RE: CFVI Supports Trustworthy Elections Resolution

["alkolwicz" <alkolwicz@xxxxxxxxx>]

Ralph,

I too have attended numerous gatherings since the 2000 election, and I find
there to be, sadly, a fairly large number of people who, for whatever their
reason, say that they do not believe the results of the 2000 Presidential
Election.  The popular press continues to recite this mantra.  

These people seem to be angry for a variety of reasons -- disappointment,
lack of understanding of our Electoral College system, political motives,
and perhaps the absence of proof that their concerns are ill-founded.

I totally agree with you that this is not due to people's understanding of
"how elections can be rigged".  I also agree with you that people have a
deep faith in clean government.  The idea of intentional fraud by government
officials is repugnant to our people.

Ambiguous election laws and procedures, vote marking methods that result in
ambiguous votes, and the absence of verifiable votes and verifiable counts
are where the real problems originate.  

Coupling unambiguous regulations and votes with verifiable votes and counts
is a step toward quieting any distrust.  Of course this is insufficient.  We
also need to have secure, transparent and reliable processes and true
independent oversight.

When I say, "The people will not tolerate further loss of confidence caused
by uncertain election outcomes", I am referring to their intolerance of
uncertainty.

Until the technical aspects are resolved, the door is open to demagogues who
can use the uncertainty to their own ends.  Think, of the global impact
should the 2004 Presidential Election not be decided until April 2005.

What is needed is a fully funded professional effort to design a trustworthy
voting system - starting with requirements and including metrics and
testing.  It is too complex a task for the average legislator and too
complex a task for the average election official.


Al



CAMBER
Citizens for Accurate Mail Ballot Election Results
2867 Tincup Circle
Boulder, CO 80305
303-494-1540
AlKolwicz@xxxxxxxxx
www.users.qwest.net/~alkolwicz 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ralph Shnelvar [mailto:ralphs@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 9:41 AM
To: AlKolwicz@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'Robert Mcgrath'; cmehesy@xxxxxxxxxxx; davide475@xxxxxxxx;
david.ellington@xxxxxxxxxxx; donna@xxxxxxxxxxxx; jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx;
mlambie@xxxxxxxxx; mlambie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; texico86@xxxxxxx;
peter.raich@xxxxxxxx; TresCeeA@xxxxxxx; michelle.mulder@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
tahommel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; CAMBER; cvv-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
PKlammer@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: CFVI Supports Trustworthy Elections Resolution 

Dear Al and all:

On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 08:53:19 -0600, you wrote:

>Bob,

[snip]

>The people will not
>tolerate further loss of confidence caused by uncertain election outcomes.

Sure they will.  The "people" tolerate a lot because they don't understand
how easily elections can be rigged.

As I go to cocktail parties and talk about these issues, people's eyes glaze
over.  They simply do not believe that the election system is anything but
honest and that computers will make them more honest.  I'm talking about
people who are reasonably intelligent: doctors, dentists, accountants.

As of yet, this coalition has done a good job of raising the alarm - and
alarms should be raised - but a miserable job of getting anyone to actually
hear the alarms.


I am in complete agreement with Evan: At this time with the laws as they are
currently written, the only feasible way of guaranteeing correct election
results is by hand-counted (and even, maybe, hand-marked) ballots.

The question is: How does this coalition get the vocal support of the vast
majority of voters for this radical Luddite (but necessary) solution?


[snip]

Ralph Shnelvar