So did the Barter Commission trade photo IDs for VVPATs?

Look, nothing happens without legislation, except in Ohio and FL of course! ;)

But it ain't over 'til it's over!

If there will be no more paperless e-voting, and there will be true and SUFFICIENT random auditing, and there will be no more Blackwells running the elections, maybe, just maybe, the photo ID thing is the big trade off.

Just food for thought. It sounds pretty extreme, but there isn't supposed to be a fee to get the ID. The details would certainly have to be worked out to make it easy to get, esp. if people move or are displaced by natural disasters and so on. But perhaps there is a way to make it work?

I don't know. I honestly haven't given it enough thought. I know it doesn't sound free and fair, but there may be a way to make it so.

One thing we can't do is let the issue of photo IDs derail the push for verifiable vote counting. We shouldn't give away the store, but if Repukes want to talk, we should talk to them. It's going to take a lot more than just VVPATs though. The paper WILL have to be counted!

And a few more are working on it.

But all that's being recommended is a piece of paper...not if it's counted, or audited, or considered the "ballot of record".

Whatever the merits of having Photo ID, or not fighting it, it will succeed in disenfranchising a lot of people...namely, the poor, the disabled, the elderly, you know, the usual.

They didn't even really define it -- they mentioned Nevada as a salutary example, but it's not in the recommendation. They mention the possibility of auditing (i.e. random recounts), but don't recommend it. They say states should decide _what_ should be the ballot of record -- well, folks, thanks for that! Of course if VVPAT is gonna be the ballot of record, then we need to solve the security problem there -- did they nail that anywhere?

And yeah, it's hard to believe that everyone will be equally predisposed to carry around their photo IDs to vote.

I don't think most of the political elites have a strong sense that VVPAT benefits one party or the other (whatever we may think!). But it's pretty widely assumed that photo ID provisions would hurt the Democrats, and that reenfranchising ex-felons would help the Democrats. (The commission recommends reenfranchising people after their probation or parole periods expire, except for capital criminals and registered sex offenders. It also calls for _informing_ people when they regain their right to vote.)

Not that the "trade" would necessarily be explicit, but a group like that wouldn't miss the point.

In Fairfax County Virginia, there was a major snaffu with voting machines. Votes were lost and the attitude of the BoE was typical but less than pleasing to candidates who had votes just disappear. The Republicans and Democrats banded together to make sure this didn't happen again. It probably has, but at least this shows that the two parties can work together. There is not reason why this shouldn't take place.

I want to raise a question now on the Voter ID's. First, there are negative iterations of this in GA for example recently. They charge for the IDs and make it hard to get. The Atlanta civil rights movement was as one calling this a JIM CROW law. That's pretty serious so the ID thing needs to be looked at. One thing for sure, this will give local Boards the "cover" they need to do IDs about any way they want. After all, who will read the fine print.

Right now, I think this is a big mess. They should have just said PAPER...PAPER...PAPER anybody can help count and all can watch.

Ohio's resolution is where the action is now. That's the model.