2006-09-27

Fraud-Free Voting Reform Proposal

Here is my proposal for achieving the most accurate-possible voting for USA elections, which should set the world standard. I will modify this proposal based on feedback comments. Here's my first draft:

1. Electronic voting machines networked together.
2. Each voter presents a driver's license or alternate state-issued ID card. Yes, these can be forged, but requiring an ID will at least cut down on people voting for each other, and non-citizens voting. For the purposes of this discussion, the term "driver's license" means either a driver's license, or that alternative card for non-drivers issued by the same state agency.
3. Driver's license will declare either "US Citizen" or "Non-Citizen Resident", based on documents used to obtain ID.
4. Driver's license will include web address that will list voting dates and the polling location associated with the holder's listed home address. Citizens who lack a home address can select "indigent" (or some other happier word) but must declare a voting precinct.
5. Automatic voter registration for all holders of driver's license. Polling location officials will have a printed and web list of all driver's license holders with home addresses assigned to their precinct. The printout will include a sticker with the person's Name and Driver's License number.
6. The precinct will have:
- Government employees, and the agency in charge of the voting must be non-partisan.
- Up to two representatives from any Party or Candidate on the ballot, or anybody else who arranges to volunteer as an observer. These observers at any time can montitor or check the work of the government employees. The observers can have their own copy of the voter role.
7. When the voter appears at the station:
- Government rep will check the photo ID against the person, and against the electronic voter role.
- Government rep hands sticker to voter with the information: Place this on one of the three printouts you will get; that will be your copy to take home and keep.
- If the person went to the wrong place, the worker can check where the addressee is assigned to vote, or electronically communicate with the correct precinct to check the person off there and permit the person to vote at the current precicnt. Observers at both sites can communicate with each other to ensure that the the change gets made at both sites.
- Obervers can count the number of people who get approved to go to the voting booth.
- If there is a controversy, say if the voter's name doesn't appear on the registration list, he or she is entitled to submit a Tentative ballot, which will be recorded but not counted until the voter exhausts appeals through the voting agency at a future date.
8. Voter in booth:
- Initiates voting screen, which assigns the vote a unique number which includes the Precinct ID, time, and date.
- Voting screen will include ability to change vote, and a final Review screen which overviews each vote, giving the voter a final chance.
- Upon selecting the "Submit" button, three printouts materialize with a summary of every race and each of the user's vote. The user takes all three, and has the option of taking them to a Review Booth to ensure that all three paper documents are identical, and reflect the votes that the user intended.
- The printouts will have at the top a unique voting ID.
- The printouts are formatted so that an electronic reader can count votes, and humans can accurately and easily interpret them.
- The printouts for a Tentative vote will have a special obvious border all around, with the words "TENTATIVE".
9. Finalization:
- Voter places sticker with his/her name & driver's license one of the copies, and hands the other two to the govt worker.
- The govt worker places one copy in a safe box, and another in a box that the observers. Tentative copies both go into a special Tentative safe box. All boxes remain in veiw of all observers and govt workers at all times.
10. Station closes:
- Various Observer groups have taken a count of the number of approved voters, and the govt workers have their count. A govt worker announces the govt count. Observers have a chance to dispute the count. If any observer disputes the count, all observers and the govt workers enact a process to count the ballots in the Observer box. First a govt worker will submit them to the electronic counter. If that does not settle the dispute, any observer or group of observers has the right to hand-count all the ballots in plain view of all others.
- A govt worker announces the count for each item on the ballot first from the electronic results, and then from feeding the Observer ballots into an electronic reader. Any observers in view of all others can conduct their own hand-vote tally for any item on the ballot.
- All govt reps and observers sign a document containing their names, driver's licenses, and whom they represent, and contact info, certifying the vote for the precinct, including any objections.
- All ballot boxes will remain in the precint until any dispute is settled, and any observers will have the option to remain in the room with the box, runnign in 24-hour shifts until all observers agree to any disputes. The next day Tentative voters will have to return to resolve those disputes, in view of the observers.
11. Voter intimidation:
- People complain that partisan Observers challange people attempting to vote. Presumably the photo ID requirement would eliminate any desire by observers to challange voters.
- People complalin that police postings near voting sites intimidate voters. Ban police postings from a one mile radius of a voting precinct on voting day during voting hours; ban voter ID confirmation process as a mechanism for identifying people with outstanding warrents; ban any communication between govt precinct workers and law enforcement pertaining to any individual voter.
- Make plain that voting precinct hours of operation and location will be mastered on a particular govt website, and that no phone calls will ever inform voters about voting times, dates, and locations.

6 comments:

Nadir said...

"1. Electronic voting machines networked together."

This will make it easier to hack since you only have to hack the system once.

"2. Each voter presents a driver's license or alternate state-issued ID card. Yes, these can be forged, but requiring an ID will at least cut down on people voting for each other, and non-citizens voting. For the purposes of this discussion, the term "driver's license" means either a driver's license, or that alternative card for non-drivers issued by the same state agency."

This places an undue burden on the elderly and others who do not have ids. I don't think I've every heard that there is a problem with people voting for each other.

"3. Driver's license will declare either "US Citizen" or "Non-Citizen Resident", based on documents used to obtain ID."

Good idea for driver's license, but I don't think photo id is a good idea for voting.

"4. Driver's license will include web address that will list voting dates and the polling location associated with the holder's listed home address. Citizens who lack a home address can select "indigent" (or some other happier word) but must declare a voting precinct."

What about voters who don't have internet access? What good does the website do them?

"5. Automatic voter registration for all holders of driver's license. Polling location officials will have a printed and web list of all driver's license holders with home addresses assigned to their precinct. The printout will include a sticker with the person's Name and Driver's License number."

Motor-voter bill. I like this idea. That's one.

"6. The precinct will have:
- Government employees, and the agency in charge of the voting must be non-partisan."

How do you insure a non-partisan agency?

"- Up to two representatives from any Party or Candidate on the ballot, or anybody else who arranges to volunteer as an observer. These observers at any time can montitor or check the work of the government employees. The observers can have their own copy of the voter role."

Why not insure that each precinct has representatives of both (or all three, four or six major parties)?

"7. When the voter appears at the station:
- Government rep will check the photo ID against the person, and against the electronic voter role.
- Government rep hands sticker to voter with the information: Place this on one of the three printouts you will get; that will be your copy to take home and keep.
- If the person went to the wrong place, the worker can check where the addressee is assigned to vote, or electronically communicate with the correct precinct to check the person off there and permit the person to vote at the current precicnt. Observers at both sites can communicate with each other to ensure that the the change gets made at both sites."

Minus the photo id part (because presumably there won't be a photo on the voter role) this isn't a bad idea. The idea that you can vote at the wrong precinct is a good one. That's two.

"- Obervers can count the number of people who get approved to go to the voting booth.
- If there is a controversy, say if the voter's name doesn't appear on the registration list, he or she is entitled to submit a Tentative ballot, which will be recorded but not counted until the voter exhausts appeals through the voting agency at a future date."

How long will it take to exhaust appeals? Though it is never certified that early, tv stations try to predict winners as early as possible. The tentative ballot should be resolvable within 24 hours or less.

"8. Voter in booth:
- Initiates voting screen, which assigns the vote a unique number which includes the Precinct ID, time, and date.
- Voting screen will include ability to change vote, and a final Review screen which overviews each vote, giving the voter a final chance.
- Upon selecting the "Submit" button, three printouts materialize with a summary of every race and each of the user's vote. The user takes all three, and has the option of taking them to a Review Booth to ensure that all three paper documents are identical, and reflect the votes that the user intended.
- The printouts will have at the top a unique voting ID.
- The printouts are formatted so that an electronic reader can count votes, and humans can accurately and easily interpret them.
- The printouts for a Tentative vote will have a special obvious border all around, with the words "TENTATIVE"."

This is all fine and dandy, but still doesn't insure that what is sent through your network is the same information that is on the printout or on the screen. If a small percentage of votes is changed through the network, it would be nearly undetectable.

I don't have a problem with 9 and most of 10 except "- All ballot boxes will remain in the precint until any dispute is settled, and any observers will have the option to remain in the room with the box, runnign in 24-hour shifts until all observers agree to any disputes. The next day Tentative voters will have to return to resolve those disputes, in view of the observers."

I already had to take off work on a Tuesday to vote. Now I have to take more time on Wednesday when CNN has already announce the winner and Fox News said they were wrong and says the other guy won? I don't need that stress, and my boss won't allow it.

"- People complain that partisan Observers challange people attempting to vote. Presumably the photo ID requirement would eliminate any desire by observers to challange voters."

Looking like the person on the id does not confirm eligibility.

"- People complalin that police postings near voting sites intimidate voters. Ban police postings from a one mile radius of a voting precinct on voting day during voting hours; ban voter ID confirmation process as a mechanism for identifying people with outstanding warrents; ban any communication between govt precinct workers and law enforcement pertaining to any individual voter."

What if the voter stole somebody's purse? What if the voter fits the description of the guy who just shot four poll workers at another precinct?

"- Make plain that voting precinct hours of operation and location will be mastered on a particular govt website, and that no phone calls will ever inform voters about voting times, dates, and locations."

What about changes to polling locations at the last minute?

Paul Hue said...

This will make it easier to hack since you only have to hack the system once.
====================

But the various procedures that include paper print outs and checking by various observers would protect against that.

Paul Hue said...

"This is all fine and dandy, but still doesn't insure that what is sent through your network is the same information that is on the printout or on the screen. If a small percentage of votes is changed through the network, it would be nearly undetectable."
============

How does paper-only do any better here? A bunch of slips of paper with no linkage to any voter and just a smattering of holes (which different people interpret differently, and counting machines can't all detect due to differences in how the pin, human, and paper interact) go through computer counting machine (digital machine interpretting the analog "chads" at less than 100% correspondance with the human who made the chad!), leaving observers to double-check... how? Re-feeding the paper with hole punches back into these computer-counting machines? Observers challange that, how? Have you ever taken the time to look at a paper ballot? Consider that it may contain 40 races. It is impossible for a human to interpret it without great difficulty.

Remember Florida recounts? Two people would holdup the same ballot, examine the "chad" (depending on the type of chad created by the human punch, the machine might have not detected a hole). One person announces, "Gore". Then the next person's examination yeilds "Bush." With a computer voting machine, the printout would read like this:

01. President = 02 Omawale (Communist) --X---
02. State Senator, District 73 = 05 Hue (Libertine) ----X-

Notice here both a computer and a human can easily interpret the result, and the human and computer information correspond with each other in a way that the human can comprehend instantly. The Presidnet race was Race 01, and Nadir was choice 02 of six choices. This paper result can get fed into a computer counter, and provides maximum ease for hand-counting.

Hole punch paper ballots are nearly impossible for a human eye to ascertain. Besides nearly eliminating the practical possibility of hand re-counts, the voter himself can't even practically double-check his own ballot.

In my system the various observer groups will all have their own record of the precinct results. The precinct results all get reported to the media by the election workers. All the observers have to do is compare their precinct counts to the reported precinct counts, add them together and compare the tally with the reported tally.

Paul Hue said...

Nadir: Would you like to switch your banking back to paper-only?

Do you realize that your "paper" balloting all gets counted by... a computer!

Do you know that your paper ballot imperfectly records your punch, and provides now way for you to change your vote, review your vote, confirm that what the paper records represents what you intended to vote, or associate your vote with any human who can confirm or refute its interpretation?

That your paper ballot provides no unambiguous mechanism for two humans to interpret what the machine doesn't detect?

Did you know that a devious person like Karl Rove can fiddle with the paper voting machines to (1) cause a Gore vote to punch the hole that the computer reader will read as "Bush", and (2) set the computer readers to register Gore holes as Bush votes?

And what's the "paper trail" that it leaves behind? A bunch of cardboard strips with holes... and partial holes? And you can't even point to one of them 5 minutes after sticking it in a box and identify it as yours?

Paul Hue said...

Nadir: If you don't like my proposal for handling dispute between voter and pollster (let voter vote, but mark ballot as "TENTATIVE" then voter returns the next day to appeal), how do you like the current mechanism? Do you even know what the current mechanism is? Can you possibly imagine a more effective mechanism than mine given for the single, anonymous cardboard ballots you adore, which constitute an indecipherable smattering of holes (or near holes)?

As for my proposal to return the next day for an appeal (ignoring for a moment that the current appeal process is... what?) despite all the news media having announced the winner, well:

The supreme accuracey and dependability of my system will indeed result in various people knowing an accurate tally very early, exactly how many Tentative ballots are outstanding, and if those outstanding ballots could make a difference. Even more importantly for you, Nadir: *YOU* would know if it would be worth your trouble to come and challange the next day! How's that for accuracy and dependability and transparancy?

Please let me know the current process for ID-less voters who show up to the precinct and get told either "we don't have you listed" or "we already have you checked off as having voted." Given the lunatic matching of ID-less voting with indecipherable hole-punch cards, there is no possible way for such a system to have a challange process as good -- or better -- than mine.

Paul Hue said...

"This places an undue burden on the elderly and others who do not have ids. I don't think I've every heard that there is a problem with people voting for each other."
=================

1. It's a possibility much easier with no photo ID confirmation. It can work like this: Nadir's dad dies, and so does his lover, Darren. I know this and submit voter registration cards for them, using my address. On election day I go and vote three times for Bush at different times of the day. What mechanism stops me from doing this? Maybe my own dad is running for County Clerk, an office where only a few voters will even bother casting a vote. These two extra votes would matter. But of course as long as I'm voting for my dad as County Clerk, I'll go ahead and vote on the big items, like President.

2. The scam scenarios are endless. If Nadir is my buddy, and he's the County Assessor and employs me or gives me favorable treatment, an office like that often gets decided by 100 votes... or less. I might know 10 or 50 idiot bums who will never vote, including my shiftless cousins and their bum friends. And of course some old people I now about, languishing in nurshing home, or even dead. I can register them all, without their even knowing it! I'm just confident that these jackasses are never going to vote. I can even list them all as residing at my house. The photo-less voter registration cards all come to my house. At election day I've got 50 voter registration cards (not that even *those* are needed!, but they do provide me a handy organizational tool). Now I just have to round up several bums in the area, maybe even some of the bums or corpses that I've registered. Can I even register some peole multiple times with the same names and different addresses? Or slightly different names? I don't even need 50 guys on election day. If I, Paul Hue, can successfuly vote as Tom, then why not on the same day also as Oscar? I can pay these guys $20 to go vote for my candidate, and hey, while you're at it, remember to vote for Bush. And can't I even just have all these guys vote "absentee"?

3. Do you care about non-citizens voting? Do you want them to vote? Have you heard accusations of them voting? If you were a candidate with access to lots of such people, see above for an easy way for a few hundred of them to make some cash voting. With no photo ID indicating citizenship, I can make this happen rather easy, no?

4. If I vote three times for Bush, that's two exta, illegel votes for Bush. My idiot, incompetent grandmother who has figured out whom to vote for and how to vote, but can't figure out how to obtain a photo ID or is just too lazy, she goes to vote for Gore. But isn't she "disenfranchised" by one of my illegal Bush votes? In this scenario -- no photo ID requirement -- there is *NOTHING* she can do, no effort she can expend, to make her vote count as an extra net gain for her candidate. But under a photo ID requirement, all she has to do to ensure that her vote will count is something that millions of American adults of all ages and income levels manage to do every year: get a freakin' photo ID, the same step she would have to take to perform innumerable acts of self-sufficiency. "Disenfranchised" indeed!