PFAW Presses Election Assistance Commission to Release Report Debunking Myth of Voter

[Dancing David]

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=22874

PFAW Presses Election Assistance Commission to Release Report Debunking Myth of Voter "Fraud"

Despite requests, the Election Assistance Commission is refusing to release a report written months ago that reportedly pokes holes in the widespread myth that voter fraud is rampant in America.
…
The existence of the report was revealed days ago by USA Today, which reported that instances in which non-eligible persons attempt to pass themselves off as voters and somehow cast fraudulent votes are exceedingly rare.
…

“We have plenty of problems to deal with. We’ve all seen long lines, unreliable voting equipment, purges that wrongly remove eligible voters from the roll. It turns out the problem is not that bad people are trying to vote, but that too many qualified voters are discouraged from voting. This report apparently confirms what common sense has told us for years – we need to make it easier for eligible voters to cast a vote that counts, not harder,’ said Neas. “Instead of fighting nonexistent fraud, these restrictive new laws will discourage voters – people like senior citizens, students and disabled voters who may not have drivers’ licenses or other forms of ID required by these new laws. That’s just wrong, and is clearly not supported by the evidence.”

 

[Demigorgon]

Now, I'm just speculating here, but I don't think voting fraud is that wide-spread at the moment. However, as we move more and more towards electronic voting systems, the chances increase significantly. If you're going to have electronic voting machines, you need to have a whole freak'n crew(i.e. lots) of the best I.T. security experts and hackers that make it strictly their job in overseeing the code and process that goes into these boxes.

As someone who writes code for a living, electronic voting machines scare the living crap outa me.

 

[Nova Land]

Now, I'm just speculating here, but I don't think voting fraud is that wide-spread at the moment. However, as we move more and more towards electronic voting systems, the chances increase significantly. If you're going to have electronic voting machines, you need to have a whole freak'n crew(i.e. lots) of the best I.T. security experts and hackers that make it strictly their job in overseeing the code and process that goes into these boxes.

As someone who writes code for a living, electronic voting machines scare the living crap outa me.

I think what you are saying is in agreement with what PFAW is saying.

To oversimplify somewhat:

Following the 2004 election a number of people expressed concern that the way electronic voting is being conducted in the US makes it difficult for voters to be confident that the vote is being counted honestly and correctly. Their concern was that, unless safeguards are put in place and good security maintained, it is posible for the computers to be tampered in ways that could alter election outcomes. A number of other people responded by saying that the possibility of computer-tampering was ridiculous, and that the real problem of election fraud was people voting who were not entitled to vote -- illegal immigrants, dead people, homeless people who were being paid to vote, and people who were voting more than once.

Those concerned about the possibility of computer problems -- whether due to poor programming or deliberate tampering -- wanted to see measures enacted such as (a) allowing independent experts to scrutinize how the machines were programmed to work (including any updates and patches and other changes made to the programming prior to or during the election, to make sure they were programmed properly; (b) setting up stringent safeguards to make sure no unauthorized person could gain access to the computers during the vote or the vote-counting; and (c) providing a reliable method for checking the recorded votes in case questions arose and a recount was requested. Those concerned about ineligible people voting wanted measures enacted such as (a) more stringent requirements for people to have to show i.d. (especially photo i.d.) before being allowed to vote, and (b) greater scrutiny of people who are trying to vote, to make sure they are actually legal voters and to make sure they are not voting more than once.

A problem was that the concern over illegal voters appeared to be put forward as a way of preventing concerns over possible computer fraud from being addressed. The issue of illegal voters was not presented as an additional concern, it was offered as the real concern, often accompanied by derision directed at the very idea of computer fraud and of anyone who felt such a thing was a realistic possibility. Measures to prevent voter fraud were brought to the floor of a number of state legislatures, while measures to prevent computer fraud were stalled or blocked.

There was also opposition to the voter fraud measures because it was thought that the number of actual cases where this happened was small and that it would result in more legitimate voters becoming unable to vote (due to the time and expense of meeting the additional requirements for voting) than illegitimate voters being prevented from voting.

That's where PFAW comes in. What they are asking to be released is a study showing that the second type of concern -- voter fraud -- is not really a significant problem, and that belief it is widespread is a myth. That in no way indicates that PFAW believes the first type of concern -- the type of concern you are expressing -- is small or mythical.

From the linked press release, PFAW seems to be largely concerned with the second point I raised -- that the new voting requirements are causing more of a problem than they are solving.

... People For the American Way, has launched a petition drive asking the commissioners to release the report, since it will refute rampant allegations of voter fraud which have led to restrictive voting requirements.

"As we approach the elections, the last thing election officials need is to labor under the false impression that ineligible people are trying to pass themselves off as qualified voters at the polls. They should be focusing on ways to keep the path to the ballot box clear for as many eligible voters as possible, instead of looking for nonexistent fraud that will slow down the process and possibly even discourage eligible voters,” said PFAW President Ralph G. Neas. “We need to raise confidence in our elections process, not allow harmful myths to stand – especially when the government has findings available to refute them.”

But it should be kept in mind that many people see this as an either/or: Either we work on concerns about computer fraud or we work on concerns about voter fraud. Why the two are seen as mutually exclusive I'm not sure, but in the real world of politics that does seem to be how many people feel. Thus, there are a number of people who support the PFAW position that voter fraud is a not a major concern that needs to be worked on because they are concerned that computer fraud is.

 

[Dancing David]

Computer voting bothers me as well, especialy without a paper trail. How would a recount happen, there has to be a hard record that is not electronic.

 

[G-K-4]

Here are some simple distinction:

Voter suppression is when eligible people are intentionally kept off the voting rolls. It sounds to me like PFAW is going after voter suppression tactics, which I should add are more common in U.S. history than just the last six years.

Voter fraud is when a person ineligible to vote does so (or tries). This is what the recent ID-card laws are addressing, which might be the wrong problem and may actually lead to (perhaps intentionally) voter suppression.

Electoral fraud is when the results are intentionally miscounted or otherwise skewed to create a desired result. The problems with electronic voting machines fall into this category.

And never mind that most people don't vote in the U.S.