Slashdot Mirror
Florida E-Voting Machine Fails
cmason32 writes "An optical voting machine memory card failed earlier today in Daytona Beach, Florida, sending election officials scrambling to secure the 13,000 paper receipts. Without the paper ballots, all 13,000 votes would have been lost. Considering how close some predict this election to be, losing that many ballots would be catastrophic. Let's hope that we won't see any more of this in the next 24 hours, and that these problems are fixed before 2006."
The title of this article may be misleading for those who equate "e-voting" with "touchscreen machines."
The machine that failed was an optical scan machine. This is like a scantron for school exams; it's the type we use here in Arizona. You fill in little arrows and it reads which ones are darkened. There are still paper ballots that go into a lock box under the machine.
Personally, I don't think this is "e-voting" at all and that the title is just plain wrong, but since optical scan machines do, indeed, use electrons, I suppose it's arguable.
I live in Brevard county, which is just south of the county in question. The machine that failed optically scans the ballots just like a scan-tron machine does (we have the same type in Brevard county). Voters fill in bubbles for the candidates they want, and the machine scans and counts the votes. The ballots are saved for just such a problem. Honestly, I don't know why all the electronic voting isn't like this. It's incredibly simple and efficient.
As to whether more problems like this will occur that will actually lose votes, I hope it does. I hope thousands of votes are lost and that the outcome is affected. That's the only way we'll be able to get rid of the paperless voting machines once and for all.
"Save the whales, feed the hungry, free the mallocs" -- author unknown
I told you so?
What about the fallout from this? Who's liable? Can we sue companies like Diebold (or whatever manufacturer created this particular machine) for this sort thing?
the good news is that there is paper trail. It can be secured, and it can be recounted.
It also shows the importance of spot checking paper trails. What if this error had not been so blaringly obvious? Who would ever know. Since its not routine practice (its illegal) to recount paper ballots there would not be any way to know.
hence we need paper trails and we need to spot check them.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
but that's were the logic ends.
first let's consider the statistical fluctuations that might be present in 13,000 votes chosen at random from a larger set. If the votes were 50:50 for either candidate then in the variance of 13,000 cast ballots the outcome would be about fluctuate by 50 votes, or a difference bewteen the two candidates of 100 votes. That's the average deviation from the true average the actual deviation would be much higher. If more than one candidate is running, lets say nader is getting 10% of the votes, then the statistical fluctuation in naders total would be about 32 votes with those missing votes not equaly distributed among the other candidates.
Second, this is one precint in one county in florida. it's literally an island. One shoul dave ZERO expectation that its average demographics and voting pattern represents the state average.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Remember that the differences came down to just a few hundred votes in some states during the 2000 elections.
Also remember that the level of support a canidate expects to recieve is going to very widely from county to county, and even polling place to polling place. If the election is anything like 2000, reducing the number of votes cast by even 5% at even a dozen polling places will change the outcome of elections.
Random errors like this have the potential to spoil the entire election, and the immediate effect would be devestating.
On the other hand, if we make it through these elections without documented random errors destroying the entire process, we have a bigger problem to worry about. Both canidates have spent millions of dollars to determine exactly which counties and polling places matter to them the most. And, a major public strategy of both campaigns this year is to employ armies of lawyers and campaign staffers to increase the "friction" at the small handful of polling locations that are unfavorable to their campaign. Simultaneously, both parties are working furiously to lubricate the polling locations that are favorable to them.
People are going to prison this year for fraudulant voter registration drives designed to increase friction at a small number of polling locations. Other efforts, like the Florida felony voter list, are diabolical and almost comic-book like in their evilness.
But in the end, both canidates would probably sell their own mother to have a chance to spoil all the votes from just a dozen hand-picked voting machines. I hope that neither campaign takes positive steps to cause a voting machine to fail. But, I pray to God that if a campaign does sabotage a voting machine that they are not caught. I honestly question if the country could survive that right now.
Let's hope that ... these problems are fixed before 2006."
Simple. Chuck machines into garbage, replace with paper ballots. Problem fixed.
Everyone who has attended public school since 1970, maybe. That leaves out a lot of voters. My parents (baby Boomers)never had scantron. My Grandparents certanly never did. My parents have since learned, my grandparents cannot. I don't mean to insult senoir citizens, but as we all get older our eyes get worse. They have problems with daily tasks that are much more important to their quality of lives that are much more embarsising than not being able to figure out scantron. So is there a better practical solution that will help the elderly/ disabled vote? I don't know. But scantron doesn't work well for them.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.