Maryland Governor Wants Voting Paper Trail

smooth wombat writes "Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. said Wednesday that he has lost confidence in the state's ability to hold fair and secure elections this fall, and called for paper receipts for Maryland's electronic voting machines,and the delay of early-voting procedures approved by the Democratic-controlled legislature." From the article: "'In light of these recent national decertifications and the Maryland General Assembly's decision to override my vetoes ... I no longer have confidence in the State Board of Elections' ability to conduct fair and accurate elections in 2006,' said Ehrlich, a Republican, in his letter to Board of Elections Chairman Gilles W. Burger. Democrats criticized Ehrlich's apparent shift on the paper-receipt issue, noting that he vetoed a bill last year that would have studied the option. Advocates of reforming the state's voting system cheered Ehrlich's remarks, which he made a day before a Senate committee is to hold hearings on a bill that would require a paper trail. "

Comments

Hey, you know what an easier way to do this

[Anonymous Coward]

Gee, paper receipts. I wonder how we could possibly implement that.

Oh wait, here's an idea. Why don't we just use PAPER BALLOTS.

If you really want your fancy touch screens and all to waste tax dollars on, fine, use them. Just have the voting machine print out a ballot. But we should never be in a situation where we're considering an electromagnetic smudge to have a "vote". You simply cannot have accountability with electronic votes. Electronic voting is a bad idea to begin with and the fact the voting machine companies are now themselves a political interest makes the idea uterly unworkable.

Re:Hey, you know what an easier way to do this

[pete6677]

Best idea yet. When paper ballots are required for "electronic" voting, the voting machine just becomes a glorified hole punch or a very expensive printer. Punch card voting can actually work quite well when you don't have idiots running it.

What was wrong with the old system?

[warpSpeed]

I live and vote in Maryland. In the last major election we used paper ballots that were electronicly read. They worked just fine.

Why should we rush to use these new fangled voting gadgets? Oh, thats right pockets needed lining. What a waste of money.

Oh, and "Go Ehrlich!" Is that politicaly correct to say here?

Why is anyone against paper trails?

[germanStefan]

The question is, why should anyone be against a voting system where people know that their vote was counted? If I press a buttong for candidate A and the paper trail shows candidate B, then one knows and can complain and perhaps revote? The only arguments I have heard of so far are that it would be to expensive. While it may cost a bit, I still think that the costs outweigh the problems when there is no paper trail.

How many districts have we heard about, where their have been problems with electronig voting machines? Don't get me wrong, I use ATMs all the time, and trust it with my money, so I don't see why it should be so hard to come up with a secure and easy way to use voting machines. Diebold, the same company in trouble in several counties, is trusted for making great ATMs, but their voting machines are notoriously bad and their behaviour not to be trusted http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,60563,00 .html. Voting machines's source code should be open to election officials, so that they can take a look at them and make sure that they don't count backwards...

Re:Why is anyone against paper trails?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are a few reasons that Deibold can make rock solid ATM machines.

The ATM machines/networks are a VERY mature technology. Give a modern day hacker 15 minutes with an ATM machine from the 80's and watch it crack wide open. We have had ample chance to vet the bugs.

There are strong financial incentives for acurate ATM machines. No bank wants to even face the possibility of losing money to hackers via ATM machines. As a bank if an ATM manufacture makes you look like an ass, you will not buy those ATMs any more. Then there is the possibility of the Fed coming down on you hard for losing people's money.

When it comes to voting, the visibility just isn't there. If you went to the ATM machine every 4 years would you really care about it? It is hard enough to get people interested in the election, never mind the technology behind it.

As more counties stop using flawed machines, Diebold will start to change their tune. If they don't they will lose to a competitor.

The machine is your friend

[ExE122]

This isn't the first time Ehrlich has tried to re-open debate issues involving putting your trust into machines. [washingtonpost.com]

But on a more serious note... this article mentions nothing about annonymity. The type of paper trail that they seek would essentially mean that they would have to keep track of your voter ID and who your choice was. While I think it would be paranoid to assume that they would actually go back and try to figure out who voted for who, it does undermine the idea of a secret ballot.

I think what they really need to work on more is enhanced security and a more accurate verification system. That would ensure that you are indeed a unique registered voter without having to log who you voted for. If they can be sure of who the vote is coming from, then they can assume the vote is indeed accurate.

Point taken...

[IAAP]

by me.

So is adding/withdrawing money from an ATM. You shouldn't need a receipt to verify that the correct amount of money was withdrawn from your account because it's all electronic.

I was once shorted by an ATM. In short, I complained to my credit union and they ordered an audit of the ATM and my account was credited. At no time was my receipt requested. My point is how could the voter have something that would really prove the vote he caste was his without casting doubt on his vote?

Ok, that pun was unitentional, ut I can't think of a re-phrasing off of the top of my head.

Re:Work with him!

[Mr. Slippery]

Do you reckon his change of heart has anything to do with him being up for reelection?

Yes, but only because his "change of heart" may let him stop a motion to allow for early voting. A paper trail cannot be put into place in time for the November elections. (Yes, it's a four year term so he's up for relection; his most likely challenger is charismatic Baltimore mayor Martin O'Malley, though Montgomery County executive Douglas Duncan still has a shot at the Democratic candidacy.)

Our (majority Democratic) legislature recently overrode an Ehrlich (our Republican governor) veto of a bill that would allow voters to cast ballots five days before Election Day. Republicans generally favor tight control of where and when people can vote; their claim is that this prevents fraud, while critics say this is to help make it more difficult for poorer people (who are more likely to vote against Republican candidates) to vote.

Ehrlich is attempting to tie this early voting issue into the verified ballots issue, calling for a "package deal" of a paper trail (which would not happen until some time well after the election, so absolutely no effect on him) and a delay until 2008 of the early voting plan (which would mean fewer voters out of a population likely to oppose him). If voter-verified ballots were his true concern he would keep the early voting issue separate. It's politics as usual.

Me, I'll probably vote via absentee ballot again this year to avoid using Diebold machines - Maryland law requires only that you may be out of your county on election day in to vote absentee.