Slashdot Mirror
New Mexico Touchscreen Voting Problems
phr1 writes "The
Albuquerque Journal reports yet more hassles with electronic voting machines.
Early voters pressing the Kerry button have repeatedly found the machine instead putting a check mark next to 'Bush'. The operators of course say it's the voters' fault. It would be just too unfortunate if the machines happened to systematically favor one candidate over the other, heh, heh."
Does this expert political analyst know what state ABQ is in?
this world is eeeeeeeeeevil just eeeeeevil.
Destroy the fucking things. They're a blatant means for whoever, Republicans in this case, to disenfranchise millions of voters and skew the election. Break them. Make them not work. Refuse to use them, kick out the plug, tip it over. Take a big magnet to them, sledgehammer, shotgun, whatever.
Untold numbers of our ancestors have DIED to bring us the right to vote. Such measures as I am suggesting here are no more out of bounds than is locking away a violent criminal.
Take them down. Justice demands it. I paid for it with my tax dollars, and I do NOT care.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
has annexed Albuquerque!
Service guarantees Citizenship! Questions Guarantee GITMO.... Amerika Uber Alles!
I remember when I saw this exact thing as a flash-made joke, where every time you tried to press Kerry it wouldn't work.
It's a sad state when reality mimics fiction like this.
What's so bad about being lazy? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?
This looks to be nothing more than misaligned touchscreens. The main question is "Are they misaligned on purpose?"
And why won't someone realign them.
badness 10000
RTFA it says that people who voted for Bush also saw their votes "change" to Kerry and straight ticket votes go for the opposite party. The problem is with the machines not some right-wing conspiracy.
Damn liberal chicken littles.
Many people had problems with the machines checking Kerry when they wanted to vote for Bush:
Suddenly, this video isn't so funny anymore...
"In a Democracy, people get the kind of government they deserve." -Winston Churchill
To be fair, the article (around the middle) mentions that voters had the opposite problem: votes intended for Bush were showing up for Kerry. So it doesn't sound like a systematic attempt to cheat the vote. (Although statistics on how many mis-votes occur each way would be very interesting.)
That said, of course the friggin' problem is in the machines. OK, so the voters are maybe not using them exactly as intended. But, I'm sorry, if touching the screen with my palm accidentally will mis-register a vote, then they need to re-work the design. It's clear that a lot of people are having this sort of problem, so it's a design flaw.
If they're selling the things under the premise that they'll make voting easier and more accurate, they'd better be able to handle real-world usage.
(And that's all assuming that the problem is not a more basic bug in the system. The fact that people have had multiple misvotes in a row implies, to me, that it might be a more basic flaw than how people are using them. When you make a mistake once, you usually are much more careful the next time. So I'm dubious that people are making the same mistakes. It's possible, but I'm not convinced.)
I have to agree with some of the other posters that want to be rid of these machines.
I live in a mostly Democrat controlled area, but usually vote Republican. When I tried to vote early, I discovered that the machine I was using wouldn't let me vote for Bush. I asked for a paper ballot, and was given one, but it was a strange thing to see.
After handing the paper ballot in, I felt a lot better knowing it would be faithfully counted.
Who hasn't seen this happen for touchscreen machines. More often than not the sensor plate thingy is offset downward of the screen so that when you press the screen the cursor will appear half an inch above it. There are two issues here.
1) Someone should fix the screen/driver so that it is aligned.
2) The woman is insane.
They keep saying in the article that they click on one candidate but then it gets "switched" to a vote for another candidate, as if the machine sees a Kerry vote and decides half a second later to change it to one for Bush. It's propaganda, for those of you who didn't look hard enough. Just another piece of that "There are evil people out there who want to rob you of your vote. If you see anything funny at the polls you'll know who's evil."
Direct away from face when opening.
It's too bad all this energy isn't be directed at trying to correct the problems and fraud caused by paper ballots.
Punching extra holes in a punchcard, or filling in a bubble with a pencil is the easiest thing in the world.
Or how about simply lying about the numbers when you call to report them to the supervisors running the election?
Yes, it really is done that way is many places.
Okay, so you don't trust programmers writing voting software. But how then can you trust all these other people in the chain? What makes you think they're honest?
What about ballots mailed in? How do you know they even make it through the post office? How do the people counting these ballots even know it was you that really sent it? How do they know you're even a real person and not Fido T. Dog?
Vote fraud is real, and it goes way beyond miscalibrated touch screens.
If it's a software problem, am sure everyone should've been facing the same issue, considering how trivially simple a thing a vote accumulating app would/should be (unless of course the developer has goofed up majorly)
... They're hitting the wrong button."
She believes it's a people problem. "I have confidence in the machines," she said. "They are touch screens. People are touching them with their palms, or leaning their hand.
Why get to a stage where ppl complain at all!? Why not have the different clickable entries reasonably far away from one another?! It's not as if you have to include the names of hundreds of candidates as in here in india.
We don't need another stupid thing that adds to the ppl's woes
"In Sandoval County, three Rio Rancho residents said they had a similar problem, with opposite results. They said a touch-screen machine switched their presidential votes from Bush to Kerry."
Of course the abstract for this story only mensions votes being switched from Kerry to Bush.
What a surprise.
What we need is non-partisan, or better, multi-partisan, voting commissions. Bring in a Dem, a Repub, and throw in a 3rd party person every now and then. It will give a better air of legitimacy to the circus we call elelection.
The real problem here is not any attempt of voter fraud - it's the goddamn things not working correctly and the official blaming it on the users. It's hilarious to hear his excuses: "they're hitting their palms! they're not doing it right!!!" I've had a problem with many touch screens before, usually depending on the angle at which you view the screen. If you're a different height than the person who calibrates it, and the options are close enough together, it'll basicially shift the whole ballot up or down.
The real question is: why the hell did they use touch screens when they could have made a simple system with actual buttons? And why did they decide that this was the year that we must test our electronic voting machines, I guess because they were sick of guessing whether a dimple in the card meant a vote? The whole thing smacks of the disgusting trend in our country: we'd rather be certain than right. If you think there's any system which won't confuse or provide difficulty for seniors, you clearly have never had a grandmother.
--Stephen
Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
Arizona touchscreen voting equipment places Albuquerque in Arizona!
Every time there's a vote "problem" the principles try to find a way to make voting easier, which they usually interpret as more effortless. So in South Florida, they go from punch-card paper ballots to video terminals, which is supposed to require even less effort because the problem is incorrectly diagnosed as people being unable to punch a hole in a thin sheet of paper even under the circumstance that the hole was pre-weakened.
So now we start seeing problems with screen registration and we're suprised? Now it's even EASIER to vote WRONG! On a side note, after hundreds of people touching these things, they're gonna get really greasy and gross. Is someone going to wipe the screen after each user?
What we need is a system that makes voting deliberate. Maybe have people write the full name or something, spell out yes or no on referendums, etc. Maybe have some anonymous system for voters to check their own votes after the election to make sure they are recorded correctly.
What we don't need is more "easy voting" schemes that a light breeze could influnce.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
You'll get them charged with all manners of tampering with the election process, public disturbance, property destruction, destruction of government property and maybe even a terrorism charge under the USA PATRIOT Act's new definition of terrorism. Remember, anyone who commits property damage to influence the opinion of the civil body politic is now a terrorist.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
"Design a better idiot-proof piece of software, and the genetic pool will design a better idiot."
-- John "Kate" Looney.
This is one of the few applications where you have to spend as much effort as you can on good design. Regular computers and ATM machines not working are mostly a concern for the manufacturer. Military and medical systems are only used by trained individuals. However, voting systems are one of the few systems that everybody are supposed to be able to use, by law.
Irene KHAAAAAAN!
Exactly. And there weren't exactly hundreds of people complaining about votes for Kerry going to Bush?
Some pople may be saying that this is part of the pre-emptive strike the Democrats promised (alleging fraud where none exists).
More likely, it's a misalligned touchscreen issue. Were those who complained shorter or taller than the people who calibrated the screens? Did they have eye-hand coordination problems?
But they all were able to correct the checkmarks and vote for those that they intended to vote for. That's much of the point with touch-screen votes. You either have instant confirmation that you voted for your preferred candidate, or you didn't cast a ballot at all. Good stuff.
Irene KHAAAAAAN!
Because the last time I checked Albuquerque was in New Mexico, not Arizona. This is also important because New Mexico is one of the swing states this year and only went to Gore in 2000 by a few hundred votes.
Point of order - if you read the article, its about voters in Bernalillo County (where Albuquerque is) and Sandoval County, in New Mexico, not Arizona.
Here in Southern Arizona, we have optical scan ballots, which the best of all worlds. I vote with a pen, a computer scans it, and if there's a question about a recount, a human can go back and look at what I marked on my ballot.
Are there any arguments for touchscreens over optical scan ballots? I can't think of any.
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside a dog, its too dark to read.
Who made these machines?
If you must moderate, please moderate as irrelevent, not something bad, because I'm sure someone will find this interest
That's what I want to know.
If you must moderate, please moderate as irrelevent, not something bad, because I'm sure someone will find this interest
In the Netherlands we have been using voting machines for ages. At a general election there are usually 100+ candidates to choose from and AFAIK there have been very few problems.
Then again..those voting machines don't run Windows,use buttons instead of fancy touchscreens and display on a small LCD strip.
The machines have several columns of buttons with the names of the candidates and a LED next to them. When you vote you look up the candidate you want to vote for and press the button next to the name. A LED will indicate your selection. if you're satisfied the correct name is selected you confirm your choice by pressing the vote button. If all went well there will be a message to confirm that the vote has been registered.
It's all very simple but effective.
1. Yes, I know Albuquerque is in NM. I simply had a brainfart when I saw "abqjournal" and read it as "azjournal" or something like that. 2. The article I submitted was edited for length before posting, so some stuff I'd asked was chopped out, like whether there were errors in Kerry's favor similar to the ones for Bush. The abqjournal article itself was not clear about that at all. While it says there were some errors in each direction, we don't know at all whether 90% of the errors favored Bush, 90% favored Kerry, or what. 3. ABQ Journal is apparently a Republican paper and it has endorsed Bush, so anything it prints is certainly not Democratic propoganda.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
This is a funny thing someone made, nothing more. It satires real life in a way.
m v
http://www.boomchicago.nl/images/Voting_Machine.w
What a surprise
Frankly, I'm shocked. I am beside myself in outrage. It is unfathomable to me that Slashdot would ever post a story with a misleading abstract.
I think this is going to permanently tarnish Slashdot's reputation of fair, honest and unbiased reporting.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
I left that out to see if someone else would think of it and get modded up beyond me.
Suuure. The thought never occurred to your lizard-like mind, you liar.
First this is not a plot created by Republicans. Since this is /., this part of the article was not mentioned in the summary:
In Sandoval County, three Rio Rancho residents said they had a similar problem, with opposite results. They said a touch-screen machine switched their presidential votes from Bush to Kerry.
The article did not mention how many voting problems have occured thus far. If hundreds or even thousands of people are experiencing problems voting New Mexico I would say something is wrong.
My personal opinion is that elections involving Federal positions should be overseen and administered by a Federal body. All PAPER ballots should have the same design. Rules for absentee ballots, early voting, ect. would be created by this body made up of three representatives from each state. One Democrat, one Republican, and one third party.
I must admit that I consider myself conservative when it comes to government however elections are crucial to democracy (or in the case of President a Republic.) The Federal government must be involved in Federal elections even though I cringe when the Federal government gets more power.
Quit your bitching. It's so childish and in no way helps the right when they go on and on about perceived political bias in the media, the movies, wherever.
What happened to being the bigger man? Sounds like a bunch of whining bullshit.
Vote 3rd party.
(and remember, after the zillions of post facto recounts, Bush always won under any interpretation that would have passed the equal-protection test.)
A lot of legitimate recounts , except the one Gore wanted favored Gore.
The problem was, as you said, Gore tried to steal the election, and his self centeredness cost him. Had he done the right thing (as in integrity and honesty, not Rush and friends) and asked for a recount for the whole state, things would have been different.
The 2000 election set a precedence, and every election after will be a mess. Both sides have plenty of blame - the president for allowing his state election leader to be the secretary of state, Gore for trying to steal the election by only recounting Democratic counties, so on and so on.
So having machines that incorrectly work is just asking for trouble. Having the maker's of these machines strongly support a single party - of course there is suspicion (not founded, but warranted).
The real question is, "How do we, as a nation, get out of this mess?"
1) A strong, overwhelming victory by the president would have been nice. But he is so incompetent, all he has done is divide the nation more.
1) A strong, overwhelming victory by Kerry would have been nice. But he is a weak candidate and is having trouble gaining much ground vs this nations worst president (ever).
3) A strong third party to "balance" the system. Things got to be really screwed up before this will happen. Maybe there is hope for Nov. 3.
I am living proof of the Peter Principle
It's a reference to Douglass Adams, I believe, about how people are scared of the wrong lizard being elected. So, they always vote for the other lizard. They never consider voting for somebody other than a lizard.
That's what "federally certified means". NADA. And denise lamb is the one who does this to you (denise.lamb@state.nm.us).
Denise is a rabid, machines-can-do-no-wrong political animal, logig means nothing to her, so lying to achive an agenda is simply machivelian to her. In fact she makes up lies about the machines and tells people for example that all paper trails would be printed on 1.5 inch wide ribbons of tissue paper. (no I'm not making this up, I've saw her demo before the ACLU.).
If that were not enough, we have a Secretary of state, Rebecca Vigil-Giron who if you look on "followthemoney,org" you will see takes not only corporate donations from vendors but also personal ones. She is also head of the NAtional association of secretaries of state and issues policy reccomendations to all the others SOS. About half of her $500,000 budget comes in "gifts" from machine vendors.
So you can see that if New Mexico has a problem then the whole united states has a problem
I urge you to write Denise Lamb denise.lamb@state.nm.us and tell her you are a professional programmer and give her your candid opinion. And while you are at it ask her to mail you one of those noodle voting tapes she had made up--she hands out copies.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
What happened was, California SecState Shelley de-certified ALL touchscreen machines around April 29th 2004. He's allowing most to be used so long as certain measures are taken, most of which improve security at least a little, and one says that voters must be given a paper option at the polling place. If that paper option isn't present, the touchscreen machine is ILLEGAL TO OPERATE. Again: this is a California only thing. Unfortunately. Oh, and the latest generation Diebold touchscreen (the TSx) was flat banned.
There's no actual evidence these machines favor Republicans. I used the same machines (Sequoia voting systems) in Washington, and me and a few other people would have Democrat selected when we clicked Republican. Happened the other way, too. If you use the provided stylus instead of your finger it is less likely to make an error (the problem being that if you flat-finger it, you could select two squares at once, and then it guesses wrong).
It is part bad design, part user error, and as someone who's worked some with the machines (we had a demo machine when we were registering people to vote, so they could play with the new systems), I can I saw no evidence it favored either side in its errors.
Vote rigging for dumnmies:
1- Use system that will generate as many errors as possible without forcing a total cancel of the election. Any political blunder can be blamed on bad software!
2- Investigate, fix, and recount when it favors the party in power.
3- Don't investigate, fix, or recount when it favors the other party.
4- Make a token exception to rule 1, 2, and 3 for journalists to quote.
5- Voting machine people, like Diebold, have felony records for sophisticated computer crimes. Make sure voters don't think they would pull a sophisticated computer crime to make sure the party that bought voting machines stay in power to buy more!!!
Anything else?
Microsoft is pure dog-ma. FreeBSD is pure cat-ma.