New Closed Source Voting Systems Malfunction

LowellPorter writes "Miami-Dade and Broward counties are having voting problems. After the 2000 election problems, new voting methods were installed including touch screen technology. Some times the problems were with workers not showing up, poor training, or mechanical problems. It doesn't look like they cleaned up the system there." Not all of the problems mentioned in the article are due to the new proprietary voting machines, but many of them are.

Comments

This doesn't make sense...

[jsonmez]

How hard is it to make a voting machine that works? All it does is count votes, it's not like it does rocket science!

Re:This doesn't make sense...

[Zathrus]

If it's so amazingly simple, feel free to go ahead and make it!

Don't forget that it has to be insanely easy to use, with extremely clear instructions and adaptable to an infinite number of configurations for different polling uses.

It also has to be capable of verifying that the voter is valid, that the ballot is valid, and that it itself is valid (i.e. - has not been tampered with).

You either need secured local storage or a secure connection to another storage facility (whether that be onsite or offsite). If local, you need to make sure the data won't be destroyed by substandard handling (see below).

It must be rugged, portable, easy to setup, and low cost.

It must save state, so that if it does crash the current voter doesn't get screwed. Optimally they should be able to go to another voting machine to finish their ballot.

Let us know when you've finished. Don't forget this is both a hardware and software solution. We'll be waiting.

Re:This doesn't make sense...

[anthony_dipierro]

What's wrong with the system that works so well and reliably in other places: using a pen, put a big cross in the box next to the person/answer being voted for. Any other marks invalidates the ballot slip.

One thing that's wrong with that is it makes it ridiculously simple to invalidate ballots after they are cast.

Re:This doesn't make sense...

[david.given]

If it's so amazingly simple, feel free to go ahead and make it!

Okay. Let's see. Let's use cardboard voting slips, with pencils.

• Intuitive --- check. Everyone knows how to make marks on paper. Put an X in the box next to the name of your candidate. Because the slips aren't machine-read, you don't have to cater to the machines, so you can put the boxes next to the candidate's name.
• Self-validating --- check. The human who counts the voting slip can tell at a glance if it's been filled out correctly. You can verify that each person has voted only once by keeping a list of people eligable to vote at each polling station, and crossing their names off the list.
• Secure storage --- check. Well, not quite. You need a box with a padlock on it and a slit in the lid, and a seal to indicate tampering. Seals are old technology. Trivial money from your local hardware store.
• Rugged, portable, low cost --- check. Carboard is cheap. Printed cardboard is cheap. It's also tough; if you use pencils rather than pens, then even if a filled box is submersed in water, the votes can still be read (carefully).
• Saves state --- check. Each vote is physically encoded on to a piece of cardboard, which can be counted as many times as is necessary to get it right. Won't crash. Ever.

So: we have a cheap, simple, secure voting system that's hard to spoof (with adequate physical security), easy to use, and with excellent accountability. You still need to count the votes, of course; here in the UK, we use volunteer bank tellers, who are really good at this sort of thing. The system scales really well, because each voting region is sized by population, and each area has about the same ratio of bank tellers to non bank tellers. The votes are counted in O(n) where n is the number of votes in the largest area, and then the results are phoned in to a central location.

And it all still works if the power goes out.

Why do we need machines, again?

What's with the headline?

[anthony_dipierro]

Would any of these problems be solved with an open source solution? Do these problems have anything at all to do with the fact that the solution is closed source? Is the fact that these systems are closed source ironic, or telling in any way?

Your headline is about as biased as "Microsoft User Commits Murder"

Journalism By Telepaths?

[reallocate]

1. The article doesn't tell us that the software is proprietary. Nor does it tell us that most of the problems are due to the use of closed software. Anyone wondering if Slashdot is an example of journalism or just a bunch of poseurs-for-hire tossing words around need look no further.

2. So anyway, why would we expect open source to work any better?

Oh, yeah, open source v1's are SO much better

[Brento]

Have you *ever* seen v1 of a system work flawlessly? It's so immature to toss the word "proprietary" in here, as if to insinuate that being open-source would fix anything. There's tons of open-source programs in v1 status with bugs. Anybody see any news headlines when Mozilla 1.0 came out and there were bugs in it? No? End of story.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

It wasn't the tech's fault..

[stratjakt]

This isn't a "linux would have saved the day" story.. This same quote is reiterated and paraphrased throughout the article:

"She said many poll workers did not wait for the full six-minute activation procedure to occur and then became nervous and uncertain."

The workers just don't know how to use the machines. Either that or Jan the Man wants to play the "I didnt really lose! it was the hanging chads!" game.

Perhaps Florida is hopelessly stupid. Something to do with a close proximity to DisneyWorld. (that explains the lesser but omni-present stupidity in California too. DisneyLand isn't as big.)

How about a "blink once for yes, blink twice for no" system?

Or set up a "Honk if you love Reno!" sign and count the horns.

Or something involving hot grits or business plans or a beowulf cluster "of these"

I can't hear the word 'gubernatorial' without giggling.

Next story please.. I used up too much karma on this one.

Let's see

[ocie]

45,128 votes for Bush
45,132 votes for Gore
2,000,000 write in votes for Bill Gates.

Wha?

Forget the High-Tech solution...

[Sylver Dragon]

We need to give up on these fancy high-tech solutions that are so buggy and difficult for old people to use. Go with what they know, and what works...
Make the ballots like bingo cards. Give each voter a card and a daubber. I've seen grandmothers that can't work a toaster, but they can turn around and fill in 10 different bingo cards at a high rate. Not to mention that you almost never see them make a mistake filling out one of those cards.
This would solve the whole boot problem and software bugs. The logistics of it would be no different than the old punch cards, but with a lower chad pregnancy rate.

A simple solution to vote counting problems

[rufusdufus]

One of the main problems with voting is that each individual voter doesn't know if their vote was properly counted, and has no recourse if the their vote was miscounted. One reason for this limitation is that the vote is anonymous, so you can't keep track of what happened to your vote.
My idea is to give each voter a secret unique identifier randomly generated at the poll. An online database would keep track of which identifier went with what vote. Then, anybody who had doubts about thier vote could look up to see if they were counted properly. If not, they could use thier receipt to petition for a revote. In the event that enough people complained within the deadline, the entire vote would be redone.

Openness is critical in insuring fair elections

[FreeUser]

Would any of these problems be solved with an open source solution? Do these problems have anything at all to do with the fact that the solution is closed source? Is the fact that these systems are closed source ironic, or telling in any way?

Yes, yes, and yes, it is telling.

Openness is absolutely critical to fair and free elections, and that applies to the technology as much as it does the people. Who knows what is being done with the data being collected, or how it is being massaged. Is every electronic vote counted? Do we know that the results being reported are accurate, or whether or not a systemic flaw (or deliberate alteration) in the software is causing every Nth republican or democratic vote to be dropped? No, we don't know this, because the software's source code is unavailable for public review, much less peer review.

There are all kinds of Microsoft apologists (not saying you are one, but the vast majority of posts taking a tone similiar to yours are, as evidenced by their posting histories) quick to point out that having untrained election officials has nothing to do with the closed source nature of the software, yet eagerly glossing over the profoundly obvious fact that if the election software is closed source, no amount of training can insure that the software is unbiased and the election results fair.

So the point is relevant, even if it does rub the closed source advocates and Microsoft zealots the wrong way.

voting machines are stupid

[DABANSHEE]

What is it with America's love of voting machines? The vast majority of countries don't use then, including most of the OECD - really the only reason for the US using machines is because they're stupid & vote on Tuesday, not Saturday. Yet they wonder why they have the lowest voter turnout in the world, afterall what percentage of people with minimum wage jobs get paid time off to vote? (the minimum wage is probably the mode average wage in the US, or close to it, as the US has the biggest gap between mode & mean average wages in the Western World,) Plus finding casual labour, for hand counting, & volunteer scrutineers, is much harder on a Tuesday, compared with a Saturday.

But haven't you bloody Americans learnt the KISS system - Keep It Simple Stupid.

This means no bloody machines, period !!! If Australia (& most of the OECD) can do hand counted paper ballots, then so can the US.

The only reason they use machine systems in the US is to cut costs, but the simple fact is they arn't as good - they invalidate more votes then hand counts do, they intimidate & confuse a good percentage of voters & they increase the odds of something fuking up (murphy's law)

Look at the mess, as well as the fucked up punch card machines you have counties with lever machines, other with optical machines, toggle switch machines, push button machines & also touch screen systems too. Then there are places like Oregon where all votes are of the mail in variety (which obviously discriminates against the homeless & disorginised). The simple fact is that huge numbers of people are intimidated with this complicated mess that's one of the reasons why most Americans don't vote & why the US has the lowest voter turnout in the OECD

Look at all the people that are intimidated by machines & even now still refuse to use Automatic Teller Machines, & there are plenty more people like that then just the illiterate, the elderly & immigrants that have poor 2nd language skills.

Its as if the bureaucracy in the US are on purposefully trying to discourage the masses from voting.

The only way to go is to Keep It Simple Stupid. Which means aiming at the lowest common denominator & designing a system that the stupidist simpleton can understand.

Which means 'X marks the spot' hand ballots.

That means a peice of paper with the candidates listed in a columne & another columne of boxes on the side with just one box next to each candidate.

Here are a couple of examples of 'KISS' paper ballots, the 1st one is an example of an Australian preferential ballot (any Americans who support 3rd parties should be demanding that the US system be made either preferential or proportional, otherwise no 3rd parties will ever make any long term headway), the 2nd ballot is an example of an ''X' marks the spot' ballot.

As far as counting goes the US should be doing what Australia does (& most of the rest of the developed world does similar) & hold the vote on a Saturday (I wonder how many blue collar workers in the US chose not to vote because of the incoveniance of voting on a Tuesday), using local schools as voting centres. Then leasing indoor stadiums & convention centres nationwide which are to be used as counting centres for the thousands of temp workers employed to count the votes. Each counter also has a Labour & conservative scrutineer looking over his/her shoulders.

It's extremely rare for results to not be known before the weekend is out (actually results mostly come out on the Saturday night, meaning people can go to election result parties & still be ok for work on Monday)

Sure its labour intensive, but as any UN election observer will tell you this is the best system if you want high turnouts with low rates of invalid votes & a result that's as accurate as can be, by Monday morning at the latest (actually in the vast majority of elections we know who's won by about 8pm the same night).

Now I bet someone will think 'oh but the US is much bigger than Australia', well my answer is no problem, the US having a nationwide hand paper ballot election would be no different than if Australia the UK, Germany the Netherlands & the Scandinavian countries all voted the same day, IE there's no reason to think it won't scale up fine.

Also all politicians must be removed from any decision making processes as far as the running of elections are concerned, etc.

Look at the way democratic afiliated local officials OKed the hand count iin Palm Beach & then the Republican Florida SoS blocked the hand count (& she was Bush's co-campaign manager, which makes it an even worse conflict of interest). That sort of thing is unheard of in Australia. Where an Independent Australian Electoral Commision administers federal elections & the various state electoral commisions administers state & local elections.

No politians are involved anywhere in the decision making process (except for calling the date of the election). As far as recounts, re-votes, referendums (in Australia politions can't amend the constitution, only the people can through referendums. Where a majority of the total votes & a majority in a majority of states, responds 'yes' to the amendment) & by-elections, etc are concerned only the electoral commision can make decisions regarding them. Although anyone can appeal to the commision's court, for a recount or re vote or something. Whether such appeals are successful is another matter.

Re:voting machines are stupid

[dhogaza]

Then there are places like Oregon where all votes are of the mail in variety (which obviously discriminates against the homeless & disorginised).

You have to provide an address to register to vote in Oregon anyway, this was true before vote by mail, so it is no more discriminatory against the homeless than the traditional system.

Why is an address required? Because many votes are regional in nature, in other words I can only vote for Congressional candidates in my Congressional District, and your stated home address is used to determine your precinct voting station, Congressional District, state office districts, etc.

In Australia, are you allowed to simply walk into any polling venue in the country and vote? Are you not asked for identification? (identification, such as a driver's license or non-driver's ID card, requires an address here in Oregon, too). If you don't have to provide ID and address, what is to prevent you from voting several times in several different polling stations?

Vote by mail is a great convenience for folks like my father, who is elderly and a semi-invalid, yet still bright. The convenience of being able to sit in your own living room, studying ballot measures and candidates, the arguments for and against published in the voters guide (which often runs in excess of 100 pages), is a great convenience for folkd like my elderly father.

Vote by mail is a smash hit here in Oregon. None of the predicted problems have materialized. Among other things it would seem to fit your KISS criteria exceptionally well. And it requires a paper ballot, you should like that as well.