RTP-area local music and culture

[Chris Rossi <rossi AT webslingerZ.com>]

Hart Blanton wrote:
> Those following this stream might be interested in today's NYT article 
> on the voter fraud claims:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/12/politics/12theory.html?hp&ex=1100322000&en=bef1453564cd6e4e&ei=5094&partner=homepage 
Well, the article says voter fraud claims are refuted, but it doesn't 
really refute them.  No real hard evidence is brought to bear on the 
claims.  At least not in this article.  Maybe in other sources.  Anyway, 
while I think it is very unlikely that the result of this election is 
going change as a result, what should be done to put the issue to rest 
is the same thing that should be done every election anyway, regardless 
of outcome or level of controversy.  A small but statistically 
significant number of hand recounts in certain precincts.  In this 
instance we can even concentrate on seemingly statistically anomolous 
precincts.  If 5-10% of those precincts are recounted and the returns 
are still the same for those precincts, then folks will have to look 
elsewhere to figure out why exit polls don't match returns.  But we will 
have checked the returns.

The other thing left to do, of course, is simply add up all the returns 
from various precincts and make sure the totals still come out to what 
they were reported as, since one of the claims by voter fraud theorists 
is that the hacking was more likely to have occured in the central 
tabulating computers.  At any rate, that is much easier to do than a 
recount and states could probably get a few thousand computer geeks 
working on those numbers if they just released precinct level returns. 
If it all comes out, then we can put to rest claims of voter fraud once 
and for all.

This all ties in to a larger issue of election reform that needs to 
happen at the national level:

All persons running for public office as well as their supporters have a 
motive for interfering with election results.  Current voting practice 
lacks uniform standards to insure election results are not tampered 
with, and many newer electronic voting systems fail to meet basic common 
sense standards of audibility and accountability.  In order to guarantee 
fair elections, the bedrock of our democracy, the following reforms 
should be implemented as soon as possible:

  1) FBOE certification of voting equipment used.  Equipment must be 
vigorously inspected both by the federal board and be made open to 
inspection by the general public.  Equipment will have to meet certain 
basic guidelines:
    a) Paper audit trail
    b) Completely open hardware and software
       (to promote public scrutiny)
    c) Other standards, such as handicap accessibility, etc... to be 
determined by FBOE.

  2) Nationwide uniform electronic format for precinct level returns 
with public electronic access to those records.  (To allow public 
scrutiny and independent statistical analysis.)

  3) Mandatory, randomly selected, post election electronic audits of a 
statistically significant number of precinct/county/state level election 
results.

  4) Mandatory, randomly selected, post election hand recounts of a 
smaller but still statistically significant number of precincts.

rossi