Can we believe it this time - electronic voting machines with paper receipts?

Question

In 2001, legislation was in the works requiring electronic voting machines to give the voter a paper receipt.

That legislation just seemed to disappear.

Now this subject and legislation is back in the news stating it is coming.

I'm like... yeah Rrrighhttt... I'll believe it when I see it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/08/washington/08voting.html?ex=1323234000&en=2477a8e868ee1194&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Answer 1

That would be a good idea. This would at least give you peace of mind that it registered. The last time I voted i wasn't sure. The lady came and put a cartridge in then yanked it out. Was the cartridge supposed to be in there still? It was like a wham bam thank you mam thing.Thing is a crook will find a way no matter what ya do. I'd just like peace of mind it registered then get on with life till the next vote. The thought of someone corrupting and curving elections is sickening no matter what party they are in.

Answer 2

I doubt it-this is from an AP article the day before!

WASHINGTON - A federal advisory panel approved a revised proposal that encourages states to use electronic voting machines that can be independently verified, a day after rejecting a similar recommendation.

It suggests that when states buy new machines, they consider buying ones that include verification tools.

The report said auditors should have a way to verify that the voting machines produced accurate results.

The panel deadlocked 6-6 on Monday over the first Rivest proposal, failing to get the eight votes needed to pass.

It also concluded that threats to voting are not significant enough to force states without paper records to make immediate changes.

The Election Commission will likely vote in 2008 on the proposed changes, which are not binding, but are followed by many states.


I think the real problem is that states & counties continue to have their own standards & procedures, which largely led to the debacle in Florida in 2000. There was so much fighting about who was right & wrong, the guts of the decision of the US Supreme Court was nearly ignored. The violation of the Equal Protection Act-and most states do violate in the same way-has never been fixed-in fact there are no attempts to do so..A recent use of Equal Protection doctrine came in Bush v. Gore (2000). At issue was the controversial recount in Florida in the aftermath of the 2000 presidential election. There, the Supreme Court decided that the different standards of counting ballots across Florida violated the Equal Protection Clause. It was not this decision that proved especially controversial among commentators, and indeed, the proposition gained seven out of nine votes; Justices Souter and Breyer joined the majority of five—but only, it should be emphasized, for the finding that there was an Equal Protection violation. What was controversial was, first, the remedy upon which the majority agreed—that even though there was an Equal Protection violation, there was not enough time for a recount—

Not enough time for Democracy-we are truly broken..

Answer 3

Electronic voting has been the back room topic in Washington DC since the first computers hit the market.

Secretly Congressmen think of it as an automatic Electoral College. With the power to make corrections for public voting error.

Go big Red Go

Answer 4

what good would it do? with millions and millions of people voting do you think you could get all those reciepts back to prove the number was right? Its a waste of paper and money. thats why they went to computers to take paper out of it. If someone was going to cheat having a paper trail wouldnt help. the paper trail can be tampered with. Im surprised an environmentalist would suggest this and an evil conservative would say what I just did..

Answer 5

Using computers to vote means some one can change the vote with another computer i dont trust it even if there is a paper receipt

Answer 6

I hope so! The paper tally will (hopefully) resolve any questions that may arise.