Browse: Home / Luther Weeks

Will Internet voting cost small Canadian town $10,000 to 30,000?

By Luther Weeks on June 19, 2011

No. That is the estimated cost of the “business case”. It sounds like they are asking the right questions, but may be getting in over their head in doing the “business case”.

Posted in , | Leave a response

Let us consider doing for Elections what we have done for Probate

By Luther Weeks on June 16, 2011

The legislature should be considering doing for our elections what we have done for probate. I am not the 1st to suggest this, let us hope that our legislature is not the last to consider it.

Posted in , | Leave a response

Some Question Integrity Of Union Vote

By Luther Weeks on June 14, 2011

There seems to be several issues. First, does the overall process and accounting for approval correspond to predetermined bylaws and rules? Second, will the election itself be free from manipulation? And Third, is it sufficiently transparent to generate confidence in the losing side that they actually lost?

Posted in | Leave a response

How Anonymous Are Paper Ballots?

By Luther Weeks on June 13, 2011

A new research report brings into question the degree of anonymity in paper ballots. The finding raises potential concerns for states and election jurisdictions considering the merits of either making ballots available for public review or releasing them under freedom of information requests. We find reasons for concern with ballot anonymity and reasons for skepticism that the result will hold under additional research.

Posted in , | Leave a response

Flip-Flopping has its place, but not in voting

By Luther Weeks on June 8, 2011

Reading and listening to the media we are led to believe that flip-flopping is the worst possible political sin. Wrong. Much of the time we spend writing, voice-mailing, or speaking with legislators is working to convince them to understand a more complete picture; to change their positions on issues.

Posted in , , , | Leave a response

Senate passes risky, expensive online voting bill – Now on consent calendar

By Luther Weeks on June 3, 2011

Despite opposition by the Secretary of the State and promises to the contrary, the Senate passed S.B.939 with online voting, placing it on the Senate consent calendar.

Posted in , , | Leave a response

Welcome to Post-Confidence Elections

By Luther Weeks on June 2, 2011

Laws and procedures which are not enforced for elections in the name of “trust us” and “it would be too much work”, are no more real than the laws and Constitutional provisions ignored in the name of national security. “It is time to learn from this recount, fix the problems it uncovered and ensure that future elections are different.”

Posted in , , | Leave a response

Report: What Hath HAVA Wrought?

By Luther Weeks on May 27, 2011

Charles Stewart III, presented a fascinating report earlier this spring. It is forty-two pages, double spaced, yet engaging throughout. In addition to describing HAVA and its implications, the report covers the political process which resulted in a useful, yet insufficient response to the issues raised in 2000.

Posted in , | Leave a response

Podcast: Talk of the Nation: Voter fraud, voter ID, and absentee voting fraud.

By Luther Weeks on May 25, 2011

The main arguments are presented from both sides. We believe that the case for significant individual voter fraud has not been made. Yet, it is appropriate that the debate continue, with more details than can be covered in a half-hour segment. Everyone agreed that absentee ballot fraud is significant and frequent, much more extensive than individual voter fraud. That is the primary reason we oppose any form of increased mail-in voting, including no-excuse absentee voting.

Posted in , | 2 Responses

Brad Friedman questions value of “Faith Based ‘Recount'” – we agree.

By Luther Weeks on May 21, 2011

What’s the point of having a “recount”, or of using security procedures and physical seals for the ballots after the election, if violations of those procedures and seals are of little concern to the state’s top election agency?

Posted in , , | Leave a response