>>At least in my state, there are ID numbers on the ballots that can be traced back, I presume. This is how they can identify "dead people" voting, for example, AFAIK, in a genuine criminal voting scandal investigation.
>
>I can't believe that's legal. We're supposed to have a totally secret ballot. Yet another argument for voting machines.

I believe (after mulling it over - I've voted in 4 states - & researching a little) it's up to the states as to how they configure the voting process. There's a lot to said for allowing traceable IDed ballots - for situations just such as the Florida mess - or anytime there are serious irregularities or criminal allegations. Of course, how anyone votes should certainly be kept very discreet by election officials. Two other points:

1) This explains why, at least in my current state, poll officials do not verify personal IDs at the polls at all. Because, they have a traceable ballot to a sign-in sheet to a name & address (and the voter also retains a stub with the ballot ID, so they can make contact from their end also). Officials can investigate later if anything funny occurs - some may say this is privacy invasion, but it sure can help in sorting out voting irregualtities, so I generally prefer the idea. This could've resolved most of the FL mess, for example, and did turn up some criminal fraud in my state a few years back.

2) We need uniformity and better technology in national elections. It took an event like this to bring out "all the bugs under the rocks" in our system. Higher tech, nationally uniform presidential ballots make a lot of sense.

2a) While I'm soapboxing, that Oregon mail-vote method doesn't cut it for national elections. Even if all other states are near perfect, we could wait extra weeks on that one state - it's their state, but I hope this election gives them a wake-up call to change.