Slashdot Mirror


Maryland Scraps Diebold Voting System

beadfulthings writes "After eight years and some $65 million, the state of Maryland is taking its first steps to return to an accountable, paper-ballot based voting system. Governor Martin O'Malley has announced an initial outlay of $6.5 million towards the $20 million cost of an optical system which will scan and tally the votes while the paper ballots are retained as a backup. The new (or old) system is expected to be in place by 2010 — or four years before the state finishes paying off the bill for the touch-screen system."

29 of 209 comments (clear)

  1. But what I want to know - by Recovering+Hater · · Score: 5, Funny

    -is where the "Suddenoutbreakofcommonsense" tag is?

    --
    My humor is probably your flamebait
    1. Re:But what I want to know - by jrothwell97 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just 'cause I'm feeling nice, I have tagged it as 'suddenoutbreakofcommonsensejustforyourecoveringhater'. Happy now...?

      --
      Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
  2. Diebold = Premier Election Solutions. by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm sure many of us are aware... but let us not forget who Premier Election Solutions, really are. They are Diebold.

    Changing the name was a sneaky move.

    1. Re:Diebold = Premier Election Solutions. by jrothwell97 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm sure many of us are aware... but let us not forget who Premier Election Solutions, really are. They are Diebold.

      Changing the name was a sneaky move. Strange that while they offer flawed election 'solutions', they also make ATMs and cash deposit machines. HSBC banks here in the Free World use Diebold-badged machines, into which shopkeepers deposit their money every Friday. I dread to think what that may implicate if the ATMs are running similar software.
      --
      Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
    2. Re:Diebold = Premier Election Solutions. by sconeu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The difference is that both Diebold and their clients (the banks) have a vested interest in making sure ATMs *DO* record every transaction accurately.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    3. Re:Diebold = Premier Election Solutions. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I bet there will be some nasty digital skeletons in the closet.
      Absolutely.

      The more I learn about this Diebold outfit, the more I think they should be kept far away from any part of our electoral system. Just yesterday, I read an interesting story about a county clerk in some rural Nevada county who looked the machines over carefully and, not being a techie, called in a few trusted computer people to check out one of the systems. Naturally, Diebold's machines are closed source, so they say this County Clerk violated their EULA. The worst part of this is that Diebold put pressure on the County Board until this clerk was forced to resign. They've got that much power.

      Just the idea that our elections would run on a closed-source, impossible-to-audit system is unbelievable to me. Especially after the rate of undervoting (ballots that were completely filled out, except the Diebold machines say there was no vote cast for President that only seemed to occur in heavily Democratic precincts in Pennsylvania, New Mexico and Ohio. In some minority districts, the rate of undervoting was EIGHTY PERCENT in 2004. That means, in a heavily contest year, in an area that has a high turnout rate, voters went in and filled out their computer ballot for all the local races, all the judgeships, county board, etc., but for some reason did not cast a vote for President. It's absolutely ridiculous. Problem is, since there are no paper ballots, it's impossible to audit. Diebold sends in the count and that's it, jack. Four more years of a jug-eared dry drunk in the White House.

      It's going to take a while, and maybe a few election cycles, but if we can't get honest paper ballots in every single precinct in the USA, there needs to be some serious shit a-flyin'.
      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re:Diebold = Premier Election Solutions. by mrchaotica · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, I am sorry to interrupt your Bush-bashing "discourse" with the facts.

      My "Bush-bashing discourse?" Check again, dipshit -- I'm not the same guy you were blabbering to. You're just making such an ass of yourself that even otherwise-disinterested third parties like myself feel the need to point out how much of a fuck-up you are!

      That's the problem with giving people like you a voice...

      "Like me?" You don't know anything about me, Mr. I'm-Too-Stupid-To-Check-The-Name-Of-The-Guy-I'm-Replying-To, except for the fact that I think you're a flaming douchebag!

      Now, seriously. Are you even even aware that you completely ignored every piece of meaningful content of PopeRatzo's post, and instead flew off the handle over a random meaningless remark? You're acting like you're a spoiled four-year-old who was insulted personally, and that's just stupid. Grow a thicker skin, and stop deluding yourself that you're G. W. Bush! Unless you are Bush, in which case your whining represents whole new orders of magnitude of patheticness...

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  3. Where can Diebold hide now? by jrothwell97 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Diebold are going to have real trouble building their reputation back up after this; even though other machines may be vulnerable, the fact that this case has been so well publicised is seriously going to damage Diebold's public image.

    --
    Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
    1. Re:Where can Diebold hide now? by zappepcs · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, they could have scored a huge boost in credibility *IF* they had said, wait! We'll pay for the NH recounts because we are certain our machines are good, and if anything is found to be wrong, we'll fix it before the next primary or caucus.

      But that is not what they did... instead, there was a conversation in a darkened back room somewhere that went something like this:

      Politician: I thought you said it would be undetectable?
      Company Rep: I thought you said we'd not be prosecuted?
      Politician: You didn't say you'd fsck it up this badly.
      Company Rep: I did what you told me you wanted, give or take a couple of votes.

      Politician: This is not going to be good, you had better hide the evidence now, bury it deeply.
      Company Rep: No problem, we just paid Britney another $2 Million to pee on the courthouse steps.

      profit!

  4. Verified Voting by earlymon · · Score: 3, Informative

    All this made me start to wonder about voting machine requirements and this turned up - http://www.verifiedvoting.org/

    Thought others might find it interesting.

    --
    Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
  5. Stuck with the bill. by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Perhaps the state could sell some of the Diebold devices to help pay the bill that they're stuck with. They may garner a cult following(like the iPhone) of hackers and tinkerers. The devices are worthless as voting machines but they may be coaxed into second lives as kiosk-style internet machines, etc.

    1. Re:Stuck with the bill. by KiloByte · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or, you see, return them as faulty and demand the (taxpayers') money back?

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    2. Re:Stuck with the bill. by Amorymeltzer · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This is just stupid. Wasting $65M to $90M is pointless, but they deserve it. Moving backwards isn't the answer, and neither is moving only slightly backwards. There's no way that for that kind of money, they couldn't have gotten a series of machines that actually works. I don't want to spit the same old Diebold sucks, yay linux/open source/etc. vitriol but there are a lot of options available to a small business, not to mention a bloody STATE. The instant these things weren't working properly eight years ago, they should've given Diebold an ultimatum and then gone elsewhere.

      Maryland expects to be back on the paper trail, following states such as Florida and California, which have also decided that all-electronic systems make it too easy to compromise elections. Hmm... an all-electronic system doesn't work, and neither does all-paper. Gee, I wonder if there's someway to combine the two and maybe get some sort of hybrid, combining the best of both worlds...
      --
      I live in constant fear of the Coming of the Red Spiders.
  6. What about the old machines? by jo7hs2 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here is question... Before touchscreen voting, our area in Maryland had an optical paper system, which resembled some sort of Star Wars fan video version of R2D2. Why didn't they hold onto these machines, just in case the touchscreen voting devices didn't work out?

    1. Re:What about the old machines? by nomadic · · Score: 3, Funny

      Before touchscreen voting, our area in Maryland had an optical paper system, which resembled some sort of Star Wars fan video version of R2D2. Why didn't they hold onto these machines, just in case the touchscreen voting devices didn't work out?

      I think they tried, but the Jawas stole them.

  7. Election fraud by Capt'n+Hector · · Score: 4, Informative

    I don't know if this is common knowledge to informed Americans (I only know of it because it is part of my family lore), but in the 1970s there was another voting machine company, named after its founder, Shoup. They made the voting booths with the pulldown lever, and though I doubt they're still around today, some of you older /.ers may remember them. Anyhow, this company was plagued by scandal. One of the Shoup family, Ransom Shoup was actually convicted of conspiracy to throw an election. The company was also involved in bribing florida politicians. And this was in the era of paper ballots, too. Fast-forward to today: nobody knows if Diebold is up to no good, but that's kind of the point. Without a paper trail, it will be hard to convict anyone of anything, and I think Diebold knows this.

    --
    Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
    Africus aut Europaeus?
  8. " ... impossible to imagine ..." by Bearpaw · · Score: 3, Insightful
    FTA:

    "Indeed, it is impossible to imagine a voting system that could be impervious to attack," the report concluded.

    That's true, as far as it goes.

    But voting systems can -- and have been -- imagined that make it much more difficult to get away with such an attack.
  9. Especially in Chicago, NYC and the East Coast. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The difference is that both Diebold and their clients (the banks) have a vested interest in making sure ATMs *DO* record every transaction accurately.

    Unlike state government agencies, the banks, especially many of the ones in Chicago, NYC and up and down the east coast of the US, are run by the kind of folks who might be inclined to provide a set of concrete sneakers to anyone who sells them untrustworthy ATM machines. And the ATM makers know this.

    1. Re:Especially in Chicago, NYC and the East Coast. by Trogre · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And why oh why is your country not populated by people who might be inclined to provide a set of concrete sneakers to anyone who sells them untrustworthy elections?

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    2. Re:Especially in Chicago, NYC and the East Coast. by g-san · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, I assume by your tone you are talking about the US. Here is my anecdote for the day:

      On a recent gameshow (1 vs. 100), first question was who was so and so's step son. Some actress got married and by the marriage the stepson is like 5 yeas younger than the dad. Whatever, I can't remember the question or answer, that is completely useless knowledge (unless you are an agent or something). Out of 100, only 3 people got it wrong. Not bad. 97% of the people in that set knew the answer.

      Next Question: What is the third highest rank in the Senate called?
      Out of 97 people, a third got it wrong.

      Now these are people who were screened for a TV gameshow. They should be smarter than the average bear. A third got it wrong.

      These and people less intelligent (than gameshow contestants) are the voters. What do you think they care about more? What do you think they spend more time exposing themselves to, politics or OJ and Britney? That is the true hopelessness of our situation. If you know of a way to get 200 million people to stop paying attention to a drug-addicted talentless dead-beat mom or other Hollywood scuttlebutt, I would love to hear it. You want us to run a marathon to stop election fraud when most of the public barely knows how to crawl. Nevermind the 100 yard dash to comprehend why our economy and world reputation are crumbling to dust. IMHO, that is the answer to your question.

      Other answers may vary. This answer does not constitute the opinion of my employer or my land lord or my cat. This answer may become invalid in the future and no guarantees are made, either thusly, thisly, or implied. This answer may be copied if it contains this disclaimer. Due to quantum fluctuations, this answer may cease to exit at any time. This answer may cease to have been written in the first place if an unforseen time warp should occur. Do not submerge this answer in water.

  10. Optical scan ballots by rtechie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Optical scan ballots really aren't a dramatic improvement in reliability. In fact, the touchscreen systems replaced optical scan ballots in many locations.

    Designing a reliable balloting system is really quite easy. The UN nailed it down decades ago:

    1. Printed paper ballots wherein each ballot is marked by grease pencil or felt marker.

    2. Ballots are folded and placed into a slot on top of a locked clear plastic box.

    3. The boxes are guarded, transported to a central location, and then opened and the ballots are all hand-counted by volunteers in front of observers from all parties.

    1. Re:Optical scan ballots by karmatic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Optical scan ballots really aren't a dramatic improvement in reliability.

      They can be. Have the touchscreen device print the vote onto the paper ballot, and a barcode with a checksum. Scan it optically and verify it against the checksum.

      Anyone can verify their ballot - they simply look at what is marked. Misreads simply don't happen - if the two don't match, there is a problem. Give they guy a new ballot (replacing the old one), and have him do it again.

      If the hand recount doesn't _exactly_ match the automated totals, it can be scanned in batches (any size). Count X ballots, scan X ballots. If they don't match, there is a problem.

      As a nice side effect, machines don't have to be trusted, and don't have to have a network connection either. The machine can't screw up your vote without marking the wrong thing (or the CRC would be wrong), and you can check that yourself before it's counted. Recounts can be done by hand, and in the event of total system failure, you can still mark the silly thing by hand.

      As a nice bonus to this, you get the benefits of touchscreen voting - secret ballots for the blind (audio), multiple language support, pictures, the ability to offer more in-depth descriptions of line items, etc.

      It's not exactly rocket science.

    2. Re:Optical scan ballots by rhizome · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hand counting is not quick, and human error can enter into that. Hand counting with lots of observers can be pretty time consuming in terms of man-hours.

      This brings up one of the consistently-unasked questions in debates over electronic balloting: what's the hurry? I don't mean "It would be nice if we knew sooner," but what is it about an election requires that this stuff be done quickly?

      A second unasked-question would be, "what makes hand-counting errors less desirable than electronic-counting errors?"

      --
      When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
    3. Re:Optical scan ballots by Kingrames · · Score: 4, Funny

      "It's not exactly rocket science."

      No, but if you could do it with rockets, that would be awesome.

      --
      If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
  11. Lawsuit time? by Iphtashu+Fitz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder if we'll be seeing a slew of lawsuits against Diebold coming in the next few months/years as the states try to recoup the cost of their investments in the Diebold voting machines. I'd bet that they'd have contracts with Diebold that would hold them responsible for failures in the equipment. Given the reports from NH that seem to indicate discrepancies between what Diebold equipment reported and hand recounts I'd think that's a pretty good indicator that the Diebold equipment is faulty.

  12. Who wrote these contracts? by devjj · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the state buys a touch-screen voting system that is later proven (without a doubt) to be flawed in any of a number of ways, all of which contribute directly to an incorrect tally of the vote (the very reason the machines were procured), why does said state still have to pay for that contract? Are states not naturally covered by the same laws we are? Did they not get a warranty? Did no one even stop to fucking ask?

  13. Heck, Shoup is still in the game today! by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 5, Informative
    Except Shoup is now calling itself, "Advanced Voting Solutions" (AVS). You've probably heard of them. --The most astonishing part is that Diebold's, Howard Van Pelt and Larry Ensminger left Diebold and were hired by AVS in late 2004. --And not just a small hire either. Van Pelt and Ensminger are now AVS's President and Vice President!

    Here's a little of Shoup's history.

    It's a big, hairball of a mess and none of the right people are in jail.


    -FL

  14. My previous county's voting system by oahazmatt · · Score: 4, Informative

    I always enjoyed my previous county's voting system.

    Here's your paper, here's your marker. Fill in the dot next to who you're voting for. If you make a mistake, please see one of the attendants for a new ballot and we will destroy the old one, and record the action and confirm it with your signature. If you would like to vote and are unable to properly use the marker, please see one of our attendants for assistance. Once you are done, please slip your ballot into the secured box at either end of the room. The "I voted" sticker is optional and will not be forced on you.

    I voted in that county for 7 years, and not once did anyone ever question the authenticity of the outcomes, even when outcomes were close.

    --
    Those who believe the Internet is private,
    find their privates are on the Internet.
  15. Proud to be a Marylander by tie_guy_matt · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Today I am proud to be a Marylander! I would break out singing a round of "Maryland My Maryland" (still Maryland's official song) if it weren't a song written at about the time of the civil war about what a jerk Lincoln is and how we should join the Confederacy.

    Funny in 140 years or so Maryland has gone from that to being one of the more progressive states in the union. Seriously, don't let our past fool you Maryland is a great place to live -- and for the record we never did leave the union. Now let's not get into what the states official motto translates to.