Re: Comment OPPOSED to Voting System Purchase

[kellen carey <kcarey636@xxxxxxxxx>]

You're right, of course, but read two sentences after the one you quote, where I note that the alternative (opscan) doesn't provide transparency or verifiability.

 

Incidentally, thanks for all your work on this, Evan!  Now even Paul T. supports some degree of handcounting.

 

kell

Evan Daniel Ravitz <evan@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, kellen carey wrote:
>
> > Electronic voting was nixed locally only because the local
> > amateurs publicized the inexcusable irresponsibility of purchasing
> > an electronic voting system.
>
> You're letting them frame the language. We ARE getting "electronic"
> voting: no human will ever count the paper w/o the Sec'y of State
> ordering it (fat chance, remember Florida?)
>
> We are just not getting DRE Direct Recording Electronic voting. The
> main difference is we will waste a few hundred trees worth of paper.
>
> Evan
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Evan Ravitz 303 440 6838 evan@xxxxxxxx
> Please Ratify the National Initiative! http://Vote.org
> Photo Adventures: http://Vote.org/photos
> Bush vs the Pope! http://Vote.org/Bush
> Sins of the father Bush http://Vote.org/silence
> NORAD's
>  website a 9/11 "smoking gun"? http://Vote.org/911
> Volunteer to hand count 2004 election http://Vote.org/hand

---

Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs