Re: Hand Counting Ballots

[Ralph Shnelvar <ralphs@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Evan:

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 21:19:36 -0700 (MST), you wrote:

>
>What I'm really suggesting is hand-counting TEMPORARILY while all the
>experts come to agreement on how an honest verifiable system should
>work, and then perfect it.

It's why I brought up the Census.  Complex systems _always_ have to fall
back onto simpler systems because complex system - by the nature of complex
systems - always fail.

Whether it be a space ship like Columbia in which billions of dollars are
spent with the best engineers to prevent failure, or the power grid on the
Eastern seaboard this summer, or voting systems, complex systems fail.

The simplest and most reliable system for counting votes is a bunch of
people looking and tallying ballots.

>
>And, Ralph, it doesn't bother me much to be called a leftist, but I'm
>not to first to believe that the real polarity is top to bottom.

Geez, you're right twice in one month!  Impressive!

>The
>few on top don't really care much about ideology, but keep those lower
>down arguing over it -and the crumbs they leave. Indeed the "left" and
>"right" meet around the back: for example my fundamentalist Christian
>landlords (who are VERY good small-c christians too, who rent to us
>for half-price and treat us lovingly) agree totally with us that the
>war in Iraq is wrong, and that Chinese sweat and slave shops are the
>devil.
>
>So my model of ideology is a cone: those on top converge in beliefs,
>those on the bottom APPEAR from 1 viewpoint to be L and R, but
>actually are all connected.
>
>Even "rightists" are "left" out when the top dogs tear up and
>divide the world!

I disagree with you on only one point: sweat shops.  I agree with you on
slave shops.  But we can take that discussion off line.

The point, though, is that if those of us on the bottom (basically, everyone
at our last meeting) have a prayer of changing things so that we're not
fighting over scraps, then we've got to make sure that the elections
represent how we vote.

Once the elections are fair and are also perceived to be fair then you and I
and everyone else can argue about what we should or should not be voting
for.

Ralph

>
>----------------------------------------------
>Evan Ravitz     303 440 6838     evan@xxxxxxxx
>Vote for the National Initiative! www.vote.org
>Photo Adventures:          www.vote.org/photos
>
>Kucinich: the ONLY candidate to vote against the
>"Patriot" Act and the Iraq war!  www.kucinich.us
>------------------------------------------------
>
>
>On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, Ralph Shnelvar wrote:
>
>> Dear Kell:
>>
>> On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 19:23:13 -0800 (PST), you wrote:
>>
>> >Thanks Ralph and Evan for mentioning hand counting and Paul for his [somewhat petulant] responses.  It would be helpful to get facts, though.
>>
>> When I first heard Evan talk about hand counting ballots I must admit that I
>> thought he was a crank.
>>
>> But I gave it some thought and I continue to give it thought and Evan is
>> absolutely correct.
>>
>>
>>
>> Every ten years this country goes through the ritual and constitutional
>> necessity of conducting a census.  We could, of course, do things
>> statistically but the requirement of actually going out and counting each
>> person one-by-one serves to establishes a baseline from which other valid
>> statistical abstracts can be obtained.
>>
>> In an election we have to have a good baseline.  The best baseline is a hand
>> count of the entire population of ballots.  As a matter of democracy we
>> should have the best reasonable baseline and not merely a good baseline.  A
>> hand count - even if it is wrong by 1% - is still a far better baseline than
>> the unknowable and easily manipulatable count produced electronically.
>>
>> I - as a recent amateur poll watcher - can understand and follow a hand
>> count.  I can't follow the count produced by a scanner as it processes two
>> sides of a ballot (one of which I can't see) at a rate of one-per-second.
>>
>> As a Libertarian, I hate government waste.  I hate spending public money on
>> just about anything.
>>
>> But of all the things that government should spend money on, verifiable,
>> honest, and easily monitored elections is way up at the top of my list.
>>
>>
>> Evan, there are times when even a Leftist can be right.
>>
>> Sorry, just had to say that.  :-)
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>>
>> >
>> >kell
>>