On 11/11/2012 03:39 PM, Michael Oke wrote:
And again I tell you that anything of this nature is being bashed as harmful.
It would disenfranchise certain voters. I personally have no issue with
something of this nature being instituted but that would probably require
federal intervention.
OK, I understand the importance of making the public as comfortable as
possible to get the vote out. That's particularly important for
minorities, so there must be a balanced approach.
Regards,
LelandJ
Michael Oke, II
661-349-6221
Contents of this and all messages are intended for their designated recipient.
On Nov 11, 2012, at 1:33 PM, lelandj <lela...@mail.smvfp.com> wrote:
On 11/11/2012 02:29 PM, Michael Oke wrote:
Voter identification of that sort is being fought tooth and nail by certain
sectors of the current political regimes.
I'm talking about an internal control where a voter would provide proof of
eligibility to vote at the point of registration, and receive a unique ID.
From this point the voter could be tracked through the system, much like UPS
tracks a package from it point of origin to point of delivery. This system
would eliminate the problem of more votes being cast than registered voters on
record, or significantly less votes being cast than registered voters on
record, and provide a back tracking mechanism should anyone try to use a unique
ID more than once.
Regards,
LelandJ
Michael Oke, II
661-349-6221
Contents of this and all messages are intended for their designated recipient.
On Nov 11, 2012, at 11:15 AM, lelandj <lela...@mail.smvfp.com> wrote:
On 11/11/2012 12:25 PM, Pete Theisen wrote:
On 11/11/2012 01:10 PM, lelandj wrote:
http://watchdogwire.com/florida/2012/11/10/massive-voter-fraud-in-st-lucie-county-florida-141-turnout/
"official St Lucie County, FL 2012 election results. Only one precinct
had less than 113% turnout. The unofficial vote count is 175,554
registered voters 247,713 vote cards cast (141.10% ). The National
SEAL Museum, a St. Lucie county polling place, had 158.85% voter turn
out, the highest in the county."
How would Texas cope with that?
Florida should engage one of the big four accounting firms to perform an
operational audit of the current system, and make recommendation
Hi Leland,
How would the auditors identify the fraudulent ballots? THAT is what has to be
done!
Just off the top of my head, an internal control might work something like
this. The starting point in a voter casting a ballot is registering to vote.
Because many people have the same name, at the time a person registers to vote,
they could be issued a unique ID number.
In order for the voter to receive a ballot, when they go to vote, they could be
required to present their unique ID number. This number could be check, and if
its valid, and has not already been used, the voter could receive a ballot.
If the system is automated the voter could be required to enter his unique ID
to cast a vote. The voting machine would check to see if the unique ID number
had not already been used within a statewide voting system; before, accepting
the voters input.
This kind of system would need strong security to protect the voters privacy.
Without some kind of internal control in place, such as the example I provided
above, it may not be possible to identify fraudulent votes.
Regards,
LelandJ
[excessive quoting removed by server]
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message:
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/50a01f75.5020...@mail.smvfp.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
