Electronic Voting Examined; Deadline Nears

[leftchick]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051130/ap_on_re_us/electronic_voting

Even in this election off-year, the potential perils of electronic voting systems are bedeviling state officials as a Jan. 1 deadline approaches for complying with standards for the machines' reliability.

Across the country, officials are trying multiple methods to ensure that touch-screen voting machines can record and count votes without falling prey to software bugs, hackers, malicious insiders or other ills that beset computers.

This isn't just theoretical — problems in some states already have led to lost or miscounted votes.

One of the biggest concerns surrounding computerized ballots — their frequent inability to produce a written receipt of a vote — has been addressed or is being tackled in most states.

[Twist_U_Up]

1. Hey Now !!

people are noticing. Rate it up !!!

[Wilms]

2. Another problem is you don't have to hack a machine to cheat.

All you need to do is make an intentional or unintentional mistake when the setting the BALLOT DEFINITION FILE for any election.

And that doesn't just affect DRE's, but OpScans as well.

[Neil B Forzod]

8. you also don't have to mess with the ballot definition file

Only election officials have (or should have, at any rate) access to the main ballot definition file, and those people have better, more traditional ways to cheat if they're so inclined. Mess with the ballot definition file and any actual testing of the vote counting machines will just give you the wrong result, so it only works if nobody tests any of the machines. If you have that kind of access, you're better off just messing with election results. Or preparing some fake memory cards to count instead of the real ones. Or just "forgetting to count" some absentee ballots when they come in. Or adding a few extra ballots to the box. Or (etc).

Neil

[Angry Girl]

3. Hmm, a tiny peep. Hey, rate it up!

[Tiggeroshii]

4. Why did they move it?

It's news!!

[demodonkey]

5. Rated it 5 stars.

Rate it up --come on, DU this story guys!

[MelissaB]

6. I'm not believing my eyes. Can this be?

Can this get the media's attention? :bounce: Look at all the election items on the "greatest" and Yahoo, and Huffington Post and Rawstory and the paper in the UK and... :woohoo:

[annabanana]

7. WOW . . . . an AP article!!

rated and nominated..
I had to rub my eyes! Can we take our tinfoil off now? Jeebus!

[AuntiBush]

9. Glad this issue is being pounded now.

DUers need to keep this front & center. 2006 is right around the corner.

:thumbsup:

[nicknameless]

10. I just found out today that, in every election, San Francisco HAND COUNTS

*ALL* of its optical scan ballots. Not talking "recounting" here.
In every election, all of the ballots are hand counted before the vote is certified.

The myth about our needing these voting-stealing machines is just that -- a myth!

:toast:

For more info about SF:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2284191&mesg_id=2284191

[nicknameless]

12. I wish. (A lot of us do.)

I was misinformed by a State Assembly staffer.
Random count of ballots only, in SF.
Too good to be true, I guess. Info double checked with the elections office today.
Disappointing, to say the least.

[freedomfries]

11. thanks for posting leftchick!

this is a real breakthrough! Please e-mail or call your Congressional Rep to co-sponsor H.R.550, which mandates random audit of e-voting and open code!