BBV - (CNN) Paper trail should be required for electronic votes

[harmonyguy]

On September 14, the Maryland Court of Appeals -- the state's highest court -- issued a crucial ruling. In its decision, it rejected a challenge to Maryland's current electronic touch-screen voting machine system -- slated to be used on November 2, everywhere in the state but in Baltimore.

Maryland's system uses Diebold's direct recording electronic (DRE) voting machines. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit requested that the court order the state to equipped these machines with printers -- which would then provide voters with a paper receipt as evidence of their vote. The court refused.

In this column, I will argue that the Maryland court got it wrong. Paper records are essential both to ensure voter confidence in electronic voting, and to safeguard against possible machine malfunctions or tampering. Experts say DRE machines are prone to bugs and vulnerable to hackers.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/09/28/ramasastry.votingmachines/

[Egalitariat]

1. How does giving a voter a paper receipt accomplish anything?

If there is a recount, are they going to ask all 2,873 voters in Precinct 23 to come back down on Saturday and bring their receipt with them?

It's not like seeing confirmation of your vote on paper means that it was recorded the same way in the database.

I like the idea of printers printing each vote so that you can compare what's printed with what's in the database, but I fail to see how giving a receipt to a voter, 95% of whom will chunk them first chance they get, accomplishes anything in the BBV arena.

Please enlighten me.

[judy]

2. No no, it is not just a paper...it is an "auditable paper trail"

with emphasis on the "auditable".

You vote with the touch screen machine. You get a printout that you can verify AND THEN, you put the printout in a SEALED BOX, where it can be recounted if needs be.

That's the idea.

[Andy_Stephenson]

3. Voter Verified

Paper Ballot...

Ask for it...Demand it...

Read my sig line...

[harmonyguy]

5. Aha ! There you are.

I knew that when 'that' question gets asked, you'll be not too far behind with the answer. My attempt at an answer is in my other msg.
HG

[harmonyguy]

4. You're right - that's why we have to be careful what we call it.

People are accustomed to the concept of putting paper reciepts in their pocket, just in case they need it some day in the future, to prove that they engaged in a particular transaction.

In the same way, people are accustomed to the concept of putting paper ballots in a secure ballot box in order to have their voted choices counted in an election. Since voting is supposed to be secret, there is no need to prove that they engaged in a particular transaction.

While some folks suggest that it's just a question of semantics, calling it a paper reciept or paper audit trail leaves a lot of wiggle room in what people will understand. My preference is to call it what it should be, a paper ballot which can be counted and recounted without machinery or without special skills.

HG