[Iv]

Came here to say that.

Transparent voting boxes, ballots in envelopes, manual redundant counting done by people, usually voter who were nicely asked if they can come help back in the evening. That's what we use in France, you get the official result a few hours after the closing of the voting stations.

The whole process is watchable, from the sealing of the box the morning to the count in the end and parties send observers in random stations to check nothing fishy happens. An official log book is open for anyone to notice if they feel something fishy happened (you were not allowed to vote, the counting was unfair, etc...)

Oh, and make voting day a holiday, or just put it on Sundays.

I used to wonder how US could not even get that last part right, but then I understood that a whole party thinks it is in its interest to have less voters.

[creaghpatr]

About the author of the article: R. James Woolsey is a former director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Sums it up.

[pgeorgi]

> Oh, and make voting day a holiday, or just put it on Sundays. > I used to wonder how US could not even get that last part right, but then I understood that a whole party thinks it is in its interest to have less voters.

Historical reasons: http://www.whytuesday.org/answer/

[_Codemonkeyism]

Same in Germany.

[EugeneAZ]

The most funniest thing is who is just eligible to be a candidate (not mention his chances to win). And how the chosen legislation, which is the result of those elections, is far from the most fair - one approved by score voting in direct democracy.

[cortesoft]

Or make voting last multiple days instead of just one.

[Iv]

That makes it harder to keep an eye on the voting process from A to Z, which people do in the current process. If the box containing the ballots stay alone, trust is lowered.

Seriously, is it harder to make a daily holiday and a transparent process than landing a man on the moon with tech from the 60s?