Doubting Electronic Voting 485
twitter writes "The NYT is raising the alarm on electronic voting. After citing expert opinion on the need for a paper trail, they then quote election officials and vendors who dismiss that opinion as the ignorant work of dreamers. The reporter titles his article, 'To Register Doubts, Press Here' and seems less than convinced."
Free mirror (Score:5, Informative)
The article [nytimes.com]
Bon appetit.
bound for corruption (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Free mirror (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.ge.ch/chancellerie/e-government/e-vo
You will discover, that in some less meticulous countries, e-voting has already been a reality.
Thanks also to HP, which has earned a lot of taxpayers money for developing a closed-source voting system never to be used at a larger scale than a 1'000 soul commune....
Misgivings (Score:4, Informative)
A bunch of my concerns that haven't been addressed in the media:
* The hardware and software are proprietary and not open to public review. My paper has a full page copy of the ballots before every election so the public can review it.
* Not accessible. How do people missing vision or limbs use them?
* How are the results audited? Do the electronic logs go into the public domain?
* Is the incredible expense and TCO of these machines justified? Paper ballots are practically free by comparison.
* What about absentee voting? What wacky "voting method of the future" can we come for that?
Re:Yeah right (Score:2, Informative)
Brazil (Score:5, Informative)
I fail to see how having a paper trail with electronic voting is "dreaming", it strikes me more as "required", particularly if we want to consider our government democratic.
The US government does NOT run elections (Score:5, Informative)
An important point, though: the Federal government does NOT run any elections, period. Elections are the responsibility of the states. This was done on purpose so that the federal government could not rig elections for itself. Of course, as we've seen in practice, federal intrusion in state business has become so commonplace that federal action frequently affects state elections, from Federal voting rights acts to the 2000 presidential election. Of course, the ends could be said to justify the means for much of this federal interference. But there is a legitimate states' rights/federalism argument to be made against any federal interference in state elections.
Bartcop (Score:4, Informative)
WARNING: This is really unsettling stuff and may cause you to lose (more) faith in the U.S. election system.
Re:Brazil (Score:2, Informative)
Paper is more tamper resistant.... the "chad" (Score:3, Informative)
Womever you wanted to win or thought should win, the recount was unconstitutional in the way it was ordered. It was also unfairly counted because anything that had an "improperly" punched chad was disgarded, which tended be more Bush votes discarded. (Not that I wanted either side to become victorious down to such an infantile issue.)
The real reliability = "Integrity and Honesty of the System" ... unfortunately that will never be 100% - I think computerized voting with printouts (like an ATM receipt) of each vote and then the voter taking that vote and placing it in a ballot box. If a hand recount needs to take place you can do so.
Has been like that in Belgium for years. (Score:2, Informative)
They even have a flash example of the electronic vote, and organise tryout sessions for the elderly people who fear everything that has a screen connected to it
went to go buy a pickup.. (Score:2, Informative)
He said, "here's one".
Cool, I go to pop the hood, can't. The hood is welded shut!
What's this? I ask, I can't see the engine?
No, you can't.
How do I know it's a v-8?
Because we sayso.
But I want to look!
You can't.
How do I know you aren't lying?
You can ask my boss.
But you and your boss work for the same company, how do I know he's not lying?
Because he doesn't lie.
How do I know that?
Because we sayso.
Can I get an independent opinion?
Sure.
From who?
The dealer.
The dealer! He works for the same company!
That's it, all we have to tell you, take it or leave it.
grumble, go to the next dealer down the street.
Hi! I'd like to buy a truck! I need a v-8!
Sure! We have one right here.
Go to look, hood welded shut....
#$%^&*!!!!
Computerised voting is such a bad idea on so many levels I am amazed it's even gotten one positive comment. It's the mother of all voting scams, sophisticated fraud and manipulation potential to the nth degree, way past simple ballot box stuffing in the olden days. Way, way, way past. Now combine that with the "two party that is one party in reality" district and debate and "news" rigging, well, there ya go, millions of people who *think* they just voted.
Re:An obvious candidate for required open source (Score:1, Informative)
http://www.elections.act.gov.au/EVACS.html.
So
Re:Yeah, great idea (Score:2, Informative)
Re:No roadblocks, no votes thrown away. (Score:1, Informative)
The Best Democracy Money Can Buy (Score:2, Informative)
The roadblocks weren't physical (Score:3, Informative)
The list was determined in this manner:
This is taken from a story by Greg Palast did for Harper's Magazine and can be read here [gregpalast.com]. Even more details can be had in this [allhatnocattle.net] article.US Commision on Civil RIghts begs to differ (Score:3, Informative)
Here's the top of their site [usccr.gov]. Here's their table of contents for the 2000 election [usccr.gov]. Here's their report on voting irregularities [usccr.gov].
This might be the best report [usccr.gov] because it was written shortly after the election when the outrage was still fresh. Their later reports try to use language as neutral as possible. This report is still prominent on their site so I don't think they've renounced any of it. Here's a quote:
In total, over 100 witnesses testified under oath before the Commission, including approximately 65 scheduled witnesses who were selected for the two hearings due to their knowledge of and/or experience with the issues under investigation. The Commission heard testimony from top elected and appointed state officials, including the Governor, the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Director of the Florida Division of Elections and other Florida state and county officials. A representative of Database Technologies, Inc. [Choicepoint], a firm involved in the controversial, state-sponsored removal of felons from the voter registration rolls also testified.
We also heard the sworn testimony of registered voters and experts on election reform issues, election laws and procedures and voting rights. Also, the Chair and Executive Director of the Select Task Force on Election Reforms established by Governor Jeb Bush testified before the Commission. Testimony was also received from the supervisors of elections for several counties, county commission officials, law enforcement personnel, and a states attorney. In addition to the scheduled witnesses, the Commission extended an opportunity for concerned persons, including Members of Congress and members of the Florida State Legislature, to submit testimony under oath that was germane to the issues under investigation. Significantly, the Commission subpoenaed scores of relevant documents to assist with this investigation.
The evidence points to an array of problems, including those in the following categories:
Re:Brazil (Score:2, Informative)
Greetings,
I have used the system several times in the past years.
Really straightforward: walk in (or wait in line), identity verification, sign receipt, walk to booth, terminal is authorized (using a remote wired keypad) by the election officer, type in candidate number (I believe one can scroll to the desired candidate, when the list is short), candidate info appears (photo [1], name, nickname, number, party), confirm, confirm again, in case of multiple elections (governor, senator), repeat process, walk out of booth, pick up receipt, walk home [2].
I'll post some links when I find the time (they'll probably be in portuguese, though). Here's one [senado.gov.br] off a senator's website, addressing possible security issues (it's a bit dated, pre-2002 elections).
---
[1] this applies to the recent presidential elections, I don't recall if the photo appears when voting for town council representatives and other positions with a large number of candidates.
[2] I live near my voting zone office, about 6 blocks away. And, voting days are national holidays (mandatory voting), so traffic is usually light.
---
Marco A. Assfalk de Oliveira
Re:Right..... and all financial transactions onlin (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Right..... and all financial transactions onlin (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Right..... and all financial transactions onlin (Score:1, Informative)
Been there, done that (Score:2, Informative)
The only networked part of the system was the voter registry, votes were counted at each polling station, verified by the regional electoral commision and then driven to City Hall and added up.
The only sad part about electronic elections is the lack of your typical election night suspension, the polling stations closed at 22:00 and the results were announced at 22:45.
The cost of the elections was about $450.000, higher than usual.
Here in Iceland we have a very sophisticated telecommunications system, 100% literacy, very high computer ownership and most households are connected to the internet with about half of them having broadband connections.
For more information: Statistics Iceland [hagstofa.is], a short summary of the Icelandic electoral process [kosning2003.is] and Public strategies for the information society in Iceland [raduneyti.is] (a bit dated).
The elections were a trial that was found to have been very successful, the next elections for local government will most likely be electronic (2006).