Palaver from Persimmon Crossing — Voting Procedures
|January 9, 2007||Posted by Staff under Progress Report, The Progress Report|
Palaver from Persimmon Crossing
with Warren Faulk
Voting is just too blamed complicated. It is almost as if the objective is to discourage voters … and I believe it is working.
I ask you:
- Would anyone be turned away by a completely manual voting process? (I don’t think so.)
Are some people intimidated by the “machines”? ( Many are.)
Is anyone sure that their votes are actually counted correctly? ( Under the present system you cannot check. If ballots had serial numbers on them it would be simple to tabulate rejected ballots, what serial numbers were counted for each candidate, etc.)(This would NOT mean disclosing WHO voted for WHICH candidate or issue. Only the voter would know the serial number of his ballot.)
Should there be a post election audit by precinct with results made public? (I think so.)
Should a voter have to declare a party affiliation to vote in primary elections?(Well some people object so strongly that they have filed a lawsuit. I don’t much like it either but I haven’t tried to put together a neutral ballot.)
Should the system be about making use of the latest technology or should it be about encouraging the largest number of voters possible to participate? (More poll worker manhours is the way to get the job done. Not machines.)
Would it make any difference if the system took a little longer to reflect the will of the people?(Ask a Florida voter.)
I believe in the secret ballot, but it doesn’t need to be so secret that even I can’t check up on my own ballot.
I voted for 10 years in Florida. Because of “machines” I have no clue if any of my votes counted. Remember CHAD?
— Warren Faulk
Share your reactions with your fellow readers at The Progress Report!