Were you a pollworker? – Please complete this survey

Welcome to the 2012 Election Workers Survey!

Sponsored by the Verified Voting Foundation and the Election Administration Research Center at the University of California, Berkeley

Goodbye Sandy, Goodbye Science, Goodbye Secret Voting

Like other disruptive events, storm Sandy is being used to justify very questionable emergency voting changes in New Jersey. The Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey has announced virtually unlimited fax and email voting – some would say this is the camel’s nose in the elections tent – I would say it is more like the other end of camel.

What We Worry? What Could Go Wrong On Election Day?

America’s elections are run entirely on the honor system. What could possibly go wrong?

Caltech/MIT: What has changed, what hasn’t, & what needs improvement

The Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project has released a thorough, comprehensive, and insightful new report timed to the 2012 election. We find little to quibble with in the report. We agree with all of its recommendations.Several items with which we fully endorse were covered in this report which sometimes are missing from the discussion or often underemphasised.

The report itself is 52 pages, followed by 32 pages of opinions of others, including election officials, advocates, and vendors, some of whom disagree with some aspects of the report. Every page is worth reading. The report is not technical. It covers a wide range of issues, background, and recommendations.

CTVotersCount flip flops from “Trust but Verify” to “Verify to Trust”

There is absolutely no need to “trust” anyone if there is sufficient verification. There is also little evidence to trust our democracy to anyone. As they say power corrupts.

Now we learn that many of our votes are being counted by machines under the influence of one of the candidates and his family.

Multiple votER fraud, multiple votes, multiple elections, multiple lessons

Individual votER fraud does not happen often, when it does it seldom, if ever, amounts to enough to change a result. But here is a Rhode Island size story from Texas that provides several lessons for those concerned with votER fraud, votING fraud, and the limits of voter ID:

Big Bird and Charlie Rose know what the CT Legislature does not!

See Charlie Rose interview Dr. Barbara Simons, co-auther of Broken Ballots. <view>

Big Bird and Charlie Rose now know that Internet voting, email voting, Virgina elections, and inadequately audited elections – do not merit our trust.

Issues with NPV vs. a strategy of overwhelm

Around this time in the presidential election cycle we see a variety of articles touting benefits of the National Popular Vote Agreement vs. the Electoral College for determining the president. One of the latest is a piece in the Stamford Patch pointing to Rep Fox’s support of the Agreement, largely quoting Ryan O’Donnell, a lobbyist for

I suggest you read the Patch article along with the comments to get a taste of’s arguments, relevant, irrelevant, and questionable and their apparent strategy of overwhelm. Often when one of these articles appears, I post a comment to articulate what they are not telling you, the risk of the National Popular Vote Agreement. Much like DDT the issue is not the touted benefits, even if overblown. The issue is the potential harmful consequences.

USA Today: Electronic voting – The Real Threat

Fortunately our Legislature has not wasted time on raising Connecticut’s adequate voter I.D. law to the level of voter suppression. Unfortunately, the Legislature has continued to ignore science, experience, and the Constitutional requirement for preserving the secret vote.

Electronic Voting Debate Continues – Defying Science and History

Computer Scientists say safe Internet voting is impossible, unless unanticipated theoretical discoveries are made.

The World is not round*, leeches are not medically useful, electronic only voting and Internet voting cannot be made safe for the foreseeable future.

Page 20 of 61« First...10...1819202122...304050...Last »