|
Edited on Fri Nov-19-04 10:11 PM by Cookie wookie
taxpayer money, does not deliver quick results (look at how long it's taking to count and recount and audit this election. Yes, the technology like TruVote and Avante where the voter verifies the printed "receipt" which goes into a lock box without being touched is the best idea for electronic, touch screen voting, but why bother with the machines in the first place. How long would it have taken all those people to vote in Ohio and Florida if they didn't have to wait for a machine to use? If each precinct counts their paper ballots on site and records it, then they could email the results to the main election offices if everyone is in such a big fat hurry. After all, the documentation would all be there so when the state elections division posts the results, precinct poll workers could immediately verify if those totals are correct.
The time and maintenance and money for machines is a stupid waste. And if the voter verified paper ballots are there for a recount, great, but why not get rid of the middle man, or rather machine.
I've spent nearly 2 years researching and working on the issue. We need the vote and vote counting close to home and not involving any IT techs in precincts messing with machines, any certification agencies, any memory cards, any worry about power failures, any worry about "glitches" in software that may not be caught so a recount may not be even allowed.
Paper and pencil. One, two, three....
|