We have convictions happening in Ohio! There was fraud afterall. Getting to the bottom of these issues It's taking a fricking long time, but it's finally getting done. We all will be better for it.

BTW: This is one of my very favorite tech sites. They frequently cover matters where society, technology and the law collide. They often do so in a very solid way.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070131-8745.html

IMHO, it's time to start pimping vote by mail again. These events are gonna have a serious impact on the remaining states still using electronic voting machines. Having actual polls still leaves a lot of room for manupulation via challenges, limiting voter access, manupulation on direction (time, dates, location, etc...)

Paper trail does not cut it. We need the chain of trust between voter intent and the record of the vote to be solid. That means, no machines between voter and vote cast, other than passive media delivery systems. (That's a pen or pencil.) I also propose we use an additive process for this, meaning no punch cards. Many of these use a stylus, which is passive, but also require some mechanical precision, which has more complications than simple additive media systems exhibit.

Optical Scan does this, in that the voter actually makes the machine readable vote record themselves. Chain of trust is intact and their efforts are both human and machine readable.

There are still issues possible with the counting process and people can still craft goofy ballots, but given the solid physical record, we've got a lot of nice options for dealing with these things.

On the ballots, I know our current law does not permit standard ballots as a matter of states rights law, but could we not craft some judicial tests for clarity and bias? States would still be free to do what they want, given their efforts are solid. We've seen other issues like this settled with judicial tests, established from case law decisions, why not ballots?

For all you naysayers, I just want to put my "I told you so!" on record here and now.

That's Resident to you Herb, Mc, et al. That's right folks! Selected, not Elected™ the first time and not known to be the winner the second time, leaving us with a Resident President™. Both these issues, tainting this Residency, are now matters of law, documented in our State, Federal and Supreme Courts.

To be completely fair, there is a high likelyhood of the Resident Bush being duly elected in Ohio. However, the combination of discrimination with numbers of available machines, court proven fraud, disinformation and intimidation easily meet the burden for that decision being ambigious. It sure as hell was no mandate.

I hope we can get this matter fixed to the point where the margin of error is well below the winning margins. It would be sweet to know our next President was actually elected, not selected.

We might think they suck (and a percentage of us will, we all can count on that!) ,but at least we won't live with the potential for 8 years of doubt and contraversy over their term(s) in office. I really hate that about this particular cycle. It's made this clown that much harder to bear. Ignorance is nothing more than an advocacy and education challenge. That's what democracy is for! Crime puts layers on top of that we simply don't need. This crap is hard enough.

Call me whatever, but you gotta admit it would be better knowing we actually asked for this shit, wouldn't it?

And as our Vice Resident says, "I feel better having said it!". Call this post, Sunday Morning Thearapy.

Next up: Election Reform. That's the big nut almost nobody in office right now wants to crack. We the people really should start just hammering on this one. My gut says a very high percentage of the issues discussed here would be sharply reduced if this were to happen. This makes it an issue all of us have in common, does it not?

I've a prototype line of reasoning for the justification for election reform. Anyone interested in hammering on this a bit? I'm gonna focus my future advocacy efforts there for a while. Curious to see where that leads.

Money is speech. I buy this. Not everybody does, but I think it's too big of a bridge to cross right now, so let's go with it.

If we step back to earlier times, before corporations had the involvement they do today, we end up with one citizen, one vote, barring some judgement against them that is not discriminatory. They have to deserve said judgement and said judgment must pass judicial review. Factor dollars out of the mess.

Ok, so with one citizen, one vote, we know where the lines are. Intimidation is not legal, disinformation is legal, but not moral, discrimination is also not legal either.

As far as I can tell, we've established these things as being solid. They are matters of law. Enforcement is an issue, but we've got that no matter what.

Now, bring dollars into the equation, but not corporations yet.

Now we've got some citizens more able to speak than others. It's a given that we will always have an unequal playfield here. Wealthy people can speak with more potency than can ordinary people. This is somewhat checked by numbers however. It is also checked by groups willing to help aggragate the speech of the people. Parties, in other words.

This is where it breaks down for me. Our current two party system is too coarse. Given money is speech, it is clear the people don't have realistic choices. This mess we are in today, is a direct result of that being true.

I'm keeping corporations outta the mess for now, and I think they really should be out of it totally and this is why:

They are not equal to us! They live longer than we do, do not suffer the burdens of living that we do. They can exist in places we cannot --and in multiple places at once! They can be harmed, but do not feel pain or remorse in the way we do.

The idea of corporations as people is also a big reason why we are where we are today. Again, this is gonna be too big of a bridge to cross, so we go with it. What is done is done.

The American thing to do would be to then make sure we have checks and balances in place to deal with this mess, leaving the people in an environment where they can have some say. This limits harm and is just in general.

Where to go from here? That is the biggest question?

We can make public campaigns an option. A huge batch of us don't like that because it's a tax and or they don't want to finance bozos. I'm largely there myself.

That leaves the party system doesn't it?

I've heard some interesting ideas posed, but the one I like the most is proportional representation. If the body of elected representatives were more coarse, majorities would be difficult to achieve, thus forcing solid debate on things and limiting really wild swings (like the one we are currently experiencing) to more moderate movements we all can live with and kick the tires on before we suffer too much and have to over correct.

IMHO, a big part of this story is getting the people (a lot of the people!) to see their own interests in a new light. Rather than buddy up with a party, hoping it will just power through and get some things done, they need to hammer on the core problem, which is election reform.

One consistant theme I'm hearing is that it's all corrupt. Maybe it's just too coarse, but I don't have a solid justification for getting there.

Discuss??

Vote by mail, is probably the most fraud ridden concepty there is.

If someone cant take a couple of hours out of their busy schedule to go down and vote, thats their tough luck.

I agree Nwokie, as long as that person has the choice of which couple hours, and which day those couple of hours are on.

But, when all voters has to find a couple of hours on the same Tuesday (a workday for most) to locate a place they may never have visited before, then it stops being "tough luck" and more badly designed voting.

Most of us pay our bills by mail, correspond by mail, send other important documents by mail - why do you contend that it is "fraud ridden?" Sure, there are a lot of doom-and-gloom scenarios for how vote by mail *could be* abused (I've read Bill Sizemore's articles too), but no evidence that it has happened to any significant degree.

Plus, it's reasonable to assume that some fraud will happen in any large election. The kind of fraud that vote by mail is susceptible to eminates from the individual - voting multiple times, forging signatures, etc. and though clearly wrong and illegal it's not likely to have a major effect on an election.

With touch screen voting, the fraud can be institutional and widespread, and therefore much more damaging.

They can always do like our BIMBO governor here in WA.

Count the dead people's votes over and over and over until you win!

Feel better now Bill? Wow, full caps and everything ...you must have been holding that in for a long time.

You bet! She's not my governor!

If someone thinks voting is important, they can spend a little time confirming their polling place, and they usually have a window from 6 in the morning until 8 in the evening. Its really not asking a lot of someone.

My favorite aspect of VBM is that votes are cast over a period of time, not just one day.

Nwokie, do you really think having polls is better, in terms of overall robustness, or do you really just like having polls?

I'm not sure what you mean by robustness, but haveing people go to polls , if done properly, ensures only eligible voters vote, people voting are concerned enough to take a couple of hours out of their day.