Replies

Josh, while your enthusiasm reflects what representation is all about, you, nor anyone else in the US has any assurance that their votes are counted or applied to published totals. The US has not had an auditable voting mechansim for several decades - longer in major metropolitan areas such as Cook, Dade, and San Francisco counties.

I'm not suggesting conspiracies, simply stating a fact. I design auditable systems, systems which the FDA demands pharmaceutical and chemical assay firms use to validate analyis, and lack of which would cause them to be shut down by the government or trail lawyers. Recounts are impossible without having everyone vote again. The courts and US Justice Department have protected the secrecy, yes, secrecy of the process - the counting software, the chain of possession (just try asking your precinct supervisor what happens to your vote).

So, while I'd probably go with Toomey, if I were a Pennsylvanian, I am always aware that whomever wins, the decision was not necessarily made by a presumptive electorate.

We are presumed such fools as be satisfied with arguing for and contributing to our favorites, and always assuming that some benevolent authority is listening to us, counting the little man's vote alongside a that of Soros (does he vote in the US?) or Fonda. We in California see bond measures we didn't vote for pass again and again, figuring the other guys just don't understand graft and corruption. But inniatives gather countable signatures on paper, and guess what? A different method of counting shows a different California. What would our country be if votes could be verified?

Paper ballots are the simplest way to return us to representative republicanism. I've read of other mechanisms, but question the need for such elaborate hardware and software, much as I appreciate the benefit the money might bring to my industry.