In the case of voting we should be chanting this mantra: Every Legal Vote Accurately Counted.
Quality assurance includes two principles: “Fit for purpose” (the product should be suitable for the intended purpose); and “right first time” (mistakes should be eliminated).
So why are there arguments against conducting an audit and investigating the process in which we vote to improve the process? If any complaint or allegation arises over the process of an election one would think that both sides in a bi-partisan atmosphere should want to investigate that issue and determine if one side, or both sides, was cheated.
In close races there is always the possibility that one partisan side will toss the flag against the other. Each side has to understand that next time it could be their team which tosses the flag. We all trust that the referees and the rule-book do not fail us.
That’s where Quality Assurance comes into play. When problems arise we investigate to determine the root cause. Investigative data is used to develop a plan to retrain workers or correct the issue. Then, when the process starts up again it comes out right the first time.
There have been numerous reported anomalies and questionable voting processes that need corrective action in the Arizona election audit. The process of investigative assessment and corrective action does not take anything away from the customer. It generates trust and fosters a loyal and repeat customer: just as new banking regulations protect the bank and its customers from money laundering and scams.
Americans have high expectations of quality and value, from the cars we buy to the clothes we wear. How long would a doctor stay in business operating on the wrong body part? And yet, we tolerate this in elections?
Mediocrity vs. Excellence
“Something deep in the human heart breaks at the thought of a life of mediocrity.” C. S. Lewis
The process of Voting in this country should be a process of excellence. With every opportunity being taken to get it “right the first time”. The founding fathers did not settle for mediocrity in determining anything as important as electing the representative leaders of this country.
When we take a historic look at the founding fathers we often reflect on them with awe and admiration for their foresight and intelligence in creating one of the most important documents in the free world. They didn’t settle for mediocre and we won’t either.
When a task is mediocre or mundane it becomes repetitive and even boring. The rate of errors increases because the attention to detail and interest in problem solving decreases. Our defenses and observation skills diminish allowing faults and failures to be overlooked.
We should be very concerned when a County Recorder says he strives for “boring”. A good administrator will take questions and criticism as opportunities for improvement. A good administrator will also be looking for a more efficient way to have a quality outcome without violating Federal or State laws and not changing policies or making administrative rules to accommodate the questionable processes.
The system is not broken, but rather operating under low standards. We need to look at the root causes and apply our corrective actions plans to bring its quality back up to excellence standards. Years of complacency, unpunished malfeasance and lack of attention to detail have brought us to this point. Denial of the slightest problematic issues and refusal to assess the situation with elections diminishes and adulterates the whole process.
It should be unconscionable to all citizens that half of this country is willing to settle for mediocrity in elections and even going so far as to fight against excellence in our election process.
It is time for a bi-partisan solution to the bi-partisan process of voting in this bi-partisan nation. Stop Fighting against Excellence in America. What did you do to help the Arizona Audit project?