Computerized voting seen as threat

[seemslikeadream]

Some states demand printers that leave a verifiable physical record of the vote

By DOUG SAUNDERS
Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - Page A16

SAN JOSE, CALIF. -- U.S. voters watched in horror as the 2000 presidential election was stymied by an excess of physical voting evidence: hanging, swinging, bulging and dangling chads punched into ancient paper-card ballots.

Today, millions of voters are about to discover that the hundreds of millions of dollars spent remedying that debacle may have led to precisely the opposite problem: entirely computerized voting machines that leave absolutely no physical evidence.

As millions of Americans in 10 states vote in today's primary elections, it will be the first major trial of the new touch-screen computer voting machines that replaced the old punch-card units. A record six million people are expected to use the new machines.

Nobody seems as worried about this equipment as the technologically savvy voters in California's Silicon Valley region, one of the thousands of places hurrying to implement the touch screens. Yesterday, a good number of those voters showed up at the Santa Clara County elections office in order to avoid having to vote by computer

http://www.globetechnology.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040302/COMPUVOTE02/TPTechnology

[JohnOneillsMemory]

1. When I vote this morning in Marin, I'll have no idea if it is counted. n/t

[TroglodyteScholar]

2. black box voting

Wasn't Marin one of the counties that had a recent vote count transmitted by cell phone?

I'm reading Bev Harris's book right now...While I was already wary of electronic voting, now I'm downright opposed to it. I want to join up with the GA group that she mentions in the book, but they asked her not to reveal their name.

The 2002 midterm election was the first one I ever voted in...and Harris's book reveals that there were mistakes in my county tantamount to a missing ballot box.

We gotta do something to get back our auditable voting, or this demorcracy is toast.

[Panda1]

3. Bev made CNN news yesterday.

CNN had TWO stories about voting machines. One on Wolf Blitzer, including Bev, and another on Aaron Brown. There might be some hope here.

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0403/01/wbr.00.html
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Millions of voters taking part in tomorrow's Super Tuesday primaries and caucuses will cast ballots using new touch- screen voting machines. Critics worry the machines are a high-tech way potentially to steal an election. CNN's Jennifer Coggiola has been looking into this controversial issue, she's joining us now live with more -- Jennifer.

JENNIFER COGGIOLA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: As the country is trying to phase out these punch cards avoiding the dimpled and hanging chad now moving to electronic voting. But with the new alarming concerns about security and vulnerabilities, so we went to Maryland, their board of elections to get a demo on exactly how it works.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
...rest at link.

Aaron Bown picked up another segment later on the machines

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0403/01/asb.00.html
.............
COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: This isn't a story about fraud or theft or even incompetence, at least not yet. It's a story about confidence, confidence that, when you cast your vote, it counts.

It's bad enough that many Americans feel their individual vote doesn't count because it's overwhelmed by special interests or party politics, but what if it really isn't counted at all?

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN (voice-over): It wasn't supposed to happen again, the excruciating process of inspecting paper chads, hanging, dimpled or pregnant. And this year, it wasn't the same. It was worse. Once again, it happened in Florida, an election on a handful of votes, so close, the loser got an automatic recount, sort of.
...

MICHAEL WERTHEIMER, DIRECTOR, RABA TECHNOLOGIES: We were able to exploit many, many security flaws and completely change the election at the state level, which means changing the database, changing the votes, pretty much having full control of the election.

BROWN: More security has since been added, but election officials and industry representatives say that keeping an election honest depends on more than software.

....rest at link

[joeunderdog]

6. Do you think that they are raising doubts because Dems are in the lead?

The dynamics are hard to ignore. Not one conservative came out worried about this "threat to democracy" before. Now that the Dems seem to be posturing for a lead that may seem beyond "tweaking" with 10,000 votes here or there.

Are they posturing for a recount if/when they lose?

[GregD]

7. Yes, Marin used cell phones

My fiancee is working today as a pollworker today, so I will have a report mid-day as to whether they are being used again.

GregD

[seemslikeadream]

4. Chads Out, but Controversy Remains

An electronic ballot awaits 43% of the state's registered voters today. Some experts worry.

By Allison Hoffman
Times Staff Writer

March 2, 2004

As Californians go to the polls today, those casting ballots in 14 counties, home to 43% of the state's 15.1 million registered voters, will use electronic machines — part of a massive national experiment in new technology that pits the hope of fewer errors against the fear of election-night computer hacking.

Supporters, who include many of the state's registrars, say the new systems promise paperless elections that are cheaper to administer, faster to tally and free of the paper chads that gained infamy in the last presidential election.

Touch screens prompt voters to make selections in all races and let them review their choices, reducing the chance that voters inadvertently will skip a race. The machines also display ballots in multiple languages. Audio units allow blind voters to cast ballots without assistance. Centralized databases allow voters to go to any polling place in their county and cast local ballots.

But some computer scientists and election watchdog groups have raised questions about the security of electronic voting. They contend that the machines are vulnerable to software bugs or "malicious" code and lack the simple guarantee of a paper ballot, which can be recounted and examined by hand.
http://fox40.trb.com/news/ktla-me-votetech2mar02-lat,0,1749992.story?coll=ktxl-news-3

[maggrwaggr]

5. so .... why are we going ahead with these "elections"?

seems to me we need to sue to stop them until they get this bullshit straightened out.

Maybe that's Bush's plan for the fall?

[joeunderdog]

8. Freepers are asking the same thing:

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1089140/posts

[truthisfreedom]

9. excellent. i'm glad this thing bothers people on both sides of spectrum.

if activists on both sides make enough noise, it will get the media talking.

[Gingersnapsback]

10. Maryland's Primary

As you probably already know, Maryland has become a key battleground in the fight to safeguard our elections. State-sponsored studies of Maryland's Diebold voting machines have turned up serious security flaws, and no one can guarantee that plain old software bugs won't lose or change votes (they already have in a number of documented cases across the U.S.)

Lawmakers are debating the issue at the statehouse, but voting is already about to begin. There's something simple, powerful and patriotic you can do about it: insist on a paper ballot when you go to vote on Tuesday.

Our friends at TrueVoteMD have organized a simple, non-confrontational protest action that anyone can take. Maryland Board of Elections administrator Linda Lamone told the legislature that provisional ballots (i.e., paper) would be available at the polls if machines don't count the votes accurately. The studies show the machines can't be trusted, so ask pollworkers for a provisional ballot when you go to vote.

That's all there is to it!

If pollworkers refuse to give you a provisional ballot, you can either choose to go ahead and vote on the electronic voting machine, or you can go a step further and call TrueVoteMD for help. Their hotline is [phone], and they'll have a lawyer standing by to tell your pollworker they really should let you have the provisional ballot.

You might want to print this email out and carry it with you to the polls.

In any case, let us know what happens. If you ask for a provisional ballot tomorrow, drop us a line at [e-mail] and tell us what happened.

[w4rma]

11. "But officials say they will not have them until 2006." (n/t)

[Retrograde]

12. my first electronic voting experience

was today in Santa Clara co., heart of Silicon Valley- voted absentee and thus paper ballot last November. After today's experience, I'm planning to vote absentee/paper in future elections.

I'm not a Luddite, but IMHO the style of electronic voting we used was a step backwards. High-tech is not always the best solution: paper ballots work, are easy to archive and retrieve (just imagine the fun in 40 years or so when some researcher wants to look at vote distribution for some project or other, only to find the machines that read the voter cards don't exist anymore - kind of like trying to get a movie off a DVD when you don't have the right type of player) and human readable. What bothers me is the total lack of backup system in place.

linda

[leesa]

13. When I voted this evening on the Diebold machine, it really made

me queazy. I asked the pollworkers if I would get some sort of confirmation of my vote. They all chimed in about how reliable the machines are. I said, but it's been proven over and over again that they can be hacked and the results altered. I asked them if they would accept their Diebold ATM not providing them with a receipt.
I referred them to Black Box Voting. All clued out soccer Moms though so I'm sure it didn't trump discussions of their kiddies.

[seemslikeadream]

14. When Chris Mattews interviewed Bob Graham tonight

It was the first thing Bob talked about, everything from no paper trail to insecurity!