WaPo: Will Your Vote Count in 2006?

[Amaryllis]

Worth reading the entire article.
Note this:
"Election security activists are more mobilized than ever and they are having an impact. They have raised the profile of these issues to the point of national urgency. Their efforts, once considered the actions of fanatical gadflies, are being increasingly cited by respected election bureaucrats."

We are now "election security activists". Not conspiracy theorists. :)

Will Your Vote Count in 2006?

By Steven Hill
Special to washingtonpost.com's Think Tank Town
Tuesday, August 1, 2006; 11:56 AM

Watching Mexico live through a controversial presidential election was like holding up a mirror to our own election difficulties in recent years. As we round the corner and head toward the upcoming November elections -- with control of the Congress up for grabs -- what can Americans expect? Will our votes count? There is both cause for worry, as well as signs that effective voting reform advocacy is paying off.

The root cause of our troubled elections is that, unbelievably, the U.S. provides less security, testing, and oversight of our nation's voting equipment and election administration than it does to slot machines and the gaming industry. Our elections are administered by a hodgepodge of over 3000 counties scattered across the country with minimal national standards or uniformity. Widely differing practices on the testing and certification of voting equipment, the handling of provisional and absentee ballots, protocols for recounts, and training of election officials and poll workers makes for a bewildering terrain.

The three federal laboratories testing voting equipment and software operate with little government oversight. They are called "independent testing authorities," even though two of them have donated tens of thousands of dollars to GOP candidates and the Republican National Committee. The shoddy testing and certification procedures are greased by a revolving door between government regulators and the industry. Former secretaries of state from California, Florida and Georgia, once their state's chief regulator, became paid lobbyists for the corporate vendors after stepping down from public office, as did a former governor of New Hampshire. Several secretaries of state in 2004 served as co-chairs of the George W. Bush re-election campaign for their state; one of these oversaw the election in which he ran -- successfully -- for governor.

<snip>

Yet these legitimate concerns also must be kept in perspective, lest we spiral into a paralyzing paranoia. There are a number of positives. Election security activists are more mobilized than ever and they are having an impact. They have raised the profile of these issues to the point of national urgency. Their efforts, once considered the actions of fanatical gadflies, are being increasingly cited by respected election bureaucrats. Former President Jimmy Carter and Secretary of State James A. Baker III were co-chairs of a 2005 bipartisan commission which warned that "software can be modified maliciously before being installed into individual voting machines. There is no reason to trust insiders in the election industry any more than in other industries."

For the rest:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080100561.html

Steven Hill is director of the political reform program of the New America Foundation and author of "10 Steps to Repair American Democracy" (10steps.net).

[bleever]

1. Q. What's the difference between election security activists and

conspiracy theorists?

A. A few million hours of hard, thankless work.


:)

[Patsy Stone]

2. May I still wear my tin foil hat?

I like it.


Here's to the activists! :yourock:

[Amaryllis]

3. Well...WaPo said we were once considered "fanatical gadflies." That's a

new one on me. They didnt say we no longer wore tin foil hats, so I guess you can continue to wear yours. However, you are not allowed to wear a gadfly hat or gadfly costume.

[Patsy Stone]

4. Shoot!

Now I'm gonna need to rethink Halloween.

Thanks for posting this, Amaryllis.

The names may change, but the game remains the same: fair voting. Who'da thunk we'd need to fight for that in this day and age?

And I offer my unending gratitude to those who are. :patriot:

[bleever]

5. "Gadfly" definition (we're in good company):

From Wiki:

"Gadfly" is a term for people who upset the status quo by posing upsetting or novel questions, or attempt to stimulate innovation by proving an irritant.

The term "gadfly" was used by Plato to describe Socrates' relationship of uncomfortable goad to the Athenian politician scene, which he compared to a slow and dimwitted horse. It was used earlier by the prophet Jeremiah in chapter 46 of his book. The term has been used to describe many politicians and social commentators.

During his defense when on trial for his life, Socrates, according to Plato's writings, pointed out that dissent, like the tiny (relative to the size of a horse) gadfly, was easy to swat, but the cost to society of silencing individuals who were irritating could be very high. "If you kill a man like me, you will injure yourselves more than you will injure me," because his role was that of a gadfly, "to sting people and whip them into a fury, all in the service of truth."

And, I think the tinfoil is no longer required (like a scarlet letter), but a girl can still accessorize any way she wants.

:)

[Amaryllis]

6. Given that definition of gadfly, I proudly claim the label!