Slashdot Mirror
Paper Trails Don't Ensure Accurate E-Voting Totals
An anonymous reader writes "In an new report from the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation they say that paper trails increase costs and can actually reduce the chances a voters' choices are accurately counted. Congress is considering a 'Voter Confidence and Increased Accountability Act of 2007,' which would mandate 'voter-verified' paper audit trails."
-A- new report, a -voter's- choices.
The rest of the board is similar (link).
"Rhett Dawson is President and CEO of the Information Technology Industry Council (ITI). Immediately prior to being selected as President of ITI, Dawson was Senior Vice President of Law and Public Policy for the Potomac Electric Power Company. In the Reagan administration, Dawson was Assistant to the President for Operations. At the White House, he managed the staff and decision-making process for President Reagan and was responsible for three White House support units: the White House Office, the Office of Administration, and the White House Military Office. He also was Executive Director of two presidential commissions, the President's Special Review Board (the Tower Board) that investigated the Iran-Contra matter, and the President's Blue Ribbon Commission on Defense Management (the Packard Commission). During the 1980s Dawson was a partner in two Washington law firms. Earlier in his career, he was Staff Director and Chief Counsel for the Senate Committee on Armed Services, Minority Counsel for the Senate Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities (the Church Committee), and Minority Counsel for the Joint Committee on Defense Production. He is a member of the statutory Commission on National Guard and Reserve, and he is Vice Chair of the State Department's advisory committee on International Communication and Information Policy. Dawson received his undergraduate degree from Illinois Wesleyan University, where he was recognized in 2001 as the Alumni of the Year. He was awarded his law degree from Washington University."
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
Just a quick browse of their "ITIF in the news" page and it looks like they are big fans of Real-ID and RFID tagging in general. On network neutrality they appear to be in favor of just leaving it up to the FCC to determine on a case-by-case basis what telecomm companies are abusive and which aren't - no legislation required, and their justification seems to be that some of the proposed legislation has been over-the-top (typical FUD about preventing telecomms from 'innovating').
Who funds these people?
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
The American ballots are also ten times as long because we don't use proportional representation and therefore get to vote for more than just a political party.
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
You ever see an American ballot in a presidential election year? It's not just "Choose a president, a Representative and maybe a Senator". Along with the Federal level offices there's a multitude of State, County and Municipal positions to fill. Then there are the ballot initiatives; intentionally written as confusingly as possible, just getting through them can be a daunting task. One of the most credible reasons for poor American election turnout I've heard (after "It won't make a difference") is the fear of such an overwhelming task.
If voting made a difference, they wouldn't let you do it.
What if Tetris was invented by Nazis?
we don't use proportional representation and therefore get to vote for more than just a political party.
Elections which use proportional representation usually allow you to vote for more than just a political party.
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
While I was taught about the electoral college, voting system, and government while I was in school, it seems that the "real world" is a lot different. (surprise!) If I remember correctly, the electors don't even have to vote for the candidate with the most ballot votes, they can choose to vote another way, becoming faithless electors.. WTF? And I'm supposed to trust these people? I find a lot of problems with the system.. Personally, it seems that if a candidate receives the majority of the votes (citizen votes, not electoral votes), then they should be the elected official. However, as we've seen in the past, that's not necessarily true.
I have no faith at all in our political system. I vote because I want my voice heard. Apparently I'm not in-tune with popular opinion, though, because I have yet to vote for any of these elected officials..
XenoPhage
Technological Musings
Oh that's easy. Paper trails are "bad" because people counting ballots are more expensive and less accurate than digital counting*.
* barring the presence of any bad actors in the simulation.
It's always the caveats that get you. See these guys are interested in "resilience against corruption". They're only interested in cheaper and more accurate because that's the only thing that supports their position.
I have to agree with you, the whole article screams "Industry Shills".
Fanatically anti-fanatical
You might want to check about Canada before saying. Canada also uses a system similar to the US - it is not proportional voting. We have a bunch of ridings and in each of the ridings you have subsection. The candidate with most votes in a riding wins that riding for his party.
Why is the count so fast in Canada, because each subsection counts its votes and reports back up. Usually we get the results by next morning and by midnight it is generally known who won, unless it is very tight.