[EL] LA's new voting system (and code-based voting)

Mon Jul 11 14:36:37 PDT 2016

Fortunately, also missing from the VSAP prototype is the dangerous 
ability for voters to be able to bring in their choices encoded in a QR 
code or barcode.The current prototype machine prints a QR code on the 
official paper ballot to ease machine tabulating of ballots, and that’s 
okay. (The choices printed in clear text on each ballot would of course 
be the official choices used in recounts and mandatory audits of the 
machine tallies.)But humans aren’t machines.Voters can’t understand QR 
codes just by looking at them.So for voters to rely on QR codes would 
divorce voter intent from the process of voting.

And you know some voters would rely on the codes.So those attractive 
slate cards that come in the mail could include a new way to mislead: A 
QR code purporting to match the wonderful slate shown on the card!Yes, 
“purporting to” match.Who’s going to check fully, before letting the 
ballot get sucked back into the machine, to see if what just got printed 
on the ballot matches what’s shown on the card-with-a-code?Not 
everybody, that’s for sure.

Even if the codes match the slates, the codes could facilitate coercion 
(or vote-buying) if ward heelers or any of your family members or peers 
can watch to see if you use the “right” slate card and don’t spend 
enough time in the voting booth to modify a slate’s choices.(Does 
anybody on this list know if that’s why “party lever” voting isn’t a 
thing anymore?Or if providing a “party lever” is 
illegal/unconstitutional in any way?)

Election administrators may view code-based voting as a sort of 
salvation from long lines at the polls. They would be happy to provide 
online interfaces and mobile apps to “push” decision-making time from 
polling places.But in so doing, they would skew ease of voting towards 
people with easy access to computers and printers or to modern 
smartphones (with un-cracked screens).Code-based voting would deepen the 
“digital divide.”And don’t some organizations say that rich people are 
already overrepresented in the electorate?

So: problems with deception, coercion and bias are hardwired into the QR 
code idea.Let’s keep it from becoming a reality.

- dah

On 7/11/2016 2:23 PM, David A. Holtzman wrote:
>
> I get some information about Los Angeles County’s “Voting Systems 
> Assessment Project” (VSAP) from the League of Women Voters of Los 
> Angeles County (LWV-LAC).
>
>
> The VSAP hasn’t exactly been seeking “a collaborative approach to 
> voting system design” as its “about” webpage 
> <https://www.lavote.net/vsap/about> suggests.Rather, it has sought to 
> design a voting system of its own, using a handpicked advisory 
> committee and sole-source contracts.The project’s voter-centered 
> approach is praiseworthy and it has generated useful insights and 
> suggestions, to be sure, but keep in mind that there is an underlying 
> hope or expectation that the VSAP will come up with a specific system 
> that the county government can get certified and sell to other 
> election jurisdictions.
>
>
> The LWV-LAC has been treating its invited participation in the VSAP as 
> a “voter service” matter (providing information to the public about 
> the project) rather than as “advocacy” (asserting League positions or 
> otherwise providing input to the project). Despite having formally 
> concurred with local League chapters’ advocacy of Instant Runoff 
> Voting (IRV) for all single-seat elections, LWV-LAC has not insisted 
> that IRV capability (ranked voting) be a feature of the system. And 
> so, *the prototype shown at the link does not appear to include ranked 
> voting for instant runoff elections as a feature*.
>
>
> Even if the machines could accept a software update to make for 
> user-friendly ranking of candidates, once the machines are certified 
> without that software, a separate, expensive, time-consuming 
> certification process would be required before the software update 
> could be used. That would delay the enhancements to voter freedom and 
> election fairness that ranked voting and instant runoff elections can 
> provide.
>
> *It looks like IRV will miss the VSAP certification boat*, and I think 
> that's largely due to the ineffectiveness of LWV-LAC. (LWV-LAC’s 
> inaction came despite my imprecations.I am a past president of the 
> LWV’s L.A. /city/ chapter, one of the chapters which advocates IRV, 
> but which was not invited to participate in the VSAP.)
>
>
> - dah
>
>
>
> On 7/7/2016 2:54 AM, Thomas J. Cares wrote:
>> Does anyone know if this new system would better enable Ranked Choice 
>> Voting/Instant Runoff Voting?
>>
>> I would presume that it should, but for all I know maybe it would 
>> make it even harder to potentially implement RCV in LA
>>
>> On Thursday, July 7, 2016, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> wrote:
>>
>>
>>     “Los Angeles County Unveils New Voting System Prototype”
>>     <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84085>
>>
>> Posted onJuly 5, 2016 11:44 am 
>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=84085>by*Rick Hasen* 
>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>
>> Doug Chapin 
>> <http://editions.lib.umn.edu/electionacademy/2016/07/05/los-angeles-county-unveils-new-voting-system-prototype/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+HHHElections+%28The+Election+Academy%29>:
>>
>> /One of the most eagerly-anticipated projects in elections took 
>> another step forward last week as Los Angeles County, CA unveiled the 
>> prototype of the new voting system developed through its Voting 
>> System Assessment Project (VSAP). The LA Times has more 
>> <http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-county-voting-system-20160630-snap-story.html>./
>>
>> Disclosure: I am a new member of the VSAP but I missed the unveiling 
>> of the prototype last week when I was travelling.
>>
>> hare 
>> <https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D84085&title=%26%238220%3BLos%20Angeles%20County%20Unveils%20New%20Voting%20System%20Prototype%26%238221%3B&description=>
>>
>> Posted invoting technology <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=40>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>
> -- 
> David A. Holtzman, M.P.H., J.D.
> david at holtzmanlaw.com
>
> Notice: This email (including any files transmitted with it) may be 
> confidential, for use only by intended recipients.  If you are not an 
> intended recipient or a person responsible for delivering this email 
> to an intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email 
> in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or 
> copying of this email is strictly prohibited.  If you have received 
> this email in error, please immediately notify the sender and discard 
> all copies.
>

-- 
David A. Holtzman, M.P.H., J.D.
david at holtzmanlaw.com

Notice: This email (including any files transmitted with it) may be 
confidential, for use only by intended recipients.  If you are not an 
intended recipient or a person responsible for delivering this email to 
an intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email in 
error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying 
of this email is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this email 
in error, please immediately notify the sender and discard all copies.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160711/a776f3a8/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160711/a776f3a8/attachment.png>