Let's Simplify Voting
Re


By Andrew J. Humm
Published January 30th 2001 in New York Times
The electronic voting devices being proposed by self-interested computer companies are subject to large-scale tampering. We need a simple, standardized, low-tech system like marking an "X" on an easily readable piece of paper.

Canada votes that way and counts its ballots within a couple of hours.  There is no advantage to knowing the result the instant the polls close, but an imperative that a verifiable paper trail for a vote be established.  Machine voting does not produce a more accurate tally.

Since about half of eligible voters do not go to the polls, we also have to look at why our democracy is so anemic. Procedures like instant runoff voting and proportional representation would give many  more Americans reason to participate.
IRV Soars in Twin Cities, FairVote Corrects the Pundits on Meaning of Election Night '09
Election Day '09 was a roller-coaster for election reformers.  Instant runoff voting had a great night in Minnesota, where St. Paul voters chose to implement IRV for its city elections, and Minneapolis voters used IRV for the first time—with local media touting it as a big success. As the Star-Tribune noted in endorsing IRV for St. Paul, Tuesday’s elections give the Twin Cities a chance to show the whole state of Minnesota the benefits of adopting IRV. There were disappointments in Lowell and Pierce County too, but high-profile multi-candidate races in New Jersey and New York keep policymakers focused on ways to reform elections;  the Baltimore Sun and Miami Herald were among many newspapers publishing commentary from FairVote board member and former presidential candidate John Anderson on how IRV can mitigate the problems of plurality elections.

And as pundits try to make hay out of the national implications of Tuesday’s gubernatorial elections, Rob Richie in the Huffington Post concludes that the gubernatorial elections have little bearing on federal elections.

Links