RE: [Futurework] Dissecting the voting machine madness

[Harry Pollard]

Lawry,   I find nothing wrong with the old ways. Neither did practically everyone else.   In California (for a change we did something right) we have a rule for chads - if it were needed. As I have previously reported, the Democrats who ran the counts in the disputed Florida counties changed the rules as they counted. These changes added a lot of votes to Gore. But that was purely coincidental.   Not much can be done about those who punch the wrong hole, or punch it twice, or whatever. But, I suppose 99% do it correctly.   I am simply against using those electronic things. I’ve never used one, but from what I’ve heard there may be more chance of error than with the punch-cards.   Yet they were demanded by Democrats. It’s a puzzlement.   I suppose we should say to Democratic activists. Don’t wish too hard for something – you might get it.   Harry ******************************************* Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655  Tujunga  CA  91042 Tel: 818 352-4141  --  Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net ********************************************   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lawrence DeBivort Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 12:43 PM To: Karen Watters Cole; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Dissecting the voting machine madness   No the two types of systems are entirely different. At an ASTM machine, you must keep track of has made a withdrawal, for how much, and when, because that will affect their account balance. At a voting machine, no record is kept of who has voted -- only who voter 'x' voted for. The purpose of this is to maintain voter secrecy. The problem with voting machines is that there is no paper trail of ballots cast, which can be physically preserved and if need be recounted. This problem is aggravated in that paper ballots can be managed by people on the scene, whereas a voting digital machine is controlled in effect by nameless, remote techies.   There are technical means to minimize the likelihood of fraud, but it is not clear that these precautions have been built into the systems.   Lawry     --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.552 / Virus Database: 344 - Release Date: 12/15/2003 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.552 / Virus Database: 344 - Release Date: 12/15/2003