More From the Northwestern on Diebold Touch Screens
I think that this is the key line of the story:
Here is the issue. If this is a system for handicap voters (a minority of all voters) then I believe it would be OK to hand count those ballots, if this is the only way we can make sure we are using a system that will assure that the vote is cast and counted.
Human error can be corrected if the documentation (a reliable paper ballot to recount) is avalable. The problem with this machine is that it risks machine error - it loses votes - they cannot be recounted.
If there are going to be problems either way, lets select a system that will allow errors to be checked, not lost.
County clerks say that any system other than the Diebold touch-screen voting machine wouldn't be compatible with county equipment, would require manual vote tallies from each polling place and would thereby open the door to potentially significant human error.
Here is the issue. If this is a system for handicap voters (a minority of all voters) then I believe it would be OK to hand count those ballots, if this is the only way we can make sure we are using a system that will assure that the vote is cast and counted.
Human error can be corrected if the documentation (a reliable paper ballot to recount) is avalable. The problem with this machine is that it risks machine error - it loses votes - they cannot be recounted.
If there are going to be problems either way, lets select a system that will allow errors to be checked, not lost.
Labels: Diebold
posted by Jef Hall at 8:07 AM
2 Comments:
Did you not hear the Deputy County Clerk say the machines would NOT be used exclusively for handicapped people. So your point is not valid. If you did not hear her make that statement, I suggest you watch the replay of the meeting.
I think he just meant that the handicap voter issue has been used to weight the argument on the pro-Diebold side. Not they the machines would be used exclusively for the handicapped.
His point is till quite valid. I beleive he is saying the risk of lost votes is far too important to overlook for the sake of possible benefit to a very few voters. And, that cost and efficiency would be best served by hand-counting the handicapped votes rather than putting the entire system in jeopardy. It seems clear that Mr. Hall has both valdity and logic on his side.
Post a Comment
<< Home