Actually, this one is easy. Try to pass a law similar to one in Canada. What the machines count is the result. If you can't process your vote so the machine can read it - you threw away your chance to vote! And good riddance. I don't want anyone that can't follow simple directions voting ANYWAY!

Now, this does not mean that people can not request a new ballot if they screw up, but once you turn it in, your vote is DONE.

As for "receipt" systems? So much GARBAGE! If the machine counts candidate A while you voted for candidate B? Well, it can still print a receipt for candidate A! But I don't trust the pile of receipts either, as it is too easy to screw with them.

And internet voting? No way. They can't keep our credit cards safe on the net. Why would I trust my vote there?

I don't know if there is a way to ensure integrity within the system, but increasing voter integrity would be voter I.D. Tags.

1. Mandatory state issued picture ID.
2. Minimum 5 years in prison for any fraudulent activity concerning item 1.
3. Purple fingers.
4. Move elections from Tuesday to Saturday AND Sunday. (much easier to find poll watchers if we don't have to take off of work)
5. No public discussion of exit polling results in NATIONAL elections until ALL national polls are closed.
6. No electronic voting systems until they are based on open systems that are 100% auditable from beginning to end.
7. Life in prison for voter fraud.

I like all the above ideas, but the unions will fight to the death to keep voting on a week day since they get the day off to vote (jeez).

go back to punched cards - they have been proven to have the highest rate of accuracy.

voter identification is a must for integrity

Pic ID, supported by a right thumbprint in a joint Fed-state-effort.

Any voter fraud carries with it a $50,000 fine per vote, and a minimum 10 yr term, per vote.

Also, voter registration fraud, a la ACORN, carries same penalties.

I think we really need to turn to technology: fingerprints, DNA, etc. The purple thumb idea is only useful to prevent people from voting multiple times. That's important issue, but it doesn't address the issue of determining whether an individual is an eligible voter in the first place.

It's also important to distinguish between actual integrity and perceived integrity. You can have the most secure, accurate voting system in the world but it doesn't mean a damn if the voters don't believe in it. Of course, you'll never be able to satisfy the conspiracy theorists, but you have to address the issue of voter confidence.