Posted on 01/17/2008 4:33:20 PM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts
Both New Hampshire primary elections are going to be recounted, since Dennis J. Kucinich has put up $27,000 to get the Democratic recount started, and Albert Howard (who was on the New Hampshire Republican ballot) has donated $56,000 to re-tally the Republican vote.
But the only reason these elections can even be recounted is because voting precincts in New Hampshire use paper ballots. And now some folks on Capitol Hill want to make it easier for other states to switch to non-electronic voting systems before the November election.
Rush Holt, a Democratic representative of New Jersey, introduced new legislation today that would reimburse all state and local jurisdictions that opted to convert to a paper ballot voting system, offer emergency paper ballots or convert audits by hand counts.
Speaking at a news conference in Washington this afternoon, Mr. Holt said there’s still time to make sure the 2008 presidential election doesn’t see the same voting controversy as happened in Florida in 2006, when some 18,000 electronically recorded ballots were marked “no vote,” and there was no accounting for what happened.
This bill, called the Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act of 2008, is a modified version of a bill Mr. Holt introduced last year that would have required a voter-verified paper ballot for every vote cast, in addition to random auditing. Since that more all-encompassing bill is still awaiting the House floor, Mr. Holt introduced this one, which moves from a paper ballot mandate to a paper ballot enticement.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com ...
Hopefully this will catch on and we can get rid of all those electronic vote fraud machines once and for all.
Yeah, we need more recounts </sarc
Being very familiar with computer systems validation there is no reason why electronic systems can’t be orders of magnitude more reliable and accurate than paper ballots which can be lost, forged, etc.. I suspect the rats want to go back to paper because they know all the ways to cheat using them.
I think we should use the voting machines for the local stuff but for the Presidential Election we have two cards one blue one red with the name of the candidate on it, you pick up one and deposit it in the box.
Sounds good to me,here we start with paper then feed it to a machine,,might as well stop at the paper
I can think of one big one:
Politicians are involved in the funding, procurement and some of the design processes. This means the outcome WILL be flawed.
>>Both New Hampshire primary elections are going to be recounted, since Dennis J. Kucinich has put up $27,000 to get the Democratic recount started, and Albert Howard (who was on the New Hampshire Republican ballot) has donated $56,000 to re-tally the Republican vote.<<
1. Uhh, yeah that makes since since they both came in such a close second.
2. But I do think there needs to be a paper trail. I don’t care who the President of Diebold donates to - that won’t stop conservatives from getting screwed at some point.
Now that we’re in the middle of an election, all of a sudden they want to complain.
Forgive me, but this is just asinine !
We moved from paper voting because the Rats complained after 2000 that their voters were too stupid to understand how to vote. Then once we moved to electronic voting, they complained again and want to go back to paper. This is getting tiresome.
We use paper ballots and prefer those over electronic. However in the future it seems there should be a way to have a paper record that includes identification of the voter that cast the ballot.
The problem with paper ballots is that the Democrats always seem to have some stashed away in a warehouse, that turn up just in time to prove that their candidate won.
Good news. The democrat fraud machine loves these new electronic wonders....the rest of us end up wondering who voted for who.
No secret ballot. I don’t think so.
We have paper too and it is just fine, cheap, and fast.
There is no way to secure electronic voting. Just look around today. Electronic systems are always being defeated. At least with paper, you can see the culprit and a large scale cheating effort with proper oversight is going to be plainly visible.
I love to joke with folks by telling them that Rush is my congressman. ;-)
No warehouse necessary when you have a VOTE-A-MATIC stashed in the trunk!
Besides, the DUmocrats always keep those extra cases of votes stashed in CHURCHES where the Rah’vrund Al & Jesse go to make speeches.
Why not have a machine that asks if you are sure this how you wanted to vote, and prints a receipt? People could then pull a numbers report and make sure it went to where it was supposed to.
I’m not 100% sold on voting machines, but when you consider the Dem track record with paper ballots, there’s probably a reason they want to go back to paper. Manufacturing votes with a supply of ballots and a machine is something an eighth grade dropout can do, but you need specialized skills to hack a Diebold voting machine.
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.