Dan Gilmore has
commented on Dennis Kucinich's criticisms of voting
machine manufacturer Diebold.
Voting transparancy seems to be a big issue with Kucinich. It's great that someone is talking about this.
People look at the Florida 2000 situation and think technology is the answer. And certainly technology can help. A touch screen can be a more accessible mechanism for chosing from a menu of choices than a punch ballot in small print.
But there is a big difference between clarity in voting, and confidence in voting. You may be more sure you chose who you meant to choose, but how certain are you that your choice was properly counted?
I think our first steps towards introducing more technology into voting should be to address clarity for the user.
But for voter confidence we should still have physical tokens generated by the voting process. These tokens should be able to be examined by the voter at the poll. And of course they should be countable and recountable by hand and by machine.