Holt Lights a Candle; Curious Voices Whistle in the Dark
I'm typically refering to neo-cons when I use the phrase "better to light one candle than to curse the darkness". This time, however, it's an odd band of Internet personalities that campaign vociferously against one of the only bright lights in federal election quality today I find "cursing the darkness".
Rush Holt's HR-811 bill will ensure that a paper record is made of every vote, and that voting machine models or software releases that provides incorrect vote counts will be detected, with proper counts restored through the paper records.
The points made by various critics of HR-811 vary widely in their stated concerns, and while all create the impression that the bill is a giant threat to voting integrity, none wage a meaningful attack on its merits.
I've read those who suggest that the voting machine sampling percentage of 3% is too small. These folks lack training in the statistics behind the 90-year practice of industrial quality control to know that it most assuredly is not too small.
There are those who cite human factors as a reason "not every vote" will have enough of the voter's attention regarding the paper record to ensure accuracy. This notion ignores the huge advantage of identifying bad equiment or software based on the records of the clear majority that will check their vote.
Some say a pure paper system is best. This is a position I agree with, but that I don't consider politically feasible. (It is possible, even for the disabled; check out http://www.Vote-PAD.com.)
Some cite the many other forms of voter abuse besides the integrity of voting machine tallies. To them, I say "more power to ya!", but why shoot down one clearly defined bill that addresses a singe grave election integrity issue well? HR-811 has a decent chance of passing.
Here's just one of the articles, a blog entry, that lists and refutes a number of these concerns in detail, and also provides link to accurate information about HR-811.
Support HR-811. Let's get rid of an election auditability gap big enough to drive a national election through!
Rush Holt's HR-811 bill will ensure that a paper record is made of every vote, and that voting machine models or software releases that provides incorrect vote counts will be detected, with proper counts restored through the paper records.
The points made by various critics of HR-811 vary widely in their stated concerns, and while all create the impression that the bill is a giant threat to voting integrity, none wage a meaningful attack on its merits.
I've read those who suggest that the voting machine sampling percentage of 3% is too small. These folks lack training in the statistics behind the 90-year practice of industrial quality control to know that it most assuredly is not too small.
There are those who cite human factors as a reason "not every vote" will have enough of the voter's attention regarding the paper record to ensure accuracy. This notion ignores the huge advantage of identifying bad equiment or software based on the records of the clear majority that will check their vote.
Some say a pure paper system is best. This is a position I agree with, but that I don't consider politically feasible. (It is possible, even for the disabled; check out http://www.Vote-PAD.com.)
Some cite the many other forms of voter abuse besides the integrity of voting machine tallies. To them, I say "more power to ya!", but why shoot down one clearly defined bill that addresses a singe grave election integrity issue well? HR-811 has a decent chance of passing.
Here's just one of the articles, a blog entry, that lists and refutes a number of these concerns in detail, and also provides link to accurate information about HR-811.
Support HR-811. Let's get rid of an election auditability gap big enough to drive a national election through!
posted by Mark MyWords at
11:01 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home