Hemp ballots! If it's good enough for the Declaration of Independence...

[Peace Patriot]

...it's good enough for our votes!

I've heard two reasonable objections to paper ballots, that I've found myself somewhat tongue-tied about answering, to wit...

1. 80% of the world's forests are gone; we MUST stop using trees for building and for paper; this is NOT a time to be encouraging more paper use.

2. We (who propose a return to paper ballots) are just being Luddites; there is nothing inherently wrong with electronic voting; it seemed to work fine in Venezuela; like so many other things, it's not inherently bad--the problem is who owns and controls it.

Well, the first one is reasonable. I'm not sure about the second. We're talking some 120 million pieces of paper just for a presidential election. Should we be encouraging that? Why not use hemp!

Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence on hemp paper. Many of the Founders grew hemp, and it had many, many uses--including common use as paper, cloth, and ships' rope (the best!).

As a matter of fact, hemp fiber is so useful and so beneficial in so many ways--it could completely replace most of our uses of trees--that we should get rid of our stupid bans on this product and encourage its production (as was done in prior eras). See

http://www.naihc.org/hemp_information/hemp_facts.html

The trouble with the Luddite objection is that, currently, yes, really bad guys own and control it, and that isn't going to be changed easily. We need a verifiable substitute NOW. And it's comparable to oil, in that sense. The bad guys own it, and are killing people for it--tens of thousands of people--and are looting us with the pricing. We're getting double and triple whammied by oil. That is reason enough to find alternatives NOW (--in addition to pollution and other impacts). We're not going to get the oil fields of Texas and Saudi Arabia and Alaska back into public hands any time soon. Also, the critic I heard this from is a techie. She doesn't seem to get that MOST VOTERS don't understand how their votes are counted, and vote counting has become an esoteric matter which excludes ordinary people. This is very bad, in my view. I'm obviously not a Luddite. I'm online! But I think it's undemocratic to have "experts" being the only ones who understand vote counting.

The paper thing, though--I tend to agree. We are trashing the planet partly for paper! Deforestation is a big contributor to global warming, to the world water crisis and a host of other ills. We really, really have to stop using forests this way--or we are going to perish from the earth.

So, HEMP BALLOTS! Any thoughts?

[jmowreader]

1. You have heard of reforestation, right?

Trees are a crop.

I'd like you to cruise the lumber companies' websites: Georgia-Pacific, Louisiana-Pacific, Potlatch, Canfor...all of those companies own huge greenhouses for raising tree seedlings, they have crews to plant trees in logged areas, they employ botanists and foresters.

The 80-percent thing is a chimera...most of the forestland that's not there anymore is being used as cropland in the Third World. Slash and burn...open up that tract of useless tree-covered land for farming. Perfect solution. :sarcasm:

However, I like the idea of hemp paper. I've used imported hemp paper; it's really good. Domestic hemp paper could be really good too if the oil companies and the lumber companies would just realize "hey! We can make money selling THIS, too!" And gee, guys, if you're worried about people stealing the crop and smoking it, just invite a bunch of pot smokers to a big industrial hemp party. Just let 'em smoke all the industrial hemp they want. Word will get around that you can't get high off industrial hemp.

[Fly by night]

2. If we NEVER want to get paper ballots, let's require hemp paper.

Believe me, I am very much in favor of allowing hemp production in the U.S., as well as respecting the multidimensional medicinal potential and less harmful recreational reality of cannabis in general. But given the irrationality we have applied to this plant for the past 70 years and the hordes of criminal justice folks who would be unemployed if we didn't maintain our demonic attitude toward this gift from our Higher Power, you are really whistling in the wind here.

But feel free to keep whistling. In the meantime, how about using recycled paper for ballots? There's certainly no shortage of that.

[firefox]

3. Paper conservation is just bullshit

A paper trail creates a visisble record. The record is necessary.

The idea that we must save paper is bullshit. Do you hear of a national effort to increase recycling or to cut paper use? Do you see half-sheets of letters in your junk mail with printing on both sides? Is there a call to buy printers for computers that print on both sides in an effort to save the trees? The flyers I get from 4 grocery stores every week could print hundreds of ballots. If paper were scarce they could print micro records that could be held under a magnifying glass and then those four weekly flyers could print thousands of records.

The paper conservation argument is bullshit. A paper trail is basic and should require no elaboration. Those that argue against a little paper are out to corrupt the system hiding behind bullshit of a "great improvement." Removing the paper trail is not a desirable thing because a tangible record is mandatory.

Not only is the argument bullshit, it is goofy.