Slashdot Mirror
Doubting Electronic Voting
twitter writes "The NYT is raising the alarm on electronic voting. After citing expert opinion on the need for a paper trail, they then quote election officials and vendors who dismiss that opinion as the ignorant work of dreamers. The reporter titles his article, 'To Register Doubts, Press Here' and seems less than convinced."
The article
Bon appetit.
it happened in florida in the 2000 elections. thousands of minority voters were deemed unqualified to vote because a corrupted registration system declared them to be felons. this occured because they shared a name with a felon others were barred having been convicted in the year 2009. if we can't get the registration right what chance do we have for the actual votes.
I'm definetly a techno-geek, but I'm also a pragmatist. Electronic voting isn't going to solve any more problems than it creates.
A bunch of my concerns that haven't been addressed in the media:
* The hardware and software are proprietary and not open to public review. My paper has a full page copy of the ballots before every election so the public can review it.
* Not accessible. How do people missing vision or limbs use them?
* How are the results audited? Do the electronic logs go into the public domain?
* Is the incredible expense and TCO of these machines justified? Paper ballots are practically free by comparison.
* What about absentee voting? What wacky "voting method of the future" can we come for that?
obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
Local state governments run elections not the US government.
National Semiconductor and Unisys (two American companies) made a really good electronic voting system for Brazil, they've been using them since 1996. It has a tamper resistant paper trail, so it is completely auditable, unlike most of the systems described in the article. From what I've heard, the machines work quite well, and people are happy with them. (Please, if someone has actually voted with these, share your experiences)
I fail to see how having a paper trail with electronic voting is "dreaming", it strikes me more as "required", particularly if we want to consider our government democratic.
----
Open mind, insert foot.
Unfortunately, the US government runs its own elections, rather than a truely impartial third party
An important point, though: the Federal government does NOT run any elections, period. Elections are the responsibility of the states. This was done on purpose so that the federal government could not rig elections for itself. Of course, as we've seen in practice, federal intrusion in state business has become so commonplace that federal action frequently affects state elections, from Federal voting rights acts to the 2000 presidential election. Of course, the ends could be said to justify the means for much of this federal interference. But there is a legitimate states' rights/federalism argument to be made against any federal interference in state elections.
For a glimpse into the potential repercussions of the Diebold e-voting machines used in the last federal election look here.
WARNING: This is really unsettling stuff and may cause you to lose (more) faith in the U.S. election system.
From hell's heart I fstab at /dev/hdc
Womever you wanted to win or thought should win, the recount was unconstitutional in the way it was ordered. It was also unfairly counted because anything that had an "improperly" punched chad was disgarded, which tended be more Bush votes discarded. (Not that I wanted either side to become victorious down to such an infantile issue.)
The real reliability = "Integrity and Honesty of the System" ... unfortunately that will never be 100% - I think computerized voting with printouts (like an ATM receipt) of each vote and then the voter taking that vote and placing it in a ballot box. If a hand recount needs to take place you can do so.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
We have voted in belgium electronically for years now, never had any problems at all. The source code of their app is even available online. http://www.verkiezingen.fgov.be/Logiciel/Jites/NL/ Cdoku1.htm ;-)
They even have a flash example of the electronic vote, and organise tryout sessions for the elderly people who fear everything that has a screen connected to it
... told the used truck salesman I needed a V-8, had to carry heavy stuff and tow a trailer once in awhile.
He said, "here's one".
Cool, I go to pop the hood, can't. The hood is welded shut!
What's this? I ask, I can't see the engine?
No, you can't.
How do I know it's a v-8?
Because we sayso.
But I want to look!
You can't.
How do I know you aren't lying?
You can ask my boss.
But you and your boss work for the same company, how do I know he's not lying?
Because he doesn't lie.
How do I know that?
Because we sayso.
Can I get an independent opinion?
Sure.
From who?
The dealer.
The dealer! He works for the same company!
That's it, all we have to tell you, take it or leave it.
grumble, go to the next dealer down the street.
Hi! I'd like to buy a truck! I need a v-8!
Sure! We have one right here.
Go to look, hood welded shut....
#$%^&*!!!!
Computerised voting is such a bad idea on so many levels I am amazed it's even gotten one positive comment. It's the mother of all voting scams, sophisticated fraud and manipulation potential to the nth degree, way past simple ballot box stuffing in the olden days. Way, way, way past. Now combine that with the "two party that is one party in reality" district and debate and "news" rigging, well, there ya go, millions of people who *think* they just voted.
That link should have beenr ry
http://www.elections.act.gov.au/EVACS.html.
So
The US Civil Rights Commission report on the 2000 FL elections reported that unauthorized vehicle checkpoints took place near voting places: This was a minor impact compared to some of the other tactics which disenfranchised thousands. The NCAA lawsuit settlement resulted in sweeping changes to FL election laws. One of the most important exposes of FL election fraud was done by investigative reporter Greg Palast. Anyone who's unaware of the massive election fraud which put Shrub in office must be limiting their news sources to the censored, right wing US news media.
If you want to some solid examples of why not having a paper trail can lead to dramatic increases in vote fraud and higher rate of discarded ballots then you should read: The Best Democracy Money Can Buy Some may claim that the book is controversial but the author backs his claims with solid evidence and if you wish to do the footwork you can verify the facts for yourself.
The list was determined in this manner:
This is taken from a story by Greg Palast did for Harper's Magazine and can be read here. Even more details can be had in this article.http://www.rootstrikers.org/
Here's the top of their site. Here's their table of contents for the 2000 election. Here's their report on voting irregularities.
This might be the best report because it was written shortly after the election when the outrage was still fresh. Their later reports try to use language as neutral as possible. This report is still prominent on their site so I don't think they've renounced any of it. Here's a quote:
In total, over 100 witnesses testified under oath before the Commission, including approximately 65 scheduled witnesses who were selected for the two hearings due to their knowledge of and/or experience with the issues under investigation. The Commission heard testimony from top elected and appointed state officials, including the Governor, the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Director of the Florida Division of Elections and other Florida state and county officials. A representative of Database Technologies, Inc. [Choicepoint], a firm involved in the controversial, state-sponsored removal of felons from the voter registration rolls also testified.
We also heard the sworn testimony of registered voters and experts on election reform issues, election laws and procedures and voting rights. Also, the Chair and Executive Director of the Select Task Force on Election Reforms established by Governor Jeb Bush testified before the Commission. Testimony was also received from the supervisors of elections for several counties, county commission officials, law enforcement personnel, and a states attorney. In addition to the scheduled witnesses, the Commission extended an opportunity for concerned persons, including Members of Congress and members of the Florida State Legislature, to submit testimony under oath that was germane to the issues under investigation. Significantly, the Commission subpoenaed scores of relevant documents to assist with this investigation.
The evidence points to an array of problems, including those in the following categories:
Yes, and he is right to be nervous. We should all be nervous. Case in point. 1996 and 2002 midterm elections. Chuck Hagel, who just so happens to own a company that produces the voting machine used in Nebraska wins a stunning upset by defeating an incumbant Govenor. Winning virtually every demographic even those that have never voted repblican... ever. Be afraid... be very afraid.
Fixing elections with touchscreen voting isn't just a conspiracy theory. It happened in 2002 in Nebraska and Georgia. Read more.
The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
There is a good collection of links to the story about Hagel, and many other stories about the new electronic voting machines, at Seeing the Forest.
We've done this already in Iceland back in 2001 if I remember correctly. I must point out that we have a sophisticated identification number system (is. Kennitala) and voters used smartcards, with their kennitala to vote. I was a part of the electoral commision for the elections (Reykjavík county elections for the transfer of the capital airport) and to my surprise the elderly, who I thought would have problems with using a computer actually found it better to use. The software had numerous accessibility options, such as enlarging the typeface.
The only networked part of the system was the voter registry, votes were counted at each polling station, verified by the regional electoral commision and then driven to City Hall and added up.
The only sad part about electronic elections is the lack of your typical election night suspension, the polling stations closed at 22:00 and the results were announced at 22:45.
The cost of the elections was about $450.000, higher than usual.
Here in Iceland we have a very sophisticated telecommunications system, 100% literacy, very high computer ownership and most households are connected to the internet with about half of them having broadband connections.
For more information: Statistics Iceland, a short summary of the Icelandic electoral process and Public strategies for the information society in Iceland (a bit dated).
The elections were a trial that was found to have been very successful, the next elections for local government will most likely be electronic (2006).