Paging Dr. Dean: Electronic Voting is in Critical Condition

[cal04]

Bob Fertik

BradBlog reports:

David Grossman (formerly of MediaMatters.org, currently of PoliticsTV.com) attended a breakfast with Howard Dean the other day. He asked Dean about his concern over Electronic Voting Machines. Dean's answer was interesting (transcript of complete answer is below.)

Dean said:

"These machines are a problem. This is not some Internet conspiracy; this is a serious problem that faces American democracy. These machines are not reliable and they shouldn't be used. We should not be using machines in this country where the results of the vote can't be verified after the fact. Period. Any machines."
-- DNC Chair, Gov. Howard Dean, 4/19/06

Exactly. But what is Dean actually doing about it?

I am actually calling Democratic public officials. I called one yesterday to try to head off the use of these machines. We spent half a million dollars after the election with a task force, headed by Donna Brazile but made up of academics that were relatively neutral and very careful, to look at these machines very carefully. We concluded that are easily hackable and cannot be verified and that they are not reliable.

Half a million dollars??? So where is this study? Has anyone outside DNC HQ seen it?

And we concluded the best machine you can use is an opti-scan machine because at least it has paper ballots and you still get the rapidity of the counting.

True - but the tabulators can also be hacked, so opti-scan must be combined with a mandatory sample recount of a significant number of ballots. Does Howard Dean know this? Is he telling Democratic officials to insist on this?

On May 11, Democrats.com is co-sponsoring a forum on electronic voting hosted by INN World Reports in New York City. We invited Howard Dean but have not received a response. Can anyone help us persuade him to participate?

http://www.democrats.com/node/8690

[Totally Committed]

1. Thanks for the post!

We need Howard on this full-throttle ASAP! Time is a-wastin'....

TC

[oscar111]

2. Canada, France and IIRC, most EU nations, use ONLY paper ballots hand

counted.

Machine complexity only helps hide theft methods. No one needs any machines.

Canada counts in a few hours after polls close.. fast enough.

France too.

toss every machine into the Atlantic.

PABAHAC... Paper ballots hand counted.

Simplicity makes theft hard. Complexity makes it easy.

[Canuckistanian]

4. Yes, our system is old-fashioned, but it works

A small piece of paper, a pencil. A cardboard screen. No line-ups, the whole process done in 2 minutes. Simplicity itself.

Most ridings (precincts) have fully reported all polls by 10:00 at night. Time enough to make the 11:00 news.

And recounts are done in hours, not days or weeks. No court battles, results can be seen and recognized by anyone who can see.

Mind you ,we're not voting for several things at once. We have no separate votes for Prime Minister. Just the candidate in a particular party.

[RufusEarl]

3. Do you have a plan?

I would certainly lend a hand in a campaign to inform Gov. Dean about your meeting, and suggest to him the urgency in doing something about E-voting in this country.

According to your post Gov. Dean has not declined your invitation, but simply hasn't responded. Perhaps a phone call to his office would be all thats required.

From his recent statement he's aware of the problem, a campaign to make him and other movers and shakers in the Democratic party understand the urgency of the problem would be a good idea!

[Stinky The Clown]

5. Action is beyond overdue and the lack of action is beyond comprehension

Action talks.

Bullshit walks.

Yanno?

We can have the best candidates, the best 'plan', the most money. But if the votes don't fucking matter, nothing else does either.

Period.

[FogerRox]

6. KNR

[IndyOp]

7. I have a plan!!

Use the staff infrastructure Dean put in place with his 50-State Plan.

Have the DNC create educational materials and have the staff hold workshops in EVERY Democratic Party headquarters across the nation over the Summer:

GOP Theft of Elections by 1,000 Cuts

> Gerrymandering: How to recognize it and what to do.
> Restricting Voter Registration: How it is done and how to work around it.
> Throwing Away Voter Registration Forms:
..Educate Your Voters To make sure their registration was processed correctly.
> Controling Voter Registration Databases:
..Giving Accenture the boot!
> Common Dirty Tricks on the Run Up to Election Day (and on Election Day)
..Educate Your Voters to Make Sure they have the correct information about polling ..location, voter rights, and more!
> Break-Ins at Democratic Party Headquarters - How to Secure Your Computer Files.
> Computerized Voting: Methods and means including rigged software, hacking memory ..cards, opscan readers, central tabulators, and more!
> Why there must be multiple Democratic Party observers at every polling location.
> Funding Independent Election Polls: Why & How.
> Defending Elections: Why ALL elections must provide VVPB and why ALL elections must ..be hand counted.

[BeFree]

8. That's a good plan

An organized party structure that helps America vote by making sure every voter is able to vote and each vote is counted.

If the party fails this time, I'm outta here!

[kansasblue]

9. Try Feingold.... look at this....

www.bradblog.com

[garybeck]

10. "best machine you can use is an opti-scan machine"

every time i hear or read someone saying "best machine you can use is an opti-scan machine"

I want to :puke:

I live in a state where we have all opsticans. to learn why optiscans are falsly given credit for being secure, read this article:

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=798&Itemid=51

[Festivito]

11. Optical scan needs at minimum random recounting, but are then good.

Just speedier than hand counting. It is verifiable, and, yes, must have properly effected verification process that is well followed. But, it is very accurate.

A complete hand count can follow that would give the best of both the fully-verifiable and fastest-results worlds.

Sorry if it makes you puke. I read your article. It just needs to be hand verified.

[garybeck]

12. they would be OK, only if

there was mandatory random hand counts, of AT LEAST 5-10%, and open source code. We have neither currently, so it is incorrect to say they are a good choice. in fact they are illegal - we know that they have illegal code on the memory cards which makes them extremely vulnerable to rigging. I would not trust opscan results ANY more than DRE results in today's elections.

[Festivito]

13. UR correct: Random HAND counts AT MINIMUM.

5-10% sounds fine. Even a complete recount by hand is possible, and could be mandatory.

Optical would allow us to have verifiable instant runoff voting. I'd hate to have it denied based on unclear or incomplete worries that can be addressed.