David GLAUDE wrote:
I agree that it is not acceptable for the voter to be given a voting receipt if they don't want one. The voting machine can ask "Do you want an auditable voting receipt?"; if not you just click "No". But I feel strongly that I should have the OPTION of being able to verify that my particular ballot was counted the way I voted, and no one but me should have access to the information identifying me with my vote.
It is not acceptable for the voter to run out of the voting location with a receipt. This mean I have something that proof my vote. I could be forced to show my receipt and if I did not vote as I was asked... face the consequence.
The secrecy of the vote make it impossible to have a hardcopy you take at home!!! Not even a magic number secretly encoded or else.
I see no reason why elections cannot be run with degree of accuracy, reliability, and professionalism as financial transactions. The kinds of errors and general sloppiness that typify election processes would be absoutely intolerable in the financial industry. Computerized financial transactions are reliable because they are traceable and auditable; elections are not. The individual voter has no way to confirm that their vote has been properly counted. The idea that we should fully entrust the security of our electoral process to a few whiz-bang computer experts just seems a little too "Big-Brotherish" to me, and I would like to be able to verify for myself that my vote got counted.
Ken Johnson
---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
