Re: Re: Emergency Measures To Protect The 2004 Vote Count (EM2004)

From: Barbara Simons <simons_at_acm_dot_org>
Date: Sun Sep 05 2004 - 15:47:38 CDT

While I don't support the effort to require hand counted ballots, the
advocates are asking this only for federal positions. I also have to say
that I don't accept the notion that it's almost impossible to hand count
paper ballots with large numbers of positions. While I think that one
problem is that our ballots are too large and too complex, I know that it's
possible to hand count complicated ballots. It just takes a long time.

I don't see why we need to have election results instantly. Curious as I
am, I'd rather wait and have confidence in the accuracy of the result.


On 9/4/04 19:19, "David Weintraub" <> wrote:

> The biggest problem with hand counting ballots is the sheer number of
> positions on many US ballots. States like Texas and New Mexico will
> usually have over 50 places to elect on a typical ballot. This includes
> from President, Governor, and down to precinct level judges. To hand
> count a ballot with that many people on it would be almost impossible.
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Thu Sep 30 23:17:02 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Sep 30 2004 - 23:17:11 CDT