Restoring election integrity
by V. Watson, citizen
Ukrainians marched in the freezing streets until they got a new election when evidence of election fraud surfaced. Many Americans have lost faith in their electoral system, but have yet to show the gumption of the Ukrainians. It’s time for the world’s ‘greatest democracy’ to get serious about deserving that title. What are the problems and what can be done about them?
The US presidential election of 2000 showed that the outcome of close elections can be changed by dirty tricks (like selectively purging voter rolls, providing inadequate voting resources for poor neighborhoods, & more). Intimidation, dirty tricks and vote tampering have been with us a long time. But as is often the case, there is not a technological fix for this. The Help America Vote Act was intended to address such problems, but currently, much of the emphasis has been on buying costly electronic voting systems. These won’t solve most disenfranchisement problems, but they do make a lot of money for a few big voting machine companies—hence the powerful lobby for these systems.
Rather than helping America vote, electronic voting makes it easier to tamper with voting results on a large scale. Especially when there is no paper ballot, voting machine computer codes are the secret private property of big corporations with a vested interest in election outcomes, and there is little security against hacking into vote tabulating computers. Widespread errors and possible fraud associated with electronic voting has already been documented in several elections and is being investigated in the 2004 presidential election.
Even without concerns about fraud, how long will this electronic voting equipment last? Longer than my last few computers, I hope. Electronic machines that are only turned on for voting every year or two are not likely to be very reliable. And even new machines have been making plenty of errors & breaking down frequently in recent elections. Will Congress appropriate massive funds every few years to replace the equipment? Not likely. How will poor neighborhoods pay for replacing and maintaining this equipment? Just as the rich should not have more freedom of speech than the poor (just because the rich can buy bigger ads or whole newspapers & TV stations), they should not have a greater right to vote because their neighborhood can afford more costly voting equipment.
Hence I feel electronic voting is inherently undemocratic—because it is costly, unreliable, and hard to verify. Printing a paper ballot after electronic voting makes election fraud tougher but not impossible (and printers break down, creating long lines at the polls). Recounts are only done if elections are very close. Electronic vote tampering can change election results just enough to avoid recounts. There is only one way to insure honest elections -- and that is with the full involvement of citizens exercising their duty to vote and to watchdog the election process.
Below is my proposal for a more open, honest, affordable, democratic voting system:
1) It is the duty of every adult citizen (judged mentally competent to vote) to register and vote. You may vote for 'none of the above.’ A fine is levied for not registering and voting unless emergencies or illness can be shown (as is done in Australia). The fine can be worked off with community service. The point is to emphasize that voting is your right AND your duty.
2) There is a nation-wide voter registration system that uses the social security number as an ID and that ensures that no one votes twice. Local voter rolls are generated from this system. The names of registered voters in each precinct are posted on the web & at the county elections office, so that folks can check to be sure they are listed in their precinct before the election.
There are also nation-wide standards for voting procedures; not just recommendations that the states can ignore.
3) The nation is divided into small neighborhood precincts -- of about 500 voters; each has it own polling place (schools, government buildings, churches are OK, even malls; preferably within walking distance of every part of the precinct).
4) Every registered voter has election day off (except essential service workers & poll workers—they must have at least half the day off). Australia has elections on Saturday so that many workers are already free.
5) On election day, polls are open from 7am to 8pm. Votes are marked on simple paper ballots. Any voters who cannot use paper ballots are given free rides to a central facility in each county or parish that provides whatever assistance they require to vote. They can bring a family member or friend if they wish.
6) When the polls close, the poll workers count the ballots by hand in the presence of as many interested citizens as can fit into the polling place. Each political party is encouraged to have an observer at each poll. Every citizen present at the count can make a tally of the results which can be posted on flip charts taped to the walls. The results from every precinct are sent to the county or state elections office which will publish the results online once almost all precincts have reported. The media can get the results from these web sites. Every citizen who attended the counting can check online or in the media to see that his/her precinct is correctly reported.
7) Now the initial count by neighborhood precinct has been verified by the local citizens and appears online & in the media. Local & state voting commissions can add up the totals, and many citizen organizations can double check their adding.
8) Paper ballots are stored in sealed boxes in a secure place maintained by the county election offices for at least one year. Then recycled, of course.
9) The paper ballots can be scantron sheets which can be scanned to allow various types of analyses, but the hand count of the paper ballots is the official count.
Such a system does not rely on costly voting machines that constantly break down and make mistakes. Poor precincts have the same quality of equipment as the richest districts (a big cardboard box will do to hold the ballots). The integrity of the vote depends only on the motivation of citizens to be involved, not on who can afford fancy machines, nor on the political agenda of private corporations that sell the machines.
This approach may take longer than a more automated approach, but when did speed come to be more important than the integrity of our democratic voting process? I actually think it won’t take any longer if the precincts are kept to small neighborhood size. It will certainly take more poll workers. But with most folks having a day off and required to vote anyway, there will be a lot more folks available to work the polls. Here in Missoula, we had more volunteers to work the polls than were needed. Most countries currently count their votes by hand. Canada is a good example. Australia & England have concluded that hand counting is not only the most reliable and trustworthy method, but actually the quickest. And citizens have so much confidence in it that even very close elections are seldom contested. Compare that to the bitter and long drawn out recounts that are becoming increasingly common where electronic voting occurs in the US.
Computers are good for some things (like maintaining a national voter registration system) -- but they are not good for making an unbiased & open initial count of votes on a single day in November. There are too many ways to compromise computers and too many ways they can break down on that crucial day. Voting is simply too important to make it subservient to the desire for instant gratification (or the bottom line of voting machine companies). Democracy does not work unless all citizens exercise their sacred right & duty – to vote and to help verify the integrity of that voting.
Some of my earliest and fondest memories are of accompanying my parents to the small rural store where they voted. When the polls closed, the neighbors gathered and counted the votes. They took their citizenship duties seriously. If we have become too busy to fulfill our duties as citizens, then we get the government we deserve.
Web sites with info on electronic voting vs hand counting are:
www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20031211.html
About the Help America Vote Act
www.demos-usa.org/pubs/HAVA_LCCRbrief.pdf
Vote counting methods used in other countries
Problems with the 2004 election