Re: Handling misconducted elections. Ballot box design.

From: Edmund R. Kennedy <ekennedyx_at_yahoo_dot_com>
Date: Wed Nov 24 2004 - 14:43:54 CST

Hello Charlie:
 
http://gnosis.python-hosting.com/voting-project/ . Correspondance archive.
 
That's a good question anytime. Yes, we've discussed it in the last year however, I'm not sure what key words to look at. Probable key words include; ballot issues, canvassing, and Doug Jones. I think that the main point was that election officials should engage their brains and not their partisan passions. Also if the car taking the ballot box to election central was hit with a RPG, the cd or memory stick is more likely to survive than the paper ballot. I think numeric consistency between the rolls and the votes counts for more than paper versus plastic. Another point is that this could be decided by case law.
 
I can't help noticing in other countries, especially when the UN is involved in conducting the election, that clear plastic boxes (like storage containers) are used. I think that this is a model worth considering. There is obviously a privacy issue. Yes, ballots could be folded but the optical scanned machine I used a few weeks ago output the scanned ballots directly into the cardboard ballot box we used. I'm sure it could be worked out somehow. No, I don't want to have a fingernail painted black to keep from voting twice. However, if the US continues to become more polarized, election officials might have to consider it.
 
Thanks, Ed Kennedy

charlie strauss <cems@earthlink.net> wrote:
One of the signs of a robust system is not just that has limited
opportunity for error but that it can recover gracefully. Has OVC
given thought to how deal with problems that occur when its procedures
are not followed or large events happen.

For example, suppose an election is run and there are massive, not
small, difference in the electronic and paper records during the
reconcilation process. What should be the policy short of declaring a
miss-election and re-doing it. Presumably this should be based on
common sense and not dogma like "the paper records win in every
dispute". What if for example, for some reason the paper record were
leaving out an entire race and no one caught it till way late in the
system. Surely we would want to use the electronic records. Of course
then at least have the reconcilation process to validate the existence
of each electronic record.

If a single paper ballot shows up without an electronic record how is
it considered? What if hundreds do, and the paper totals agree better
with the number of voters than the electroinc ones?

Is this worked out?

-- 
10777 Bendigo Cove
San Diego, CA 92126-2510
"We must all cultivate our gardens."  Candide-Voltaire
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
==================================================================
Received on Tue Nov 30 23:17:39 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Nov 30 2004 - 23:17:44 CST