Slashdot Mirror
EFF Sues NC Election Board
Kludge writes "The EFF is suing the NC elections board. The board certified several voting machine manufacturers although none of the manufacturers would comply with the state law (passed unanimously) that the machine code be kept in escrow."
now can we look at the ones in ohio and flordia?
Will this stop my dead cat from voting 43 times in the election again?... I know it has rights but it keeps voting republican...
*''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
The board certified several voting machine manufacturers even though none of the manufacturers would comply with the state law (passed unanimously) that the machine code be kept in escrow. Not because.
"The board certified several voting machine manufacturers even though none of the manufacturers would comply with the state law (passed unanimously) that the machine code be kept in escrow."
The EFF is worried about e-voting based on the likely possibility of vote manipulations. Those in power of the election boards have an incredible amount of power in abusing the democratic process.
I'm no fan of democracy as all I see in democracy is the ability to manipulate the vote to further the interests of the elite. Democracy is merely a shroud fooling the voting citizens into thinking they don't live in an authoritarian and favoritist regime.
Votes are manipulated in more ways than just electronically:
1. The FEC sets federal campaign finance guidelines. Any restriction in how you spend your money is unconstitutionally limiting your freedom of expression. The primary goal of campaign finance reform is to give the authoritarian political parties great power over non-authoritarian parties. What democracy needs is Real Campaign Finance Reform (group is gone) that gives everyone back their ability to express their beliefs politically. Even if you want to give money to a third party, they can't do much with it and you can't give as much as you want.
2. The FEC gives voters the idea that money corrupts government. Government corrupts due to unlimited power to control, not because of voter donations. If our federal government ran beneath their constitutional boundaries, no amount of bribery or donations would make one difference. Russian could give every Congressman a billion dollars a piece, but the Constitutional would not allow any Congressman to give Russia (or any group or individual) preferential treatment.
3. The school system is unbalanced in teach the Constitution, leaving the majority of the population unsure of the real power of the Constitution -- leaving people free to use the rights they are born with, and preventing any government from walking over those rights.
4. Voters are given completely biased ballots. Proper ballots should force the voter to know who they are voting for and write in the candidate. Offering ballots showing the current office holder or party affiliation provides more power to the two authoritarian parties.
5. Voters are only allowed to see commercials from major parties as they are offered (illegal) campaign matching funds in addition to virtually unlimited campaign budgets. Third parties can not raise the necessary funds as they are limited by finance reform guidelnies.
6. Voters never get to see every candidate in the debates as the debate committees are run by authoritarian parties unwilling to give up their powers.
7. Voters are confused by the colluding media that wants them to vote in order to give the authoritarian candidates the mandates needed to expand the power of government. Voters rarely hear that voting is wrong and that the process setting up the vote is a collusion between the authoritarian parties.
I hope that the EFF can see how short they come when they prosecute only the voting machines, rather than the voting system.
Do what I do. Don't vote for any candidate -- write yourself in for every position.
From the article, it seems like the elections commission certified all voting machine manufacturers despite the fact that none of them were in compliance with the law. How was the elections commission allowed to do this? Wouldn't the logical solution have been to certify none of the voting machine manufacturers until they came into compliance with the law?
Am I missing something here (e.g. time limit)?
We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
"DOES NOT COMPUTE" The Slashdot summary claims the board certified the manufacturers because they wouldn't put their code in escrow. It's more likely the EFF is suing the board for certifying the manufacturers despite their refusal to place their code in escrow. First dupes, then ads, now stories that don't even make sense.
REM Old programmers don't die. They just GOSUB without RETURN.
Right now, the Libertarian Party is also suing the NC State Election Board because the Election Board is only allowing residents to register as "Democrat", "Republican", or "Independent". More importantly, they're also suing because NC has taken all alternative parties off of all ballots. I can't even vote for a Libertarian or Green or Reform Party candidate in the state of NC. The gizmo they use to count the ballots is just red herring. That debate is fabricated to keep people's wheels spinning about relatively unimportant things, while the big problems are being ignored. The real problem lies in the fact that choice has been removed from the process. Now, citizens get to vote for Bad or Worse, with both sides (Bad and Worse) colluding to keep the status quo.
I don't respond to AC's.
Read the guys explanation as to why he was certifying them, it was because none of them were prepared to meet the escrow requirement that he certified them.
If one of them had broken ranks and put their code in Escrow, he would have certified just that one.
My gast was totally flabbered by the explanation, and you don't like to say such things, but I recall Diebold and the American association for the blind, suddenly demanding electronic voting, while at the same time getting a new $17 million equipment centre as if by magic....
This is an interesting change of pace. Not too long ago, big interests would spend a lot of money buying voters and pressuring them to vote their way.
Now they just cut out the middleman! Why mess with voters when you can just mess with a couple of voting machines?
Genius!
What are you eating? isItVeg?.
Why don't you? If you've got a "good" idea, why not make some profit? :-)
Nobody's gay for Mole-Man.
There are no problems with electronic voting machince, except maybe for this minor glitch.
As a North Carolinian I was a little shocked to see the EFF was suing the state elections board. Then I read why. Why does the elections board think they can just ignore the law? I am all for having electronic voting and I imagine that it will help out the process considerably but we certainly shouldn't add more risk for fraud and error. Voting accuracy should be priority #1.
Switching to Linux can be an adventure!
I wonder what it would cost to put together an open-source consortium to design the thing from the ground up. These things aren't exactly rocket science, and I bet that most of it could be done with off-the-shelf components. As for the software - I don't see that as a terrifically complicated piece, and I'm willing to bet that a few good coders could put the likes of Diebold to shame.
The election commission does whatever it wants. Their only interest is to make sure only the big two parties stand a chance at any election. My state is the hardest state to get a party onto the ballot, and because of this there's only two choices on any state or federal level ballot in NC.
This open-source system was developed by a number of well known names in the open source community - eg - Andrew Tridgell (Samba), Martin Pool (Apache), and Rusty Russell (ip-tables / netfilter).
This system is in active use. All elections for the ACT government in Australia are now run using this system. Votes are lodged either at an eVACS terminal or - if lodged on paper ballot sheets - are manually entered into the electronic system for counting. That is - all votes end up in electronic form before counting / preference distribution is done automatically by computer.
Obviously the $200,000 cost of development of such an open, accurate, and secure system is clearly not high enough to give US governments' bank rollers the belief they are getting value for money from their political donations! Maybe Halliburton can develop such a system for use in the US for a billion or so?
more info and source code from the electoral office and recommendation for continued use.
Everyone concerned about the future of our electoral system, Diebold, and electronic voting machines in general NEEDS to watch this movie (available for download from the site): Votergate.tv
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
As a Christian and a scientist I am of the opinion that "Intelligent Design" is bad science and bad theology.
As for the "poser intellectualts"...there are idiots and assholes at every point of the compass and everywhere on the spectrum from left to right.
I think what most people are frustrated with is the complete absence of dialog and debate. I personally think that the likes of Karl Rove and his Democratic counterparts have done this. It seems nobody has the time for a real debate any more. We see our President in front of a banner with the "on message" catch phrase of the week. We hear some hand wringing wimp from the democratic side whining...
So, getting back to the topic of the article, TRANSPARENCY is the key. I agree the President should ability to receive candid input from whoever he wants it from....but if Enron execs ghost wrote our energy policy (as is likely the case) the voting public deserves to know and make an informed decision. The news media is so busy reporting on each other that they can't be counted on for that....but there is still hope unless our voting machines can't be relied upon as unbiased (not to claim they were ever perfect), it is that much easier for the cynical and power hungry to ignore the frustrated voter...and in turn it is easier for the frustrated voter to tune out.
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.