WI Bill Would Require E-Voting Paper Trail, Source
AdamBLang writes "Three Wisconsin legislators announced today that they began circulating a memo for cosponsors to a bill that would require electronic voting machines to produce a paper ballot. Additionally, the new bill includes a provision that the source code must be publicly accessible. After the November 2004 elections, there were numerous reports of problems with the new paperless touch voting screens. Problems include machines subtracting or adding votes, freezing up, shutting down and skipping past races."
There is a link on the EFF page so you can send a canned or customized letter of support for this bill to your Senators and representative.
"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" - Patrick Henry
"Quick question: Why isn't this already a national requirement? What reasonable explanation is there for such a glaring lack of security in the most fundamental of governmental institutions?"
They'll tell you it's too expensive to have printers on all the voting machines. (Even though Diebold is the same company that somehow figured out a way to give you a receipt for every transaction you make at an ATM.)
The real reason is that paper receipts make it too hard to rig the election.
$8.95/mo web hosting
a bill that would require electronic voting machines to produce a paper ballot.
Good, they should. If atm machines can print a receipt so should e-voting machines. I seem to recall some years back about how Deibolt, one of the companies that makes them, said having these machines print receipts wasn't practical. Funny because Deibolt also makes atms.
Falcon
Help support Black Box Voting, they guard your right to have your vote counted.Should there be a Law?
the more immediate pure electronic vote can go forward with the machine, but the voters could verify their vote on the paper,then drop them in another tally box if they look good, then those paper votes get manually counted elsewhere and compared against the electronic result within a few days.
That's one way to do it. Of course I am in favor of no e-voting at all. I've voted for decades, and it's only the last three I have been required to be dieboldized. My vote has disappeared, you can't see it, it's gone, poofed away to some closed source machine only used by a few people with an agenda. We have no vote now, we have an illusion of a vote, we traded magic beans voodoo "new shiny" voting for anything resembling a vote. Paper pencil and wooden box are quite sufficient. worked for centuries. I like tech, but I like simple too. The only *need* for diebold is to hack elections, that's it. all the stuff that has leaked out about diebold screams "hacked elections on mass scales for fun and profit". Obvious as all get out. I don't think it was a coincidence that the first state wide all e-voting (georgia) also resulted in major poll busting differences in the vote, all *conveniently* in favor of the party currently enjoying power. Now I am not a D,nor an R, none of my guys every hardly gets elected, but... but this was fairly easy to see happen. It just sucks. pre and post polling for years was always pretty accurate,not perfect, but usually nailed it well. Then all of a sudden these polls "failed" the same time we started using diebold machines.
uh huh
I just don't believe in coincidences with power politics, not with the stakes as high as controlling large states and the federal government. It is beyond even putting a numerical value in dollars to estimate what control of the executive and legislative branches of the federal government are 'worth", and if that continues for some time, then control of the judiciary, then that's it, you got it wrapped up. Only two parties is dismal enough, but just one party would be a disaster, and with the vote controlled, it would stay a disaster.