E-voting Trials and Tribulations

Alex Susor writes "This article is about the new digital touch screen voting system in Georgia, the first state in the nation to adopt this method of voting statewide. Demonstration machines were set up at the recent primaries to teach voters about the new system (to be in place for the November general election) and had some big problems." Compare and contrast to systems in Florida and Germany.

Comments

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Friendly help

[aseh]

As long as there is a talking paperclip at the bottom of the screen to help people out, I think everything will go smoothly.

Secret ballots with secret software

[leighklotz]

I wonder if it's really legal to have votes counted by a machine that has secret software inside that voters are not allowed to examine?

Chris Riggall, a spokesman for the secretary of state's office, attributed the problems to errors by poll workers, a glitch in the Windows operating system that runs the machines ...

Shouldn't voters in Georgia be able to file an FOI request to find out what's happening to their votes?

the true voting tech is the method, not machines

[js7a]

I don't care whether they use paper, plastic, or some newfangled electronic gizmos. :)

What really matters is that they use Instant Runoff Voting; please see:

The Center for Voting and Democracy

the Instantrunoff mailing list

and the California Instant Runoff Voting Coalition for an example of a good local activism site.

P.S. You can create your own web-based IRV web surveys with DemoChoice.org (also includes free downloadable php scripts for your own site.)

Next election

[JahToasted]

The next president of the United States: {FATAL EXCEPTION IN 0x0E4F}

Re:Computerized voting restricts access to voters

[MAXOMENOS]

Voters who are not computer savvy will likely become confused by the unnecessary complication of the new voting machines and many are likely to cast their ballots in error, possibly voting for a candidate they had no intention of supporting.

I think you're over-estimating the complexity of the system for the user.

It's not hard: you see the candidate you want, you touch their name. Their name lights up. If you want to change your vote, you touch a different name. Once you've picked your candidate, you move on to the next page. You can change your vote later. When you want to accept the ballot, just press a last panel on the screen.

This isn't rocket science. It's as easy as the paper ballots, if not easier.

The reliability and accuracy of paper-based systems is what led to the mess in Florida in 2000.

I agree with you on the hacking and digital manipulation. There are ways around this, but only if the system is well-designed. Of course, there are all sorts of ways to manipulate the system to produce a desired result, both subtle (place the candidate's name on the second page of a list of names) and gross (stuff the ballot box with 'votes' for your guy from 'voters' who are dead.) No paper system is 100% tamper proof.