BartBlog

Greetings from the Dark Side!I was worshipping at the Limbaugh alter this morning and He Who Is Never Wrong (except concerning Hillary) indicated something I think is worth reflecting on.His Most Wonderfulness (whose second-hand cigar smoke I’m not worthy to breathe) wondered: was it Hillary tears welling up that caused her win in NH, or was it dishonest voting?Think about this – the pollsters and pundits got it right concerning McCain but were way, way off concerning Mrs. Clinton.Why? Obama should have won and didn’t.Why?Was it tears or cheating?We desperately need election reform. There’s no reason it can’t be done. We have the technology, and only need the will.I’ve been pushing for this, as you may know, with articles such as the two below:Concerning Election ReformIt’s very exciting to me that with our technology, even the confused little old lady in Florida can’t screw up the voting system. Instead of her being able to carefully hang a chad, or vote for both Gore and Bush, she must now press a frail, uncertain finger against a touch screen that won’t tolerate anything other than a single choice.But now, as the election reform issue turns to other topics, there is a growing mindset that is willing to sacrifice secrecy for accurate vote count. This bothers me because I don’t want man or machine to know how we vote.The question, then, is how do we obtain both a very high degree of voting privacy and accuracy?This is how:(1) Require photo identification (such as a driver’s license) against the up-to-date list of names of registered voters.We should enter the voting precinct and show pictureI.D. to the poll worker, who then finds us on the list.Then we sign on the line next to our name, and go vote.(2) Use a computer touch screen which both issues a paper ballot to the voter, and records the vote electronically.(3) The paper ballot is then inspected by the voter and put into the ballot box.After the polls close, the paper ballots are carefullycounted, the count is matched against the number ofpeople who showed i.d., and signed the list, and againstthe computer disk record. All three must match: paperballot, number of people who signed to vote, andcomputer disk count.So if 2000 people showed I.D.., 2000 must have votedelectronically and there must be 2000 paper ballots. Ifthey don’t match, work it out amongst all parties tosatisfaction.(4) Randomly pre-assign the ballot with a number, issued to the voter. For example, the number 4XXX2170 might be your ballot number. This number is on your paper ballot and you either write it down or tear a little tab with the number on it before putting the paper ballot in the ballot box. Then all the numbers are displayed on the internet. No one else has any idea who 4XXX2170 is, but you. This helps verify that your vote was recorded and counted. This also gives the total number of voters, again. If not there, voter reports discrepancy.(5) Provide appropriate punishment for those who cheat, so it’s not worth it to do so.For example, in Chicago (was it Chicago?) more peoplevoted for Al Gore in 2000 than there were registeredvoters.Cheating like this should be investigated and prosecutedvigorously.One thing I really dread is a federal takeover of our election process. States are reforming their ballot process just fine, thank you very much, and should receive neither federal mandates nor federal money, in spite of what Jimmy Carter wants.The state run election is one of the more subtle yet powerful checks and balances in our system of government and besides, the govt is already too large, powerful and wasteful to be taking on more responsibility.Incidentally, people should not be overly encouraged to vote. I’m very willing to study the issues and candidates and vote for those who don’t feel like it.Being able to register and vote the same day is a bad idea because it disrupts the carefully maintained list of registered voters needed for accurate elections (see point #1).It’s an embarrassing fact that one of the components of our Judeo/Christian heritage, honesty, is now so lacking in our culture that the foregoing is necessary. As a result, our voting system, in order to be accurate, must contain redundancy and therefore be expensive to administer. But I’m certainly willing to pay the price for secret, thoroughly accurate elections, and suggest the preceding as a way to achieve much needed election reform.Even Dead People Voted in MiamiNewsMax.comMonday, Dec. 25, 2000A report in Sunday’s editions of the Miami Herald reveals that scores of dead people and non-registered individuals were allowed to vote in November’s presidential election.In a survey of just 138 of Miami-Dade’s 617 precincts, the paper found that 144 persons voted illegally.The Herald study indicates that if this number is extrapolated, more than 600 votes were illegally cast in the heavily Democratic county.Vote fraud is no stranger to the city of vice. Just three years ago, the Democratic mayor of Miami was forced from office after massive election fraud was uncovered.Use this link:Even Dead People Voted in MiamiGrimgold