Enough Voting Machine Problems, Let's Return to Traditional Ballot Box

Oh for the good old days when your ballot was the last thing you worried over. When the only ballot controversy was who carried the boxes of paper and who oversaw the counting.

The first several elections in which I voted consisted of a very simple procedure. Step into the booth, use the pen that was supplied and fill in the box next to your candidate. Bring your ballot out of the booth with you and deposit it into a box sitting next to a poll worker. A clean, easy way to vote and as long as you had acquired the proper coloring skills in your youth, there was no doubt in your mind that you had voted for your intended candidate. When the ballot box was full, they were sealed by officials and taken to a collection point to be counted. As long as the counting and transportation were properly supervised, there was no controversy.

Now, we have hanging chads in Florida from punch card ballots, as well as controversy in West Virginia where folks touch one candidate and the touch screen machine places the mark on the other candidate. More troublesome is the fact that practically every time this complaint was heard, the machine had placed an intended democrat vote into the republican box. This is probably due to improperly calibrated machines. But don't you find it troubling that this mistake always resulted in an unintended republican vote?

It seems that most of our problems result from our desire to speed tabulation. That is understandable. In this day and age, we are impatient. We want immediate results. We are used to using our computers to instantly access any information we desire. But there are so many problems with our methods, that far too many of us leave the voting booth with doubt in our minds.

This is very destructive to our democracy. After all, our one man, one vote principal is the very basis of our freedom. When that freedom is put in jeopardy, the public reacts badly. It is very important to have confidence that our vote is counted accurately. When there is doubt, it drives down voter participation as well.

Unfortunately, there is no honor among politicians. We must always safeguard the integrity of the voting process. When we try to move away from the good old fashion paper ballot, we put our trust in a technician, programmer, manufacturer, etc. There is no substitute for being able to clutch a ballot in your hand and personally place it into a ballot box.

In the old days, I don't remember ever hearing of someone having doubts as to whether they voted for the intended candidate. So as my grandfather often said, "son, if it ain't broke, don't fix it." I think we should apply that simple advice to our voting system.

Comments

[Mugzi]

Yes, haven't we learned ANYTHING FROM 2004 AND NOW!!! Let's do as our Canadian neighbor..­.paper ballots, pencil and oversight of counters by member of both/all parties. They have the results by 11pm. I'm afraid we won't be so lucky.....

Paraphrasi­ng...voter­s decide nothing, counters decide the election - Stalin

[lapdogs]

I suggest the Iraqi Soldiers INVADE America so WE can have fair and free elections.

They can bring the paper for the ballots, along with the ink bottles for us to dab our fingers into.

Pretty bad when WE go to other countries to give THEM Fair Elections, while we do everything in our power over here to make sure WE DO NOT have FAIR ELECTIONS!!

[Lisa Solod Warren - Huffpost Blogger]

I know. I WANT MY PAPER BALLOT. Or at least one of those old fashioned lever machines like we used to have.

This electronic stuff is unsettling. Especially as I know how often it can fail......­.

[R.W. Sanders - Huffpost Blogger]

Today I'm reminded how easily we human machines fail. With touch screen machines in particular, votes can be miscast by simply re-aligning the screen. My grandpa used to say "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

[IndyReader]

Was there something wrong with the big machines with the curtains that I, mid-50s, remember from when I was a kid and going with my mother to vote?

[R.W. Sanders - Huffpost Blogger]

Good morning! I'm not familiar with that machine, but I assume it was entirely mechanical, not one of today's computerized monsters. The main issue is that the process is simplified as much as possible. The more transparent, the more trustworthy. I still think it's hard to beat marking that paper ballot and putting it into the box.
That being said, I hope I didn't step all over your attempt to wane nostalgic. It's nice to hear from a fellow boomer.

[R.W. Sanders - Huffpost Blogger]

I'm not familiar with that machine. I assume it was entirely mechanical. The main issue is to simplify the process as much as possible. The more transparent, the more trustworthy. Perhaps the very young people are comfortable with computerized voting monsters, but our generation most probably has a problem trusting that our intended vote makes it all the way to the final count. I still think it's hard to beat marking that paper ballot and stuffing it into the box.

That being said, I hope I haven't stepped all over your attempt to wane nostalgic. I think many in our generation sometimes long for the old days. What seemed so complicated then, seems so simple now.

[R.W. Sanders - Huffpost Blogger]

i need to apologize. i usually answer comments somewhat quickly but my power has been down all day.

[Plowboy]

My computer friends say that it is easy to make a machine do the job honestly, but there must be something else in the works here. The software is protected proprietary stuff for which the taxpayers have forked out big bucks to some faat a$$ed Republicans. I think it time to look into this. I also belierve that stealing a presidential election is high treason -- just as puttring the wrong king on a throne would be. The will of the sovereign people should not be thwarted by disgusting creeps.
TWO stolen elections is already two too many.

[happyone1]

This is absolutely the most important step that democrats can take to secure their reign of power for the next 20 years. The republican operatives have designed a voting system and implemented a counting mechanism that disenfranchises millions of voters each election cycle.

call it the "securing democracy" bill. have every vote be standardized as a scanner sheet-style vote, (with darkened circles so that voter intent is easy to determine--NO CHADS!!!) then have them counted twice (by 2 people at each station) and recounted twice. THen have a 10% random sample taken and counted to ensure that all three "counts" are the same. IF they are not the same, do them again until they are the same.

All contested ballots get placed before a judge who determines voter intent, if there is one.

if this were done in 2004 Kerry would have won by over 5 million votes, and by over 600,000 in florida.

this can be performed in a single evening if the personnel are trained and ready to go.

[R.W. Sanders - Huffpost Blogger]

This sounds similar to the process we used forty years ago. thanks for the comments

[Sundialsvc4]

RW, I'm a computer professional. It's what I do. And I'll flat-out tell you that the voting-machine system you see now ... if it were, say, a financial system ... would be illegal. It would be illegal because it has no auditability.

However, "the law of the land" is not written that way these days... in fact, it is written the opposite. There is to be NO paper-trail. There is to be NO accountability. That's what it actually says.

So... reasonable minds might ask... why on earth would you not only "do that," but codify it into law? For one reason, and one reason only: so that you could "stuff the ballot boxes" all over the nation without lifting a finger.

This will be the third consecutive election that this country will "lose" due to election tampering, and maybe if things continue to go downhill as they are doing, in four to eight years we will finally find that our national "prodigal son" is tired of eating pig-slop. But, I am very sorry to predict, 2008 will not be that year. Nor will 2012.

You're going to find yourself stuck with 4 more, if not 8 more, years of increasing­ly-despoti­c rule... which may or may not have a particular party-affiliation. It will become ever more clear to you that our entire national system is pursuing an entirely self-serving course that is based upon the Golden Rule: "He Who Has the Gold, Makes the Rules."

[R.W. Sanders - Huffpost Blogger]

sundail - so true and don't even get me started on gerrymandering. our congressional districts are a joke. a really sad joke.

[SheilaParks]

Thanks for this, however in 2008 I have a lot of trouble with your "one man...". One person is much more appropriate
Please go to the web site of the Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
www.handcountedpaperballots.org
to read much more in detail about and watch the hacking of the machines, articles against machine counting and articles for hand-counting paper ballots (HCPB). And more.
Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
Founder and Director
Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots

[R.W. Sanders - Huffpost Blogger]

I stand corrected and a bit embarrassed. Indeed I will visit your site, it sounds intriguing. thanks

[SheilaParks]

Thanks for this, however in 2008 I have a lot of trouble with your "one man...". One person is much more appropriate
Please go to the web site of the Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
www.handcountedpaperballots.org
to read much more in detail about and watch the hacking of the machines, articles against machine counting and articles for hand-counting paper ballots (HCPB). And more.
Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
Founder and Director
Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots

[mortgagejake]

I really do not understand why the nation does not go mail in ballots?? Here in Oregon we do it, and it works WONDERFULLY. I got my ballot yesterday, and I sat down with my Oregon voters guide, and took my time voting. I read every measure as I was voting. Today, when I leave, I will go to one of multiple ballot drop off boxes, and drop it off in a secure box. Then they just run it through the machine, and boom, it is done. Come on USA, figure this out!

[R.W. Sanders - Huffpost Blogger]

i vote in california and vote absentee, pretty much amounts to the same thing. i probably should have mentioned in the post that my absentee ballot is a paper ballot so it is somewhat better. however, it is still counted by machine. but at least you fill in the circles rather than punch out. thanks for the comments! all good and very true. maybe interest will grow in this movement away from riggable elections. they can all be messed with, but we don't need to make it so easy.