- report by researchers at Johns Hopkins University and
Rice University on the dangers of touch-screen computer voting systems
has set off alarms around the nation.
-
- After exploring the source code -- the programming instructions
for the machine -- of one popular machine, the researchers found "stunning
flaws" and an astonishing potential for abuse and election fraud.
-
- Their startling conclusion: "... if we do not change
the process of designing our voting systems, we will have no confidence
that our election results will reflect the will of the electorate."
-
- After the Florida presidential election fiasco, many
states have adopted such machines -- strongly encouraged by the federal
government. The "Help America Vote Act of 2002" authorized $3.8
billion to replace punch card and mechanical voting machines by 2006. States
eagerly endorsed and purchased these machines, despite the fact that makers
of electronic voting systems refused to let computer scientists examine
the software used.
-
- The Johns Hopkins/Rice researchers found Diebold Election
Systems' source code on an Internet site. (Diebold has over 33,000 voting
machines in use in 37 states.) What they found when they examined the code
shocked them.
-
- The software, they said, was badly designed, flawed,
and could be manipulated -- and an election thus rigged -- by anyone with
$100 worth of computer equipment. It is possible for voters to get past
safeguards and cast multiple ballots. The "Smart Cards" used
in some machines could easily be copied. The machines and ballots can be
altered so that voters touching one candidate's name would unknowingly
be voting for another. A poll worker could secretly cut off vote counting
early, thus influencing the outcome. The machines could be electronically
broken into from remote locations, or manipulated onsite by poll workers,
voters or even janitors. And should an election appear suspicious, there
is no way to do a recount, since there is no record other than the voting
machine itself.
-
- Hackers, corrupt political operatives, and other sinister
characters could have a field day with all this -- and the lack of a paper
record means that no one would ever know. In short, the use of such machines
leaves all election results forever in doubt.
-
- Diebold has disputed the findings and charges that one
of the authors of the report has a conflict of interest because he served
on the advisory board of a Diebold competitor. (A link to Diebold's arguments
is below.) But some of the nation's leading computer scientists are now
saying that similar security problems are common to all electronic voting
systems.
-
- David Dill, a Stanford University computer science professor,
has gotten over 100 fellow scientists to sign a petition calling for more
accountability in voting technology.
-
- "What we know is that the machines can't be trusted,"
Dill says. "It's an unlocked bank vault... a disaster waiting to happen."
-
- Proposed reforms include requiring that manufacturers
of the voting machines include a paper printout that voters could look
at to verify that the machine accurately recorded their vote. Also proposed:
allowing openness in the software development process, to facilitate the
monitoring and improvement of voting software.
-
- Sources:
- http://www.verifiedvoting.org/index.asp
-
- Conclusions of critical report and link to it:
- http://www.verifiedvoting.org/article_text.asp?articleid=71
-
- Diebold Adobe PDF defends their machines:
- http://www.diebold.com/checksandbalances.pdf
-
- "We must confine ourselves to the powers described
in the Constitution, and the moment we pass it, we take an arbitrary stride
towards a despotic Government."
-
- -- James Jackson, First Congress, 1st Annals of Congress,
489 [1789]
-
- "All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution
are null and void."
-
- -- Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (2 Cranch) 137 (1803)
-
- "The Constitution of the United States is a law
for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and covers with the shield
of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances.
No doctrine involving more per consequences was ever invented by the wit
of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the
great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy
or despotism."
-
- -- The Supreme Court of the United States, 1866
-
- "The only way to reduce the influence of money in
politics is to reduce the size and power of government. If Congress had
nothing to sell, special interests would have nothing to buy."
-
- -- Geoffrey Neale, National Chair of the Libertarian
Party
-
- *Just because you do not take an interest in politics
doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you. --Pericles (430 B.C.)
|
