Diebold Admits ATMs Are More Robust Than Voting Machines

An anonymous reader points out a story in the Huffington Post about the status of funding for election voting systems. It contains an interesting section in which Chris Riggall, a spokesman for Premier (formerly Diebold) acknowledged that less money is spent making an electronic voting machine than on a typical ATM. The ironically named Riggall also notes that security could indeed be improved, but at a higher price than most election administrators would care to pay. Also quoted in the article is Ed Felten, who has recently found some inconsistencies in New Jersey voting machines. From the Post: "'An ATM is significantly a more expensive device than a voting terminal...' said Riggall. 'Were you to develop something that was as robust as an ATM, both in terms of the physical engineering of it and all aspects, clearly that would be something that the average jurisdiction cannot afford.' Perhaps cost has something to do with the fact that a couple of years ago, every single Diebold AccuVote TS could be opened with a standard key also used for some cabinets and mini-bars and available for purchase over the Internet."

Comments

Re:So?

[rhizome]

While I'm not bank executive, I am going to suspect that a bank will be far more concerned about the security of their ATMs than they about about how much those ATMs cost.

No, banks are concerned with the security of their cash. My ATM has a touchscreen that can be smashed with a rock just like my TV at home, so the bank is only concerned with the security of certain parts of the machine. Voting machines do not contain cash, so that whole aspect of their cost can be ignored.

Re:Best Parallel Ever!

[susano_otter]

Bah. Banks get what they pay for. They care about their ATM machines, and so they pay good money to get good ATM machines.

You care about voting machines? So front the cash to your local election commission, so they can afford to get good voting machines. It's not like Diebold is going to make world-class voting machines for free.

You don't have the cash? So front the time and energy necessary to convince your local community members to pitch in. Collect signatures and get a tax measure put on the ballot to finance the development and purchase of high-quality voting machines. Campaign in favor of that tax measure. MAKE IT HAPPEN.

Don't have the cash, and don't want to spend any time and effort on it? Then stop fucking whining. It's obviously not something you actually care about.

Re:Best Parallel Ever!

[susano_otter]

With what money? The taxes you already pay are already allocated to all the other government services you can't do without. Obviously it's never occurred to you that the state budget only goes so far and that your elected officials can only do so much to discharge their responsibilities with the money you give them. It's obvioulsy also never crossed your mind that democracy is an intereactive exercise. Your diligent oversight is a critical part of good governance.