper record that could be used in the event of a recount, audit or other problem.
The suit asks the state's Commonwealth Court to decertify machines used in 58 of Pennsylvania's 67 counties. The other counties use optical scanning systems, in which voters fill in bubbles on paper forms that are counted in scanning machines; the plaintiffs say such systems should be in use statewide.
"Whatever the initial promise may have been for electronic voting, we now know ... that they are simply not ready for prime time," said Lowell Finley, an attorney with the nonprofit group Voter Action, which has been involved in similar suits nationwide.
The lawsuit alleges that certifying paperless electronic voting machines violates the state's election code and constitution.
A similar lawsuit helped force New Mexico to use optical scan ballots earlier this year, Finley said. Other suits involving paper-based voting systems have been filed in Arizona, Colorado and California.
State officials say the voting machines in use have been carefully scrutinized, and that new electronic voting machines performed well for the most part in the May primary. Residents in all but one county cast ballots using either electronic touch-screens or optical-scan systems for the first time.
The systems have been certified and can reconstruct votes based on computer images, said Leslie Amoros, a spokeswoman for the Department of State.
The plaintiffs, however, claim votes have been lost several times because of computer malfunctions, including in Allegheny and Centre counties during the May primary and in Berks County in May 2005. Other problems could be going undetected, they add.
--
Not necessarily.
each pre printed ballot is a chance for fraud and theft.
HOWEVER, by comparison, the actual machines can be guarded and secured against a third party (see union boss example).
Ther SHOULD be an audit trail. It just must be an audit trail which does not involve print shops or printers outside of the voting place.
I think that Florida demonstrated that some folks aren't able to punch out chads, get pencil marks in the right place, etc. Having that part done electronically and then verified by the voter is all right by me.
I was opposed to paperless machines before Florida ever happened. I think anything that is not verifiable is an error that will eventually get abused.
I wonder how banks handle money? Do they rely totally on electronic digits with no supporting documentation?
If I understood it right, our system involved a mechanical gauge from which the count was recorded by certified officials watched by representatives from both parties & was checked by both parties before the election to make sure nobody got a head start so to speak.
Are you a Pennsylvanian? I understood that the entire state had to be electronic starting with the May primary.
Don't you mean one for the voter to turn in to his union rep to prove he voted for the 'right' candidate, (even if he personally wanted to vote for the other candidate)? Or one to turn in to the guy who is giving out a pack of cigs for each Dem vote?
They also claimed that Pat Buchanan could not have gotten those votes because Jews live in that county. But he got roughly the same amount of votes that the Reform Party candidate for congress got two years before.
I'm sorry, but I disagree. It's always been the conservatives in the past who have insisted on honest, verifiable elections.
Paperless electronic voting is ripe for EASY fraud. Worse than that, it is ripe for manipulation by powerful forces.
Elections must remain local for America to remain free. They must be voted locally, tabulated locally, and verified locally. The more separate units in a system, the harder the system is to manipulate.
It could be made part of the law that the voter's check receipt must be shredded at the door before the voter leaves.............
Supposed electronic voting used a system similar to online polls: 1. Let (only) the voter see the current tallies. 2. After voting, the voter sees the new tallies and checks that his vote increased the total for his candidate. Report each machine's vote totals online. Poll watchers could vote late in the day and then check to see if the reported totals match what was on their machine after they voted.
Exactly. The only reason the democrats are cryng foul is that electronic voting is cutting into their stealing of elections - the good old fashioned way of paper ballots.
That may be why free beer was always made available.
I don't think so.
It's one thing to be a shadow aristocracy. It's quite another to proclaim yourself as such.
My brother were saying the same thing to each other.
Evidently the Democrats discovered that it was not as easy as they were led to believe it would be to steal elections using them.
Lies, deceit, and treachery are the only three things that Democrats know.
In Ohio they've started to require proof of identity in order to vote....a picture ID, driver's license, etc. issued by a public authority.
The democrats are up in arms.
I think it's a great idea. Fair elections require verified voters and verified votes....and carefully watched vote counters.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.