-
Subscribe -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
-
Recent Comments
- I see that Coinstar now also offers vouchers for Starbucks or iTunes. How do you redeem the voucher with Starbucks? Do they give you a Starbucks card? Regardless, I've got a lot of coffee...
- Dude, I'm just joking with you Applebees. Chill. And yes, the stylus is soooo 1994. But some things from the past are worth preserving.
- Steve: Great comment, to which I would add just a couple of points. First, to the extent that a corporation that may provide the "pipes" is separate from one that provides the content,...
- My top 5: 1. <a href="http://ww.autohotkey.com/">AutoHotKey</a> - This is a simple yet powerful macro scripting program for Windows. I created a simple one-line script...
- "Don’t understand how you iPhone zombies get along without one." It does not help your argument any when you insist on insulting users of another device. You arguments come off as...
DISQUS
Returning? Login
1 year ago
Without electronic technology, the system can be 100% transparent to any human, geek or not. No high level government certification needed.
The nearly four billion dollars behind HAVA could have bought us a lot of human labor in ballot counting.
Holt will only cement the acceptability of computers in elections, and for the first time give the Feds say over how we conduct elections. It should not pass.
1 year ago
I'm also sensitive to federalism concerns, but I don't think those are a serious problem here. The bill leaves almost all of the implementation details up to states, and only requires that states certify to the federal government that their election processes meet certain requirements. I'm not wild about these provisions, but the only states that will be seriously burdened are those states that have adopted paperless touch-screen voting systems, and those states need to be burdened.