PDA

View Full Version : A Voting System for the 21st Century




MrZach
02-08-2008, 06:35 AM
Is anyone interested in forming a corporation and trying to lobby/market this kind of machine to EVERY COUNTY IN THE REPUBLIC?

Now... before you stone me for talking about a voting MACHINE let me point out - this is not an electronic voting system, but it will be "computer assisted." I get the idea from the machines they use in my precinct in Cook County, IL - and also from my grandfather's county in Texas where, apparently, they have this EXACT system in place already but not tweaked the way I want it to be...

Here's how it works:

:D You verify that you can vote with ID and your voting information is electronically downloaded onto a card that will activate your "voting machine." This also creates a database that shows you voted, but gives no information as to which party you voted for.

:D You insert your card to activate the machine and from there voting is all done by touch screen or keyboard selection... this is an ASSISTANCE device only.

:D You final ballot is printed on paper - but not on a ROLL of paper, on an actual piece of paper that will be deposited into secure ballot box.

:D In addition, you will receive a receipt copy of your ballot. BOTH ballots will have a unique identifier number (UIN) (randomly generated) on them that link the two ballots together. YOUR receipt ballot will have an additional code on it that when scanned will verify who you are and that you are a registered voter. Also, ballots will be filed IN A SPECIFIC ORDER, and must be counted IN THAT ORDER. There will be a separate register printed and can be viewed right there that shows their ballot was counted. This will also include a code that time stamps the ballot (but this time stamp will be ciphered).

:D Ballots may be machine counted, but they will be SO OBVIOUSLY CLEARLY PRINTED that they can be hand counted quite easily. Each UIN will have a bar code so that when a hand count is being performed, the counter first scans the bar code and then types in the vote - which will be printed on a verification form that basically includes a long list of all numbers and how the vote went.

:D The UIN's and how the votes for each one was cast will be made available to the public - especially via the internet! This way anyone can verify how their vote was counted and make sure it was counted and for the right candidate. In fact, they can also see how all the ballots add up but won't know to whom each ballot belonged.

:D In the event of there being accusations of "election fraud" - all voters will be contacted and asked to bring their receipts in to be verified. The voters who respond to this request will be able to bring in their ballot to be re-verified. This is essentially taking an simple random sample (SRS).

:D Simple statistical analysis can be performed on the ballots that are voluntarily verified. It will be analyzed for lurking variables such as demographics and "time stamps" to make sure that the SRS closely represents the population that actual voted on election day.

:D If the SRS is significantly large enough and there are no lurking variables, the votes counted will be compared to the votes tallied. If the vote is accurate, there should be very little difference in the statistical breakdown of the votes. If there is enough variance between the SRS and the actual results, this will cast doubt on the results not containing "inserted votes" - i.e. votes that were never cast being inserted into the record.

...from there I'm not quite sure where to go with this idea. There will be some flaws I'm not aware of, and some areas that need improvement. I have some undeveloped ideas because I don't really know how to make use of them (time stamps, printing a separate record of in what order the UIN's were distributed, etc.) but I figure they may be useful for making the system air tight while maintaining anonymity.

What do you think?

KevinR
02-08-2008, 06:39 AM
Sounds good to me, then get rid of the two party system, and just have one race for the white house thats like a week long :]

syborius
02-08-2008, 06:41 AM
paper ballots, hand counted, with a tear away receipt, count ballots in open with any and all reps from running parties present as a rule, and add cameras

CASE EFFFIN CLOSED!

MrZach
02-08-2008, 06:45 AM
*nod

I agree about the hand count. Delay the results - get a representative from each party to hand count every ballot and for good measure, do it on camera. Why not?

Why is this so hard to accomplish?

One nice thing is that we can ALL lobby our local election commission to change their rules instead of sitting back and letting them stick it to us...

acmegeek
02-08-2008, 06:49 AM
Here was my idea from a few weeks ago... similar to yours.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=987115#post987115

Basically the idea is to use the machines to prevent any errors and be able to easily verify your selection, while still having a receipt/takeaway that can be verified after the fact.

And... Diebold knows how to have cameras on all their ATMs... how come they don't on the voting machines? :)

Here are the basic criteria for a good voting system:

- Every vote can be easily recounted.
- Each voter receives a receipt with enoguh information to be able to verify that it has been counted.
- A voter can verify their selection to ensure that there weren't any input/user errors.
- Open sourced software
- Completely transparent machines and ballot boxes.


So in summary, the voting system would involve literally transparent hardware running open source software that helps voters verify that their vote was accurately reflected and gives them a physical receipt that can be verified after the fact.

BigRedBrent
02-08-2008, 06:54 AM
paper ballots, hand counted, with a tear away receipt, count ballots in open with any and all reps from running parties present as a rule, and add cameras

CASE EFFFIN CLOSED!

+1

acmegeek
02-08-2008, 07:02 AM
While hand-counting everything may seem like the most secure way to count the votes, you always introduce the potential for human error. As a programmer, I know that software or computer is only as good as the human that set it up.

Machines are simply tool to multiply or leverage human effort. I think that machines are not the problem, just the people who design machines that may be intentionally flawed or designed to be vulnerable and exploited.

syborius
02-08-2008, 07:30 PM
While hand-counting everything may seem like the most secure way to count the votes, you always introduce the potential for human error. As a programmer, I know that software or computer is only as good as the human that set it up.

Machines are simply tool to multiply or leverage human effort. I think that machines are not the problem, just the people who design machines that may be intentionally flawed or designed to be vulnerable and exploited.



I prefer the 1-5% human error over the 100% systemic failure of a computer, OR as I would say, Electoral fraud. There are banana republics that count 100,000's of votes quicker than we do, all by hand. Why are we still awaiting results in LA, and in other places. I would also pass legislation giving equal time to everyone that is in the race, and has the support and money to stay in it. If you are in the race, you should have equal time at debates, and in the media. Until we address as a nation how this media coronets our front-runners, we can never gain the popular support to even begin to disable this fraudulent voting system.

Valis33
02-08-2008, 07:33 PM
I would like to simply see a machine that can produce a paper receipt with a code number, in which you can later use that code verify your vote via the phone or internet.

BigRedBrent
02-08-2008, 08:43 PM
I would like to simply see a machine that can produce a paper receipt with a code number, in which you can later use that code verify your vote via the phone or internet.

This would be a step up. I think the votes should be both hand counted and electronically counted and the results to both always be made public.

It would not add much more to the hand counting process to include machine counting as well. And a very intelligent way to verify all the votes would seal the deal. This is America folks. We need to use our innovation to get this crap straitened up.

Paul4Prez
02-08-2008, 09:07 PM
Just do away with the secret ballot entirely. Sign a statement saying who you voted for, so you can check later that it was counted properly. My donation to Ron Paul is public info, thanks to the FEC. My support of Ron Paul is public info, thanks to my window sticker, bumper sticker, and door magnets.

louisiana4liberty
02-08-2008, 09:13 PM
How about a universal voting machine? Made by outside experts and audited/inspected by the GAO.

syborius
02-09-2008, 01:48 AM
I would like to simply see a machine that can produce a paper receipt with a code number, in which you can later use that code verify your vote via the phone or internet.

Unfortunately, if you give this any analysis whatsoever you soon realize that this solution will not prevent "election fraud". A fraudulent system can be devised wherein you verify your vote "WHICH WAS NOT COUNTED". Verification of your vote means nothing, what matters is an open forum where each political party can count the votes from the begin, and everyone certifies the results. Recounting the vote is just stupid, because any fraud that had occurred can be masked easily. For instance, 100 people vote for X. Officials claim that 75 voted for X. 25 votes are simply shredded. In this circumstance, which is every election there is no way for you to verify how many people actually voted for X.
Recounting will yield the exact same correct results as intended by the fraudulent act. What needs to be done is to make certain that each candidate has a representative in each voting precinct in an open forum.

Even receipts are virtually useless, because it is highly unlikely that you can ever get an accurate recount of those receipts which is the ONLY logical way you can verify the results of the election with any accuracy contingent on getting a hold of 100% of the receipts. The only thing that a patriot might be able to do in that instance is to check whether or not his vote was counted against some online database. The logistics for this are still messy, but the point is that the only way to prevent election fraud is cameras, open-forum voting, and representatives from each party that are able to oversee the integrity of the process. The closed forum voting is why we have election fraud, and why the flower-types hold onto their wealth and inheritance and the ruling elite is where they are, and the working class is where you are. You all must realize that none of this was devised by accident.