Seattle Times Gives Online Voting Exec Space to Hawk Online Voting Without Disclosing He's an Online Voting Exec


The Blethen Cult: not a single fuck was given.
The state is incrementally destroying the integrity of our vote.

Once, we had voting places. People appeared in person, signed a list, obtained a ballot, filled it out, and put it into a scanner. The paper ballot remained secure, with an unbroken chain of accountability from the moment it was handed to the voter to the moment the vote was canvassed and declared final.

Then we started to move to "ballotless" systems, with no physical ballot and no record that the tally was actually what the voter had intended. These were largely abandoned after many independent tests showed how incredibly easy it was to hack them and program a pre-dermined outcome.

Then we did away will polling places and moved to an all-mail election. IF a voter receives a ballot in time to cast it -- this has been a problem -- it gets put into an envelope that clearly marks it as an easy-to-steal ballot, coming from an address whose voting trends can very easily be determined from public records. It is dropped into a mailbox, where an unknown number of anonymous hands can fondle it, "misplace" it or "accidentally" drop it into gears before, hopefully, it is delivered to the ballot processing center several days later. Sure, you can go online and see if anyone has received your physical ballot, but if they haven't, you're kind of screwed.

Now there is more and more talk of eliminating the paper ballots again and moving to an all online system, back to no physically verifiable ballots and without even the marginal security of having to physically sign in. Because login IDs and passwords are always secure? Because databases can never, ever be altered? Because everyone has access to a computer terminal? Because we can just trust the government we are trying to influence with our votes to be honest with our votes?
Isn't this common on every op-ed page? Former NATO Ambassador Kurt Volker wrote a piece this week in the WSJ that put a wonderful spin on Hungary's problems with democracy, and they didn't disclose his undoubtedly huge payoff as a lobbyist for the Orban government.

Maybe it's a right-leaning editorial board thing.
What electric voting needs, is a paper trail. So when you vote, here's a paper receipt that you print out with a bar code or a long serial number that has all your voter registration information on it, that you can take to a library or perhaps the state election web site, scan the bar code to verify who you voted for, when and where (should this be another county that doesnt do all mail ballots).

This would help reduce the chance of any vote tampering, because the way it is now, you really have no way to verify who and what you voted for. With this paper receipt, citizens would have hard evidence of fraud to take to the Elections Board or State AG.
Pardon me while I puke.
Of course, the only real vulnerability with online voting is with the (likely partisan) company implementing it. We pay our taxes online, and you don't hear people worrying about hackers somehow not paying taxes.
Kathleen Drew is a candidate for Secretary of State and is the only progressive woman running for one of our State offices. She is leading in findraising, endorsements and support. Last night for instance, in a head to head vote amoung over 100 democrats in Greg Nickols own legislative district she receaved the solo endorsement with over 60% of the vote. She supports our system of voting which has a paper record and does not expose our democratic process to risk of hacking. Check out this great candidate at KathleenDrew2012 .com

In-person paper balloting has its issues too, namely that many jurisdictions suppress votes by under-staffing polling locations, making people wait hours to cast their votes.