Hello Greg, 3000-l
Re: OT:election
>> I knew it would just take a few good problem solvers out here
>> to fix this one before 2004 !
> #6) Federal law prohibiting the abuse of data (IBM) cards used as
> ballots?
Except elections have always been held at the local level. This is the price
we pay. We would like to think that reason could prevail, but I believe that
(recent) experience demonstrates otherwise.
>>That is the point of making it a FEDERAL LAW... Let's obsolete
technologies
>>which have known HIGH error rates. Make it a Federally funded mandate to
>>eliminate the use of CARD PUNCH technology in the Voting process.
> #7) Federal law mandating technology to prevent "no" vote for a seat/race
> or to identify with out question the voters intent is a "no" vote. If (7)
> candidates are running, then offer a (8th) choice of no-vote for this
> seat/race. If a voter does not select candidate 1-7 or 8 no-vote then
> their ballet is rejected and required to be corrected before the voter
> leaves the polling place.
I have a friend who is an engineer. He mentioned the Japanese idea of
designing a thing so that it can only work one way, or it fails completely
and obviously, like a polarized outlet. People can and do make mistakes on
the scantron type ballots, such as filling in two holes. Previously, others
mentioned systems that only allow one choice, and so on, without the need of
an additional validation step. I like your idea of a no vote requirement,
though. And, I would like to see it handled like None Of The Above (NOTA). I
understand that at least in some jurisdictions, if NOTA "wins", then no one
else did, and other provisions must be made to fill the office or not, or
hold another election (and how do you ever run again after you lost to
NOTA?).
>> Hee hee... NOTA can not win... a vote for NOTA is the same as a blank
>> entry in the past, but assures your intent to NOT vote for a seat/race.
> #8) Improved Identification of Registered Voters...
Again, it would take a non-local authority to enforce this, although some
oversight would probably be a good idea, so long as it was only oversight.
Still, could this affect how late one can register? When we moved last year,
I never changed my registration, so I drove one town over to vote. Not only
was my name still on the roles under my old address, so was my wife's, and
she did reregister in our town. She could have voted twice! And, no one
asked to see my ID! Now THAT was not too bright!
>> The answer I think is that you are able to vote by Mail-In to the state/
>> county you are registered... rules should follow state requirement that
>> you get a drivers license with in 30 days of moving to a new state and
>> at the same time register to vote... If you are not registered, you can
>> not vote no-way!
> #10) Saturday voting!
Um, that means Joe Liebermen would not have voted, nor would a number of
members of Sabbath-keeping religious groups. However, anytime the Federal
Government wants to declare that Tuesday a national holiday, I'm right with
you. I do however like the idea of moving all elections back about six
months to April 16th (or the first Tuesday after April 15th)... Do you think
that they deliberately give us six months to forget our pain?
>> You got me... and I appreciate your brilliant answer... Tuesday is good,
>> we just need to make it a National Holiday, no-one works except
pollsters.
>>
>> I am not sure about the suggestion to extend the period to April... It
>> might give us 6 months to forget our pain, or as we are seeing now it may
>> give us an extended 6 months of pain //:~(
Greg Stigers
http://www.cgiusa.com
>> Thanks Greg, I think we have solved this problem...
>> Well, I am heading to Cupertino, CA for a week, Leaving tomorrow... Is
>> their anything I should do or not miss while I am out in the valley ?
>> Regards,
>> James Hofmeister
>> Hewlett Packard
>> Worldwide Technology Network Expert Center
>> P.S. My Ideals are my own, not necessarily my employers.
|
