Crystal Ball Department
The lights are dimmed, the candles flicker. Let us all join hands while our mystic sage looks deep into the recesses of the crystal ball. (Cue sinister music). Come to us, oh all-seeing spirits. Hear our pleas for knowledge and understanding! Help us see the future and all that it brings to us. Wait, I feel the presence of the spirits! They whisper to me from a place beyond out imagining. They tell me that we can expect…….
…. Full employment for lawyers.
An overhaul in how states and localities record votes and administer elections since the Florida recount battle six years ago has created conditions that could trigger a repeat — this time on a national scale — of last week's Election Day debacle in the Maryland suburbs, election experts said.
In the Nov. 7 election, more than 80 percent of voters will use electronic voting machines, and a third of all precincts this year are using the technology for the first time. The changes are part of a national wave, prompted by the federal Help America Vote Act of 2002 and numerous revisions of state laws, that led to the replacement of outdated voting machines with computer-based electronic machines, along with centralized databases of registered voters and other steps to refine the administration of elections.
But in Maryland last Tuesday, a combination of human blunders and technological glitches caused long lines and delays in vote-counting. The problems, which followed ones earlier this year in Ohio, Illinois and several other states, have contributed to doubts among some experts about whether the new systems are reliable and whether election officials are adequately prepared to use them.
In a polarized political climate, in which elections are routinely marked by litigation and allegations of incompetent administration or outright tampering, some worry that voting problems could cast a Florida-style shadow over this fall's midterm elections.
"We could see that control of Congress is going to be decided by races in recount situations that might not be determined for several weeks," said Paul S. DeGregorio, chairman of the federal Election Assistance Commission, although he added that he does not expect problems of this magnitude.
"It's hard to put a factor on how ill-prepared we are," said Democratic former Ohio governor Richard F. Celeste, who recently co-chaired a study of new machines with Republican Richard L. Thornburgh, former governor of Pennsylvania, for the National Research Council. They advised local election officials to prepare backup plans for November.
"What we know is these technologies require significant testing and debugging to make them work," added Celeste, now president of Colorado College. "Our concern — particularly as we look to the November election, when there is a lot of pressure on — is that election officials consider what kinds of fallbacks they can put in place."
This is so simple almost anyone could figure it out. Paper ballots and require voters to identify themselves with a photo ID. Period. Any bull about the ID requirement "disenfranchising" legitimate voters is making excuses for voter fraud. Period. Any high-tech voting method is subject to tampering.
Paper ballots, photo ID. It. Could. Not. Be. More. Simple.
By guy, Saturday, 16 September , 2006 @ 10:47 pm
“Paper ballots, photo ID. It. Could. Not. Be. More. Simple.”
You might want to check this post out.
The mexican elections used both paper ballots and photo IDs - with holograms and everything!
If the loser of an election is a big enough loser no voting method in the world will help.
By Neo, Monday, 18 September , 2006 @ 9:48 am
And require a photo ID to get an absentee ballot.