Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary
I know that any time someone steps in and tries to tell us that the feds should tell states how to conduct business at the state level there is a problem. No system is perfect and the one we have now works. Not perfectly but it works. There are not millions of disenfranchised voters out there. On top of that there are groups eligible to vote in some states and not so in others. That is the way it goes.
|
There are absolutely millions of votes not counted...most are provisions ballots and others result from the differing failure rates of various types of voting machines.
I am simply suggesting that the process be standardized....its not a fucking federal take over of elections.
HAVA was a good first step when it was enacted after the 2000 election, but doesnt go far enough to provide the greatest assurance possible that your vote will be counted with the same likelihood regardless of where you live.
Maybe we just need the "purple thumb" test that we spent $millions on to assure "free and fair" elections in Iraq.
There is the irony....we spend $millions to support democratic elections in other countries and cant maximize the effectiveness and reliability of our own disjointed system....where if you vote in a rural county with a old punch card machine, your vote has a greater likelihood of not being counted than an upscale suburb and fancy new optical scanners.