I've a coupla stories to link today. One from Kos, one from Bradblog.

First the Kos link:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/11/19/83113/474

We've got a race where there were 18,000 undervotes for a high profile congressional race. This one needs to be a re-election as neither party has any idea who won that election. I'm seriously hoping the Democrat goes ahead with her challenge. We will know within 10 days if that's gonna be the case.

In this election, electronic machines were used. There is no enduring record of the actual votes cast. Only the counts as recorded by the machines and a collection of testimony related to incorrect vote recordings. (Person makes selection for vote, selection not recorded or recorded incorrectly.)

This race is a prime example of why we need paper ballots.

Having said that, even with paper ballots, we've got serious problems on a lot of fronts. The one primary point I've been running into when I advocate for more trustworthy elections, is the matter of there always being some level of fraud and that it's no biggie. We can still make decisions and that's what counts.

This story from BradBlog illustrates perfectly why this is more of an issue than we think:

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3803

This study suggests the Democrats lost 3 million votes nationwide. What ended up being a nice majority could very well have been a landslide. The cause? Rampant fraud and manupulation nationwide on as many fronts as is possible:

Robocalls (these are phone calls discouraging voters for whatever reason, or annoying voters to undermine support),
challenges at the polls (vote by mail would eliminate both of these as costs and time would be too high to make them worthwhile),
Deceptive mailers (One party implying associations they don't have,
or devaluing the other party with near lies),
failure to count provisional ballots (vote by mail would eliminate this travesty nicely as only registered voters actually get ballots),
mis-information (voter told date, time or location changed), etc....

Essentially enough folks are willing to subvert the process to make close decisions ambigious. The only winners are really those who win by a substantial margin. The size of that margin where trustworthiness is concerned is unknown and very likely to vary by location. That's pretty fugly, IMHO.

As a Democrat, I'm annoyed at the idea that we were very likely denied the full referendum. As an American, I need to know the results are the real results, otherwise the process really comes down to which party has the guts to do what it takes, and that is not democracy in any shape or form.


Most of the items being uncovered are essentially criminal. There is very little actual accountability for those running elections and it's starting to show in both the growing aggressiveness of those wanting to sway elections through the process instead of through advocacy and the growing apathy of those shepards of our elections. They run the process and it comes out how it comes out.

I prefer solutions that address the process issues first. Always better to lower the incentive and means for crime instead of building more jails. This is where VBM shines huge. However, enough damage is being done to warrant more comprehensive criminal legislation and oversight as well.

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

'Diebold bad.'

Sheesh.

Give it a rest.

Herb

Actually, it's not Diebold. It's electronic machines in general.

Their inability to be proven trustworthy is no longer in question. It's a fact, established by our brightest computer science minds. Not being able to tie a persons vote to their record in a personally identifiable way is the issue.

This is why ATM's work and electronic voting does not.

Then we have the issue of people attacking the process on nearly every front. These attacks have gotten more aggressive in recent times. They are enough all combined to make all but the most resounding decisions questionable at best.

The only reason anyone has for denying this issue is that it favors them in some way. The body of information that supports my view on this is now huge and growing.

Again, as Americans, we should all have an interest in having a solid democratic process in place. We are afterall the model for democracy that has inspired much of the world.

Tell me Herb, what support can you bring to the table for not having an enduring and human readable record of the vote? Surely you have some opinion and or facts that support the idea that this really is in our best interests.

Enlighten me please.

Naw, it's just the left whining about everything.

Herb

Thought so.

You've got nothing, but the hopes that the GOP you know and love will somehow claw, lie, cheat and steal their way back into the hot seat.

I expected no less you know. We all know that nothing else matters but fighting terror and getting those rightie court appointments.

Selfish, selfish...


It's a damn good thing you are firmly in the minority view right now.

Hand wring, away.

And if you think the left is now able to push anything through Congress without Republican support, like Mrs. Clinton said: "Not so fast."

Democrats need 60 votes in the Senate to over-ride a Presidential veto.

Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said this week that if the democrats don't work with Republicans on court appointees [and that includes the Supreme Court], they'll get none of their legislature through.

Good luck for the next two years, lefties. You'll need it.

Herb

Doesn't matter.

Dems will set the agenda and draft a ton of legislation that people want. If Bush obstructs the will of the people, he only does himself and his party more harm.

That will be corrected in '08.

If he actually works with those people he was elected to represent and serve, then he will not do so much harm and we get some legislation that matters.

What's not gonna happen is more legislation and appointments that are not in our best interests. That means you, "Legislate the Bible", are essentially cooked. Only a small, but really vocal fraction of us want this crap, and you've been outed as the small but vocal fraction you really are.

I definitely think electronic machines should be used only to print a machine-readable ballot. You make your choices on the screen, say "print," and out comes a ballot from the printer. If you're happy with it, turn it in. This is completely common sense. The mind reels wondering who in authority could be so dumb to approve anything else.

I am less worried about fraud than I am about the issues that happened in places like FL's 13th district. Of course, Vote by Mail is a much better solution anyway...

Andrew

That's the beauty of VBM. It takes the fraud issue off the table, thus making both of us happy!

It's telling to watch those that don't want a more solid vote. It's all about getting their way no matter what. IMHO, improving our democracy would essentially bury the GOP until they came to their senses and started acting like a real American political party.

I really hope we see a re-election there. That would get some serious attention to the lack of an enduring human readable voting record. We need to fix that huge.

I'll take that fix over the other fraud schemes any day.

VBM also takes most of the dollars out of elections. There is zero need for corporations to profit from our democracy in a way that has a direct impact on our elections. VBM can be run by the state at a cost that makes sense to the taxpayers and said cost does not have the potential to impact election results.

So Herb, you're already admitting that the GOP will be obstructionists? That's a funny position to take after all the hand wringing from the GOP about the Democrats being the obstructionist party. Maybe you can try the nuclear option? Oh wait, I guess not!!

herb sez: "'Diebold bad.'Sheesh.Give it a rest."

me: hmm, from the guy that still yells: Clinton did it!

VBM should be illegal, there is no way to prove the person voting, is the actual registered voter. The constitution specifies a certain date as election day, not the week before.

If people dont want to take the trouble to go to a polling station, they shouldnt vote!

Go ahead and tell me, Nwokie, which section of the US Constitution dictates the day of election day. You're going to be looking for a very long time, because it was established by an act of Congress, no by the US Constitution.

There is no way to prove the person voting at the polling place is the actual registered voter, either. Most states are prohibited from asking for photo ID. I could go in and vote for Fred if I wanted to. You think that doesn't happen all the time?

The Oregon Dept. of Elections most definitely checks signatures. I have had a few people tell me that the elections office contacted them after an election and said, "This doesn't look like your signature on your ballot, compared to your registration signature. Can you update your voter registration signature?"

Although most if not all states have laws requiring employers to give their workers time off to vote on election day, they do not have to be PAID for that time off. People should NOT be forced to take paid time off of work just to go vote on a Tuesday. The only reason Congressed picked the first Tuesday after the first Monday was due to constraints on farmers, since the election occurred at the end of the harvest season.

Andrew

More ignorance from the right.

Vote by mail only works if your signature matches, and each one is checked. If your sig is good enough to sign a contract to buy a house or to divorce your wife, it should be good enough for voting.

Yep.

High turnouts too. Gotta love that.

As for the week before, try a coupla weeks.

The big news on that is the inability for last minute election manupulation efforts to be as effective as they could be. Candidates must stay on message and on task for a nice solid length of time during which voting could occur.

It's my favorite part.

GD neo-CONers just pissing and moaning about everything....
Lots of hand wringing going on.....

Hey Herb the Democrats don't really have to do anything for the next two years.

They will have everything done in this first month. First raise the minimum wage. Allow Medicare to negotiate drugs. Do not vote to make capital gain and dividend tax reductions permanent.

This will shrink defecits by the billions and they can campaign with it for the next two years.

Why do you think McCain et al are only launching "exploratory" campaigns. They know once the working class hears that the working tax cuts will be made permanent, wages increased, and budget defecits going down will make 2008 a cake walk.

The first act of the President in 2009 will to bring back the fairness doctrine and by July, 2009 conservative talk radio will be buried for good.

They might get one of those, the President cant bring back the fairness doctrine, without legislation.

'Hey Herb the Democrats don't really have to do anything for the next two years.'

Wrong.

It's gridlock.

You need 60 votes to get anything done in the Senate.

Otherwise, it's veto city.

Nice spin.

Herb

Not true, tehre will be a lot of you scratch my back, etc.

but nothing really important will get done.

The only major legislation I see getting through, is a slight increase to minimum wages, and that will be tied to continuation of the tax cuts.

The increase in minimum wage will NOT be tied to tax cuts. The House will pass the legislation, and those that don't approve of it will have it used against them in 2008. Simple politics!

Yea for the demos, first thing they want to do is raise taxes, and make rules to decrease jobs.

this is after their leader tries to appoint an unindicted coconspirator to their #2 position, and are trying to appoint an impeached judge, head of the house intelligence committee.
Wont it be kind of hard for him to do anything, since he wont qualify for a security clearance?

nw sez: "make rules to decrease jobs."

more jobs at $5.50 an hour is a good thing?

Well Herb your wrong again. If the Senators filibuster then at least five GOP Senators will be taking a hike in 2008. (see link)

http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/two_column_table/Class_II.htm

That is why it was such a shock that the Democrats took over in 2006 since the Democrats had fewer GOP seats to go after. In 2008 there are 21 GOP seats up for election.

If the GOP chooses to filibuster minimum wage then adios to at least five GOP senators.

In addition Nwokie the fairness doctrine was remove by Reagan in the 80's by executive order.

After the junk that the right and people like Wayne and Herb have placed out there for the last quarter century it's time to place them back in the teapot and get on with the better way it use to be.

There will be zero jobs lost that actually matter.

People want to make money, that's what will empower them to find ways to pay, those they are leveraging to actually make that money, a fair wage that's worth the time and effort to earn.

As for the other stuff, Bush did it, so how is this a problem?

I've got a great source for new tax revenue.

Let's tax all war profits at 95 percent. Follow that with money made holding elections too.

Done, next.

Actually, the fairness doctrine was eliminated by the FCC commissioners, not President Reagon, and congress repealed several of the anti monopoly laws.

It would be very difficult for a president to reinstate either the fairness doctrine or reinstitute the anti monopoly laws.

If you don't make more than $200K a year, then you don't have to worry about taxes going up. Chances are, that includes every single right wing poster here on this site.

Those FCC commissioners were appointed by Reagan. So when the next Democrat gets in there they will appoint commissioners who are in favor of the returning to the fairness doctrine.

http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/F/htmlF/fairnessdoct/fairnessdoct.htm

Probably, if the fairness doctrine were to be reintroduced, it would be ruled a violation of the first amendment.

The reason originally behind it, is because there were so few venues.

besides thats typical liberal attitude, they cant compete in the free market, and want the govt to correct their failure.

So which is it? I thought the media was liberal, yet you are trying to convince us that liberals can't compete in the free market? You can't have it both ways.

"If you don't make more than $200K a year, then you don't have to worry about taxes going up. Chances are, that includes every single right wing poster here on this site."

No. You must mean Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Kerry and Mr. Kennedy. They make that in a month or two.

Herb

And they all 3 oppose the Bush tax cuts. What's your point?

Herb, does your household make more than $200K per year?

Nwokie

Where's the first amendment violation if the fairness doctrine. I constantly hear the righties go "this is my show and I'll allow what I want heard on my show."

It's their show? Not when they don't tell the truth. That is the scope that the first amendment does not protect with the fairness doctrine.

Now if all the owners of stations across the country allowed every frequecy to be licensed then their would be no need for the fairness doctrine. Instead you would have 910,920,930,940 etc. That would be more than a 400% increase in stations in the Portland area.

However in each stations license they are to produce programming that "meets the needs of the community". In addition "licenses must provide assistance to the community"

This is why In-Trade advertising is done between all radio stations and community groups.

However with a more forceful FCC Commission many stations would have their licenses revoked as they do not help the community.

One of the funniest things about Lars and his gang is how he wants to put an end to Latino Job fairs and other related activity since there has to be people there who are illegal aliens.

Who has been a sponser of some of these recent fairs? Any guesses? That's right KXL-Lars' employeer.

Have fun on this one righties.

Herb: You must mean Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Kerry and Mr. Kennedy. They make that in a month or two.

Reinstatepete: And they all 3 oppose the Bush tax cuts. What's your point?



This goes to show that before making a point, give it some thought before posting to ensure it doesn't turn around and get you up your rectum. Ow! That musta hurt.