Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Verified Voting's Statement On the South Carolina Primary

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-16-10 11:16 AM
Original message
Verified Voting's Statement On the South Carolina Primary
On the South Carolina Primary
A call for recountable, auditable voting systems
June 15th, 2010

Last weeks surprising outcome in a party primary in South Carolina for United States Senate was accompanied by anecdotal reports of voting problems on election day, and many questions about the accuracy of the vote count.

Whether specific reports of irregularities in this election are confirmed, the most important fact about South Carolinas voting system is that most ballots cannot be effectively audited or recounted. Serious concerns about the integrity of the primary (and of other elections conducted using the same technology) are inevitable, and legitimate.

South Carolina uses paperless touch-screen electronic voting machines...


In a statewide election verified by a risk-limiting audit, many more people would have to commit egregious error or collude actively in order for electronic vote miscounts to cause an incorrect winner to be certified. By contrast, a paperless system such as South Carolinas requires the error or malfeasance of a relative small number of individuals to change an elections outcome.


Some interpreted a GAO report on the FL-13 undervote as exonerating the iVotronic machines, but we noted in our report that the GAO did not analyze firmware for the cards that enable voting for each voter; and verified only that the firmware found on the sampled machines contained the certified firmware...


A 2007 report commissioned by Ohios Secretary of State also found:

taken as a whole, the security failures in the ES&S system are of a magnitude and depth that, absent a substantial re-engineering of the software itself, renders procedural changes alone unlikely to meaningfully improve security. Nevertheless, we attempted to identify practical procedural safeguards that might substantially increase the security of the ES&S system in practice. We regret that we ultimately failed to find any such procedures that we could recommend with any degree of confidence. (p.30)

More at:

Refresh | +14 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-20-10 08:52 AM
Response to Original message
1. A voice of reason is a sea of uncritical hysteria.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Sep 21st 2017, 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC