Navigation
Topics
Log In
Log Out
:
Special Search
New Today
New This Week
Advanced Search
Tree View
Your Account
Edit Profile
Register
Forgot Password
Tools
Help/Instructions
Policies
CLICK STATE TO SEE:
"WATCH LIST"
Marked with: 
"OPEN & HONEST"
Marked with: 
...
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Helen Moore
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Helen
Post Number: 1
Registered: 3-2011
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 - 1:20 am: | 
|
I have read through so much that is posted here. At this point I don't even what to do. If I should even vote anymore. How do we fix this? I want to know that when I vote my vote is counted. What do I need to tell my representatives? Is there a system that can be put in place that would allow more confidence? What solutions do you suggest to solve this problem? |
Dale McClain
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Dale
Post Number: 325
Registered: 10-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 - 11:37 am: |
|
Hi Helen , Regarding QUOTE:
“At this point I don't even (know) what to do.”
You posted 4 important questions and here on BBV.
I am sure you will get some good answers.
But before I can personally give you an accurate answer to any one of the questions I will need to know which one you prefer to be answered first.
I would love to address your second question if you wish because I am working up a good poison pen letter my self to send to “my representatives”…
here in Tennessee.
===============
The Florida Legislature is in the news:
Howard Troxler , a columnist writing in the St. Petersburg Times has written an article that should make your blood boil.
Various ways and means to implement the same
Situation in every state seems very doable.
============
The Title of his fine article is:
Florida Legislature proves once and for all that it is for sale.
================
Keep us posted please.
Dale |
Helen Moore
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Helen
Post Number: 2
Registered: 3-2011
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, March 30, 2011 - 8:54 pm: |
|
I don't care what you answer first. That is up you.
I just cleared my browser of cookies. I do this now and again.
Why is it that a site like BBV, that says it is trying to help our democracy, trying to track me with cookies? I really don't appreciate this and would ask for you to stop this. |
Helen Moore
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Helen
Post Number: 3
Registered: 3-2011
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, March 30, 2011 - 9:00 pm: |
|
You should at least tell your visitors that you are planning on placing cookies on their browser so that they can decide whether or not to stay and participate.
I think that it is totally unacceptable and dishonest to place cookies on someone's computer without their permission.
I know this goes on every day, but that doesn't make it right and it says a whole lot about the person or company that does it. It tells me that they are not to be trusted. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 3716
Registered: 4-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 6:03 am: |
|
There are cookies and then there are cookies. Some cookies are benign and harmless, and even serve a valuable purpose.
Without a cookie, you would have to re-enter your Username and Password on every page you visit and post to. I'll take a website cookie if it means I don't need to deal with that.
Please see this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_cookie
==========================================
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan
"Public sentiment is everything. With it, nothing can fail. Without it, nothing can succeed". --Abraham Lincoln
|
Dale McClain
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Dale
Post Number: 328
Registered: 10-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 7:19 am: |
|
Hi Helen, QUOTE: “I don't care what you answer first. That is up (to) you.”
Well you have asked another question and you have received a tremendously good reply from a top poster on BBV. (Kurt)
==================
It is possible that I myself might be guilty of Googling Helen Moore. When I found out she was the first woman chief ambassador diplomat in US History I concluded that it was not you ---am I correct?
I do hope you will stay and participate in this dialog.
I feel that anything posted here or anywhere for that matter on the internet should be considered to be available to the entire (global) public domain to read.
Not many seem interested enough to post but they do lurk.
Dale |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 11325
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 8:34 am: |
|
Hi Helen,
The cookies are benign and part of the forum software, and from what I understand they simply recognize you so you don't have to sign in with every new post. I have cookies disabled on my browser, so I do sign in on every post I do, but that is kind of a pain in the neck. Most forum software uses cookies to make it easier on the user. If you prefer not to have cookies, just disable them on your browser.
Now, as to being told what to do:
The current lead blog on this site suggests using home rule to create town ordinances to prohibit concealment of key election processes from the public.
There are always various approaches, but they start with defining the core problem. Through field work and research during the last 10 years, I have come to believe the core problem is concealment of key election processes from the public, specifically concealment of any of the following from the public:
- Who can vote
- Who did vote
- Chain of custody
- The original count of the vote and any changes made thereafter.
Options for change include media coverage, legislative change, and the courts. Each has pros and cons, and within those broad areas one still has to decide how much of the four areas, or which, they wish to tackle. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 11326
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 10:49 am: |
|
I'd like to carve out some conceptual territory here. A recurring theme at Black Box Voting is the desire to know "what to do about it!"
For at least a decade, politicians have been deciding "what to do about it" with almost no discussion of the core principles about what makes a democratic system actually BE a democratic system. We need to retain our willingness to think, examine, evaluate how mechanisms used in today's elections fits into a broader contextual framework.
In the book Avoiding Politics: How Americans produce apathy in everyday life by Nina Eliasoph, the author illustrates the disconnect between our willingness to examine core principles vs. shunning such thinking in favor of doing "tasks" -- not that doing tasks is bad, but what she points out is that in our current volunteer culture, it is often considered inappropriate to have meaningful examination of the underlying issues.
When converting discussion of principle to short, task-oriented directives, Eliasoph contends that we tend to lose "respect for dicussion itself, willingness to debate about troubling issues that might not be resolved immediately; willingness to risk discouragement."
quote:"Theorists since Aristotle have argued that regular political conversation is a defining feature of a healthy democracy; that in a democracy, the substance of political life is public discussion; that the ways we can talk about our concerns go far in shaping them; that the ability to discuss allows citizens to generate power together."
As Eliasoph says, "Without this power to determine what sorts of questions are worth discussing in public, citizens are deprived of an important power, the power to define what is worthy of public debate, what is important, what is good and right, what is changeable and what is just natural...
"The point is not that once we figure out our real interests and act on them, then we can stop talking and go home. The point is that being able to talk can be a good in itself, and a source of power."
She contends that politics, and democracy itself happens between people; that we do not simply carry concepts around inside us like ships in a bottle.
The point I am making is this: It's fine to discuss small can-do tasks, but not at the expense of examining larger principles and policy debates for which a quick fix may not immediately be provided.
Volunteer groups studied by Eliasoph often felt that admitting there were larger issues might discourage their members; it therefore became inappropriate to spend time discussing the thornier issues underlying the need for doing the tasks at all. Eliasoph characterizes this as an evaporation of the political discourse which is crucial to a democracy.
"Another way to keep discouraging issues at bay was to hone in on a very concrete solution to an overwhelmingly large problem," she writes.
I mention the excellent work produced by Eliasoph because I think it clarifies some of the tensions we see between advocates for voting rights. Some want to focus on short-term piecemeal tasks, without discussion of the broader issues of what the components of elections must be to retain liberty itself; others are willing to look at broader structural issues even if there is not an instant fix immediately available. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 11327
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 10:55 am: |
|
The discussion of what to discuss -- small piecemeal tasks vs. overarching principles which may feel discouraging -- is not just an academic exercise, at least not for me.
I was out until 2:30 last night, working with two wonderful citizens as they both wrestled with immediate tasks (merging databases to analyze the "who can vote" and "who did vote" aspects of a particular public election). While we worked with the databases, we discussed deeper structural issues.
"I have a headache now," said Alan. "Don't worry. I have had this headache before when I have realized the depth of this issue and what we have lost."
"We just have to fix it," said Tom. I didn't take this lightly; Tom grasped the difficulty of the underlying problems. "I am an engineer, and part of my job involves getting to the core problem," he said. What Tom meant was, We have to recognize and tackle the core problems.
When people like Alan and Tom have this kind of courage (to look at what is rather than what we wish it is) it does feel overwhelming.
One of the Black Box Voting board members, Natalie, described this as like the feeling when you have to clean a room that's just piled with stuff, junk, hoarded, a mess. You pick a corner and just go at it.
As Tom said, "We just have to fix it."
I can see that Dale has picked a corner of the room and is tackling it a piece at a time. He is writing letters to his representatives.
Other citizens frequently mentioned here, and who sometimes post here, are tackling it as well. Marilyn Marks has done extraordinary work in Colorado to tackle the public right to see and authenticate ballots. When told she could not in Aspen Colorado, she spurred a ballot examination in El Paso County Colorado, and when told it could not be done in Saguache County, she helped trigger articles in the Denver Post, and a request by the Denver Post to examine the ballots!
Al Kolwicz, another extraordinary Colorado voting rights advocate, was often criticized and some election officials attempted to marginalize his work. Yet just yesterday, the Denver Post printed an editorial by Kolwicz.
In Chicago, Lora Chamberlain is involved in an attempt to authenticate "who did vote" by absentee in the recent Chicago mayoral election. They have refused to let her see the necessary records (so far). But she is continuing this effort, and attended my recent presentation at a Tea Party event, sharing valuable information with participants.
John Washburn, another person who just goes in there and tackles it, was awarded the James Madison Award in Freedom of Information for his refusal to back down when the governor of Texas was trying to shred his e-mails before people could see them. He, too, attended the event and shared information with others.
It is the combination of real willingness to examine issues that may not be responsive to a quick magic wand with action on small immediate tasks that separates the grownups from the kids in this fight to restore our ability to exercise our right to self-government. |
Helen Moore
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Helen
Post Number: 4
Registered: 3-2011
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 1, 2011 - 9:12 pm: |
|
I just read everything up above.
I do think that we as a society are being discouraged about talking about politics and or religion. It has become divisive, and a taboo that I don't abide by. Politics and religion are my two favorite subjects. So I get that. We do need to at least be talking about politics in the public forum.
But in terms of fixing our voting system. I think the discourse above makes it seem like this is complicated. I think that in this day in time, we have the technology necessary to count votes properly. We know how to do it. It isn't rocket science. Am I wrong here? How do we take our ability to count votes, (and It could be that it is paper ballots or whatever) and make it so? It isn't that we are unable to count votes accurately. Mark me wrong, but I think that we have the technology to do that. How do we bridge the disconnect between are ability to do this and the will to make it happen? What do we need to do to go beyond the realization that there is a problem here, to building a consensus as to how we solve it and then implementing a system that is worthy of our democracy? How do we do that?
That is the question that I have for you. And I believe the key to everything. |
Dale McClain
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Dale
Post Number: 330
Registered: 10-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 2, 2011 - 5:38 am: |
|
Hi Helen, Roll up your sleeves, adjust the telescopic sight on your weapon, (please do not use a scatter gun ) take careful aim on one target, ( technology is fair game), slowly but firmly pull the trigger when the crosshairs intersect on your target.
You are in the right place.
Dale |
Dale McClain
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Dale
Post Number: 331
Registered: 10-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 2, 2011 - 2:26 pm: |
|
Please do not be discouraged!
Notice my mention of:
( technology is fair game),
====================
By your narrowing your interest to Politics
is a good beginning but you are very wrong to think counting votes is not complicated.
The dis connect problem comes when we compare Rocket science with voters rights.
We here on BBV have thought the Black Box was bad but now I feel the E-Poll book is even worse.
The E-Poll book is gaining popularity because it is one of the greatest “CASH COWS” of all times.
It can be manufactured anywhere in the World with all sorts of data imbedded.
Then it can be hooked up to your local election polling station daisy chain and do its thing.
The problem as I see it is there is no way we mortal
Voters can defend ourselves against the sales pitch of
E-Poll companies claiming 40 years of customer satisfaction and ½ billion dollar per year in revenue.
These E-Poll books use Smart cards containing information they have gleaned from 40 years of involvement in everything from Corporations to current “first responder” information regarding who is authorized to be at the scene of an accident.
It can be safely be assumed that the high levels of security that they are shooting for is aimed at we voters not the insiders and their vendors.
Information from Educational and Financial Institutions from around the world including health and medical records --Telecommunications and of course it goes without saying Social security numbers--Passport information as well as boarding pass requirements is all on Smart Cards.
If you have been watching how counterfeit drivers license, credit cards, fake ID’s --college diploma’s .
Preachers license and even medical staff with forged credentials have fared over the years you might understand what happened in New York City last
September.:
It was widely reported that an astonishing list of problems occurred.--Broken Machines, Missing Machines, Missing Ballots. So called glitches that no poll worker could handle--
All this after NY had spent 160 million dollars on new equipment!
Considering that thousands may have been unable to cast Ballots I feel neither Real ID nor E-Poll Books
are the answers we are searching for.
Dale
. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 11329
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 4, 2011 - 12:53 pm: |
|
Helen, you wrote:
quote:we have the technology necessary to count votes properly.
Define "Properly."
My contention is that if the counting is concealed from the public, so that the public cannot authenticate the original count, it is improper.
It sounds like you contend that it is "proper" if it is accurate, but if the public can never authenticate the accuracy, this "accuracy" exists only in your mind, as trust or confidence of some insider.
You write:
quote:It isn't that we are unable to count votes accurately. Mark me wrong, but I think that we have the technology to do that.
The argument isn't over technology, it is over public right to see.
The system ceases to be democratic if the public must give up its right to know (a fundamental, core human right that underlies and supports the entire structure of human rights); it cannot meet the test of democracy if it forces us to give up our right to self-government, a cornerstone to our Constitution and a definer for all who are a free people.
You ask what we must do -- first, we need to keep in mind what defines a democratic system. Any technology proposed must meet those tests first.
First, the public must be able to see and authenticate.
You're right about one thing. It's not complicated. The public just needs to be able to see and authenticate who can vote, who did vote, chain of custody and the count. |
Charles Christopher
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ilikeinfo
Post Number: 265
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 4, 2011 - 6:15 pm: |
|
The "technology" to properly count has existed for as long as humans have engauged in commerce, and thus had counting systems to reconcile that commerce. Probably the last 100,000+ years.
I don't see any difference with voting, except intentionally misscounting goats might have gotten one a heavy branch upside the head .... Thus both parties had lots of incentive to get counts correct.
There is no need for technology seducation, the human brain works fine IFF allowed to. I think 100,000+ years can't be wrong ...
Problem definition *FIRST*, solution formulation *SECOND*.
The frog just needs to *SEE* the thermometer
Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth
|
Helen Moore
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Helen
Post Number: 5
Registered: 3-2011
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 4, 2011 - 11:30 pm: |
|
There is no such thing as a voting system that doesn't use technology. All voting systems use technology. And I do believe in transparency and accuracy, the ability to do a recount that isn't just a regurgitation of bad information. "garbage in garbage out" The written word is one of the biggest technological advances of our species. So in my mind, any voting system whether it is electronic or a seemingly simple paper ballot, it is a form of technology. Maybe we need to start concentrating on some kind of litmus test for these systems instead of obsessing on specific system or technology or lack there of.
It seems to me that the only way to fix this is thru legislation. And I don't see how legislation can be successful if determines a specific technology. I think that it needs to be a list of qualifications. Must be: transparent, Must be accurate, Must be verifiable Must be secure, etc. etc. such and such.
Maybe like a voters bill of rights. Or like the type of document you would present to a construction company that was building something for you. You set the parameters, expectations and qualifications and they have to build or submit a proposal accordingly. If it can be shown that if fails any of these qualifications, it is illegal for it to be used. That simple.
So how about we start making that list. |
Helen Moore
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Helen
Post Number: 6
Registered: 3-2011
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 4, 2011 - 11:31 pm: |
|
Lets make a list that defines properly. |
Helen Moore
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Helen
Post Number: 7
Registered: 3-2011
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, April 5, 2011 - 12:09 am: |
|
I'll start... and maybe we can define what these mean. And then push for legislation.
Free,
Fair,
Accurate,
Transparent,
Anonymous,
Voter Verifiable,
Open,
Accessible,
Audited,
Public, |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 11333
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, April 5, 2011 - 8:02 am: |
|
Helen, you are making it more vague and complicated, not less.
An example of a location where all four election components can been seen and authenticated by any member of the public is Lyndeborough New Hampshire.
Who can vote: The voter list is available to anyone for $25.
Who did vote: The list of who voted is posted publicly for anyone to see and photograph
Chain of custody: The ballots are placed in a box in full public view during the entire election. The ballots are removed from the box in public view and counted publicly, on the spot. Absentee voting is limited to need only, and absentee votes are delivered to the polling place by the post office, where they are counted in public.
The count: Counting is done by hand in public, anyone can watch, including videotaping the actual faces of the ballots as they are counted.
The system in Lyndeborough is not a theory or a pipe dream. The above system was effectively coded into municipal law by citizens passing a warrant; note that the warrant did not specify anything about whether technology would be used or not, it simply prohibited concealment of any of the essential election processes.
For locations with optical scan machines, another way is to open the ballot box in public, and on request, deal the ballots out like a deck of cards for the public to video each ballot face. This compares input to output while keeping chain of custody intact.
In Illinois a citizens group recently requested the county auditor to allow them to videotape the ballots, dealing them out like a deck of cards when polls close. I have not heard how that turned out, but whether or not that worked, they were on the right track. One local turn-down should not discourage anyone who knows that it takes persistence to get real change.
"Technology"
Arguing with statements like "technology will always be with us" erects a straw man which diverts focus from rights to mechanics.
Whatever allows the public to exercise their right to see and authenticate the four steps will do, whether or not it uses technology. |
Helen Moore
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Helen
Post Number: 8
Registered: 3-2011
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, April 6, 2011 - 12:12 am: |
|
Beverly,
My argument is rights based, if you look back at my previous post you will see where I mentioned a "voters bill of rights" What I was trying to say in terms of technology is simply that we should concentrate on whether or not any voting system that is put forward meets certain criteria and not concentrate on what technology it uses. I am very against most of the electronic voting systems that we have now, but I am also against some of the old technology that we have had in the past. There is no such thing as a voting system that doesn't use some kind of technology, it could be technology as simple as the written word and ballot boxes or anything from that forward. My argument is that we should concentrate on rights and let that guide our decision in terms of process.
I'm trying to find out where I said "technology will always be with us" and I'm not seeing it.
My argument is simply that we have always used some form of technology to count votes. Technology is the enemy and isn't the enemy. What is important is the process, it is how the system is designed and if it provides transparency, if it provides a paper trail etc. etc. etc.
I have come to the conclusion that the only way that we are going to fix this is if we start developing this language and the criteria that we expect and demand from these systems. And then push for legislation.
I think that is pretty simple and not vague at all.
Maybe an independent non-profit organization should be formed that would put it's seal of approval on systems that meet these requirements until laws can be passed. Maybe it is something like Leed certification is to green building.
Our constitution and bill of rights were written way before much of the technology that we have now and yet it still seems to be relevant in terms of basic privacy etc. So maybe it is this kind of document that needs to be formed to cover the principles and characteristics that we expect and demand from any voting system that we are subjected to. Hopefully make it illegal if it doesn't meet this criteria.
This isn't vague, it is very simple. Could be a set of questions like... is it transparent?, does it preserve the chain of custody?, can it be audited, and so on?
This is not complicated or vague. If it meets the list of requirements it is legal, and if it doesn't it is not. |
Dale McClain
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Dale
Post Number: 336
Registered: 10-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, April 6, 2011 - 10:45 am: |
|
Before Bev answers your post , Please feel you have accomplished one mission in the realm of “What To Do.”
You have activated me to compose a letter to my representative.
It will be a letter from a desperate man cornered much like a rat in a corner that will fight like hell.
Hopefully it will contain all the hopes and fears you have so elegantly described and even more. ( no pun intended).
To add to my urgency - the Government might shut down Friday and I want my congressman to read my letter while he is on vacation.
“And then push for legislation.”
It will go something like this:
=================================
Dear Congressman Phil Roe,
You are my congressman from Precinct 11, Sullivan County, Tennessee.
My attention to secret ballot information in the TIMES NEWS pointed to your input on the subject.
Before I begin I must tell you no one shares my
Opinions -- I am strictly a loner.
The reason I am telling you this is because I am afraid you might think I am a Left wing nut case as best described by Glen Beck in his ongoing open warfare against all that is evil in the world today.
He likes to rehash Labor wars from as far back as 1873 and its angry workers. He brands birds of a feather found today is such far off places as , Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, Senegal, Japan, Burma, Hong Cong, Belgium, Morocco, Palestine Barbados, South Africa and then quote Richard Trumka on Union Solidarity.
For your information here in Sullivan county I doubt if you can find one union carpenter, electrical worker, brick layer, Railroad man, or anyone who is out to destroy the world or even less “gives a damn” about civil wars elsewhere in the world.
While it is true that leaders do find strange bed fellow that is why I am writing to you.
I hope your stance on the secret ballot is not based on Chamber of commerce group think to bust unions.
But there again -- I could care less.
I am concerned that Election Law in the United States Is changing at a pace that is dangerous to democracy as we know it.
How you got in office should concern you -- if
wide spread distrust of the system that put you there is questioned.
And it is questioned because in the zeal to streamline voting and dissolve mountains of redundant paper work and documents -- our government is playing right into the hands of vendors that use techniques that completely conceal and then burn all evidence
of any wrong doing in the election process.
I use the word “BURN “ because I feel that in the case of a marked ballot being photo copied , put into digital format , then reduced to microfilm is more effective than actual consummation by fire.
Historically the Department of Justice has required original documents to prove or disprove evidence.
Has this all changed?
Under the broad heading of “The Federal Election Commission Clearing house” I realize the work that has been done and the complicated new vocabulary that is mystical to we voters .
Your position should be on the fence .
I know you are no Glen Beck.
Please use your influence to restore our faith in Democracy by allowing the voters to see a little of what is going on in the Election System.
Dale McClain. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 3720
Registered: 4-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, April 6, 2011 - 10:57 am: |
|
Helen,
Some PARTS of this are complicated, not technologically, but legally. Two key questions keep repeating: 1) What shall be done?; 2) Who shall decide what shall be done?
Example issues that all have in common that the 2 above questions apply:
1) Who SPECIFICALLY shall be entitled to vote? (Felons? Age? Citizens? Absence from the polls?)
2) How do they become registered? Do they even need to?
3) How shall ballots marked unusually (not to the legal specifications) be counted?
4) Who shall be included and/or excluded from observation if and when demand to observe a phase outstrips capacity?
5) What happens if polling officials screw up or don't even show up?
6) What constitutes enough evidence of identity for those who the law says must prove or at least provide evidence of identity?
7) What parts of the voting experience are public, and what parts private?
There are MANY MANY more examples of issues, but for these 7 issues, and all the others, we must decide what shall be done, and who shall decide what shall be done.
The simple easy answer (make a nationwide standard) is almost always the wrong answer. Elections are first and foremost local and secondarily state functions in this country, even when the names on the ballot are running for President and Vice President.
Just so we're clear on how unusual that is, I haven't YET found even one other country that runs elections for its head of state withouit a national elections office of some kind. (And no, the FEC and EAC don't count - their roles are too limited.)
==========================================
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan
"Public sentiment is everything. With it, nothing can fail. Without it, nothing can succeed". --Abraham Lincoln
|
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 11338
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, April 6, 2011 - 12:45 pm: |
|
Helen,
Just to clarify, it is illegal to form a not-for-profit 501c(3) for the purpose of enacting legislation.
What you are describing is formation of a lobbying entity. To do this a Political Action Committee can be created, or some aspects can be done through a 501c(4) entity.
Black Box Voting is a nonpartisan nonprofit public education 501c(3) nonprofit.
That means it is entirely within the scope of our organization to develop public education materials and to do thoughtful public education-related discourse, but would not be appropriate for our organization to focus on passing specific legislation. A 501c(3) is permitted to spend about 20 percent of its efforts on lobbying for issue-oriented legislative action, and can spend NO time on advocating for candidates.
I believe the public education area is and has always been the best use of our resources. Occasionally we step in to advocate against specific issue-oriented legislation, like the Washington state nonstop barrage trying to enact legislation to permit Internet voting (conceals all four essential processes from the public).
Kurt is correct that centralizing and federalizing specific election legislation is, as a general rule, contradictory to the U.S. Constitution and to the dispersed powers structured in the founding of America. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 11339
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, April 6, 2011 - 1:15 pm: |
|
I would also note that you can't legislate your way out of corruption. One of the things that makes Black Box Voting unique is the amount of time we spend in the field doing actual front-lines observation and investigation.
In too many cases, the laws are already on the books to address problems we are finding, but the laws are not followed and violation of the laws is rarely consequated. In some cases there is no process on the books to consequate violation of the law.
An example of this is New Hampshire, where the public Right to Know law is very clearly spelled out, but the only redress available is to sue, and even if you prevail in a right to know lawsuit (which can cost $40,000 or more), under the state of New Hampshire laws, you can't necessarily recoup your legal fees. Thus, a record that should cost 25 cents could cost, in practical terms, $40,000 or more. This effectively removes public access to Right to Know laws; not always, but any time a government official feels like violating this right. It is, quite simply, a betrayal.
This lack of responsiveness of the political elite to the rights and needs of the public is what has produced the populist movements on both the right and the left (Tea Party and Progressive movement built by Howard Dean).
quote:"To a growing group of populists on the right and the left, there is a sense that the American Dream has been perverted, if not lost. Those who cheat are the ones who win. Those who steal are the ones who profit. The corporations that fail on every imaginable level are the ones who attain unimaginable earnings...
"Today a solid majority of the American people have come to believe that their government in Washington is neither responsive to, nor interested in their concerns. Rather, they view government as being solely responsive to organized special interests or to financial elites. There is an all-pervasive sense with the American electorate that government is unresponsive, ineffectual, out-of-touch, wasteful, and frankly, just plain corrupt -- rarely serving the interests of the people who elected it and pay the taxes."-- from Mad as Hell: How the Tea Party Movement is Fundamentally Remaking Our Two-Party System, by Scott Rasmussen et. al.
Our deepest problems with the current electoral system are in one sense simple -- public controls have been removed, and have been transferred to government insiders, a remaking of the structure that defines democracy into something that is not democratic. Some of the public structures remain in some locations, and all of them in a few locations (ie Lyndeborough New Hampshire); but the widespread loss of the true democratic system is real, and must be restored.
As Kurt points out, there are disagreements as to the finer points of implementation of certain parts of key components. But a growing number of Americans, and now even some members of mainstream media, are beginning to ask questions about what the hell happened to our rights.
The Tipping Point Project, a major thrust of Black Box Voting's activities in 2010 and 2011, is part of the public education process necessary to build awareness of the loss of access to public rights in elections, and we are also highlighting successful actions which have restored effective ability to access our rights.
Restoring public access to our rights doesn't mean there will never be election fraud. You can't remove crime by hiring more policemen, but you can bet crime will increase if you remove law enforcement.
In elections, the efforts need to start with restoration of access to our right to see and authenticate each essential step. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 3721
Registered: 4-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, April 6, 2011 - 5:45 pm: |
|
Helen,
A very wise person once observed, "Never ascribe to corruption what can be explained by stupidity."
While that's certainly correct, it can also be a cloak of invisibility for true corruption. The difference between stupidity and corruption is mens rea, or "guilty mind", a criminal intention or knowledge that an act is wrong. It is what separates crimes from torts.
What has happened, though, is allowing "oops" to be an excuse to forgive tortious as well as criminal actions and their sanctions. That can't be acceptable. "Oops" needs to lead to "Bye, see ya" way more often than it does.
Why doesn't it? Because frequently election offices are patronage havens, staffed far too often by offspring of politicians, contributors' friends' wives, an elected official's secret mistress, etc., etc. They used to be heavily "clerical only" offices. They have morphed since 2000 into quasi-legal and IT roles. Yet the patronage and nepotism persist.
Bev and I agree fully on the key prescription - public (real Sam and Sadie Citizen type public) ownership and responsibility for elections. Where we part company is in our perception of our local communities' readiness or even willingness to take that on. Election integrity, in order for it to ever really work, has to change from "Hey, they're doing it all wrong" to "Hey, let me be a part of seeing this gets done right".
Man, if that spirit ever works its way here, I can die knowing we're gonna be okay. Right now, I don't see it where I live. As long as government is "them", and "we" are somebody else, it'll never work.
To wax political for a minute, it's why , to me, the Tea Party movement is the most corrosive movement in American history - it's all about "us" vs. "the gummint". Stupidity or steroids... and crack.
==========================================
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan
"Public sentiment is everything. With it, nothing can fail. Without it, nothing can succeed". --Abraham Lincoln
|
Helen Moore
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Helen
Post Number: 9
Registered: 3-2011
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, April 6, 2011 - 11:57 pm: |
|
I'm stealing this but it is perfect for this discourse. "Don't let perfect be the enemy of good enough".
Your excuses are mere technicalities.
Legislation is only one part of this. Vigilance is another. Those two are not at odds. |
Helen Moore
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Helen
Post Number: 10
Registered: 3-2011
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, April 7, 2011 - 12:02 am: |
|
A lot of why we can't and not much here about how we can.
I believe we can.
I'm ready to get busy. |
Helen Moore
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Helen
Post Number: 11
Registered: 3-2011
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, April 7, 2011 - 12:20 am: |
|
Beverly,
I don't know much (if anything) about non-profits 501 whatever. What I do know is that sounds like an excuse to me and I don't believe anyone is forcing you to be a 501 c anything. I would hope that if your status as a non-profit is keeping you from your goals, that you would make the necessary changes. |
Helen Moore
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Helen
Post Number: 12
Registered: 3-2011
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, April 7, 2011 - 12:29 am: |
|
My only understanding of non-profits is there are two advantages to being one. Tax relief and the ability to get grants.
Are these perks big enough to muzzle BBV? Are you telling me that you are going to limit what you can do to fix this because of money? Because that is what it boils down to. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 3722
Registered: 4-2006
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, April 7, 2011 - 4:34 am: |
|
Helen,
It also boils down to what needs to be done and who's already where on the field. There are already far too many organizations and people out there doing "rah rah" faux advocacy that only results in repeated fundraising letters, websites full of vitriolic rants by lunatic posters who can't act civilly, and emotional appeals that MUST fall on deaf ears. Bev has decided not to go that direction.
The real problem is what I call my "Rule of 80's". 80% of the people don't know or don't care that there's problem. 80% of the people who get that there's a problem have identified the wrong problem. (We're down to 4% if you're doing the math.) 80% of the people who have identified the right problem have decided on the wrong solution. (0.8% now) and 80% of those who have the right solution don't know how to sell it convincingly to policy makers. Bev has gotten past phase 3 and is gaining on phase 4. That puts her among the 0.016% of people who get it.
Her goal is EDUCATION ABOUT THE PROBLEM. Why? 'Cuz 0.016% of anybody needs more help.
Do you think that rants against corporate influence will work for a guy who was ELECTED by corporate influence? I don't think so. Maybe appeals based on "liberty" will work. (Not 'human rights', Bev; that's the appeal for progressives. TP's speak in terms of 'liberty'.)
==========================================
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan
"Public sentiment is everything. With it, nothing can fail. Without it, nothing can succeed". --Abraham Lincoln
|
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 11343
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, April 7, 2011 - 9:16 am: |
|
Kurt, you are dead-on. And some of the organizations shouting rah-rah and begging for money in repeated email and mail solicitations are actually ripping off the work of others. As an example, Common Cause was down in Florida during the Sarasota scandal in 2006, busily sending out fundraising letters but doing very little of value, while the real work was being done by locals with boots on the ground, like Kindra Muntz. All Common Cause did was siphon funds away from those doing the real work.
I subscribe to both right and left-wing lists, and the amount of distraction from real issues on both is amazing, and possibly not accidental.
Eighty percent of the people don't know or care that there are problems with election rights -- I think that's too high. But it is definitely true that most who are aware there are problems have been steered to the wrong problems. They aren't asking the right questions, so they choose courses of action that don't get us any closer to the goal.
When Helen (aka Trent Wittenbach, of course) trots out that "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good) refrain, we know we are being distracted. If you propose a "solution" that addresses the wrong problem, that isn't even "good", it's damaging and siphons energy and resources AWAY from real solutions. That's why education and yes, discussion, are so important. If we're going to invest ourselves in a course of action, let's make sure it is meaningful action, not just rah-rah point-our-guns-at-the-wrong-target action. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 11344
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, April 7, 2011 - 9:38 am: |
|
Now, as to whether to call it liberty or human rights, I think you are missing the mark on that, Kurt. I've recently returned from doing two public education meetups with Tea Party organizations. They definitely are concerned about their RIGHTS and, to my delight, participants at both events immediately embarked on truly meaningful actions to assert their right to see and authenticate crucial components of their election.
Citizens from both the left and the right are actively working on meaningful actions to restore our ability to see and authenticate our own public elections.
Some members of who focus on elections only from political perspectives left try to claim ownership on the terms "voting rights" and "human rights" but my, my, my those individuals get testy when you specify that the right to see and authenticate elections is a voting right and a human right.
There is no doubt that "voting rights" arguments on the left have devolved into specific actions pushing what they are now calling "convenience voting" which actually REMOVES the public right to authenticate who voted.
Some members of the right have bought into the idea that wholesale fraud is occurring through retail "voter fraud" wherein busloads of people are voting twice, and/or non-citizens are voting. I recently assisted some citizens to analyze data to see whether this is happening. To my surprise, we DID find people who voted twice, some in the same county and some voted in contiguous counties across state lines (ie voted in both states). Non-citizen voting is more difficult to quantify, but certainly we know that the motor-voter registrations do capture some people in the registration net who are ineligible.
When I showed a small group of THESE citizens where the wholesale opportunities are -- ie, an insider casting ballots for bona fide registered voters, and manipulation of the count itself -- they got the point instantly.
I think we're getting traction. It is not going to be an instant fix, but I see measurable gains in framing the issue correctly. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 11345
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, April 7, 2011 - 9:42 am: |
|
Trent is again posing here under a false name, in violations of the rule. He also violated the rule about speculating on motivation and I'm sure if we leave this thread open, it won't be long until he starts back with his personal attacks on members of these forums. So I'm locking this one down and banning "Helen", the latest incarnation of Trent Wittenbach. |
|
|
