The Granite State Delivers Rock-Solid Information on Hand Counting

[Wilms]

The Granite State Delivers Rock-Solid Information on Hand Counting

by Nancy Tobi

August 4, 2006

New Hampshire Shares Hand Counting Method for Counting Votes

Now available from the Granite state, rock-solid information on how to conduct hand count elections! This article provides information about hand counting, links to videos and a Counting the Votes Toolkit, and an analysis from a recently released National Academies of Science groundbreaking report on elections.

The Numbers Game

First, some numbers for those who think that their city or town is too large to consider hand count voting. Consider this: in NH we are already counting 2-3-4 times the number of ballots compared to the national average of ballots processed in any given polling place. In other words, it's not the millions of voters in a state that matter, it's the thousands or hundreds in a polling place. And the numbers show the whole nation can do hand counting if they get the civic action component and the procedures solidified.

So let's look at the numbers.

snip/links

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_nancy_to_060804_the_granite_state_de.htm

[kster]

1. Kick-n-Recommended..........nt

[Land Shark]

2. really good work by Nancy Tobi and the others at Dem for NH

[Kip Humphrey]

3. K&R...For all those "fix e-voting" advocates who don't think we can count

[mom cat]

4. Excellent. K&R

[eridani]

5. What makes people who hand count ballots trustworthy?

The Warren County ballots in 2004 were counted in secret by Republicans who used a non-existent terrorist threat as an excuse. Had they hand counted, how would that have improved the situation?

People are no more trustworthy than machines--it is precisely BECAUSE machines are programmed by people that they are a problem.

To get proper checks and balances you need at least equal numbers of Dems and Repubs, and adding 3rd party people would be desirable as well. How do you arrange that in precincts that are tilted heavily one way or another.

[Febble]

6. Exactly

We have pretty transparent elections in the UK, and we use hand-counted paper ballots. But our elections are not transparent because they are hand-counted. They are transparent because they are counted transparently - every part of the process is witnessed by bipartisan scrutineers and open to the public.

It's dead easy to corrupt a hand-counted election, which is why we take such care. And we are still open to corruption (postal votes are a weak link).

[Land Shark]

8. this is why HCPB is poorly named, what they really favor is transparency

and checks and balances like you suggest.

[eomer]

9. Good point: witnessed by bipartisan scrutineers and open to the public

With emphasis on the "open to the public" part.

The Ohio recount had a lot of Dems in the process that were questionable as to whether they were really Dems or were in fact planted Repubs. I don't want to rely on anyone -- I want to see it for myself.

[kster]

7. KICK