October 18, 2003
The hidden danger of 'Black Box Voting' machines
There’s been a lot of discussion on blogs recently about the new touchscreen voting machines (sometimes called “black boxes”) that are being purchased by states eager to comply with the Help America Vote Act of 2002. An article in the Independent (UK) earlier this week offered an overview of some of the allegations and concerns raised by these new voting systems, and Wired is running a story alleging that patches were applied to the system before last year’s Georgia elections, but that the machines were never recertified after the changes were made, something that should have been done, according to election laws.
I’m not really in a position to get into a serious discussion how much of a threat there may or may not be from the reported security problems with the machines or the concerns that there may be something of a conspiracy afoot to use them to help ensure Republican victories. Most of what I’ve read has been from the BlackBoxVoting site - a site who’s sole purpose is to raise awareness of the potential threat to democracy that the operators believe these machines present, but I’ve not found much offering any other side to the story.
Still, there are solid reasons to be concerned about these machines. They leave no paper trail and there's no way to verify that the votes recorded are actually the votes that were cast. There are extensive security concerns about the machines - many of them listed in a report done by testers at John Hopkins (file is in .pdf format) - that, if left uncorrected, could leave the machines vulnerable to tampering both locally and from a remote location. On top of that many of the executives working for or otherwise associated with the firms designing and marketing these machines are staunch supporters of the Republican party. Walden O'Dell, the chief executive of Diebold has - in a fund-raising letter recently sent to Republicans in Ohio - made a promise to "deliver" that state's electoral votes to Bush. Additionally, US Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) holds an ownership interest in ES&S, another firm that makes these machines.
There's another danger, though, posed by these machines, that I've not yet seen widely discussed - and in my opinion, it's the most dangerous one of all. In comments on several threads I've read about the black box voting machines, I've noticed a number of people saying that with these new machines being so vulnerable to tampering and with the companies that make them so firmly in the Republicans' pockets, they feel like there's no point at all to voting next year. The Republicans are going to win, these people figure, so their vote won't matter - especially since there's a good chance that their vote won't even be counted correctly by the machines.
What I find really ironic is that, the way things are going right now, the Republicans and their supporters in the election-machine industry may not have to do a thing if they want to win. The more alarmist stories that are published, with bold headlines shouting that the next election is already rigged, the more dispair I see in the comments being posted in response. By offering little or no defence to the charges, giving few answers to the questions being asked and paying minimal attention to the concerns being raised, all that's being heard are the voices of doom, telling us that the fix is in. But if we buy into that mentality - if we let the frustration, cynicism and anger we feel silence our voices - then the Republicans will win. They won't have to use any dirty tricks or try to manipulate the data. They'll win by default.
Like I said, there's plenty of reason to be concerned, and any problems that are found must be fixed - but we can't let the concerns get us down. If we do, then it won't matter if every single vote in every single district in every single state across the country is registered accurately and counted correctly. We will have defeated ourselves.
~=<*>=~ ~=<*>=~ ~=<*>=~
Are you registered to vote? Are your friends? If not, be sure to give them the link!
Make sure you know when your state's registration deadline is!
There is an interesting perspective regarding corporate control of voting machines. Timely article Thorswitch, and a subject that won’t be going away soon.
The above article exposes a potential for purchasing voting results from the company providing the machines, based on the fact that some designs preclude any recount and fail to provide any paper trail or accountability for the results.
Posted by: David R. Remer at October 20, 2003 10:17 AMThere’s that vast right-wing conspiracy at work again!
You have got to be kidding me.
Has it ever dawned on you that the reason Republicans are winning is that the majority of people are in fact actually voting for those Republican candidates, and it is not some vast right-wing conspiracy conjourning up “blackbox” voting machine schemes and or making it so that populous Democrat voting districts have to use “out-dated” technology from the ‘60’s and old junky punch card ballots to make sure every vote indeed is not counted.
Give me a break.
Either that or tell me what you are smokin’!
Out.
Posted by: bdy at October 20, 2003 03:43 PMI think that this is a greater threat to our Democracy than international terroism. The head of Diabold corporation is a fundraiser for Bush.
Posted by: Jake of 8bitjoystick.com at October 20, 2003 04:41 PMBdy: The problems with these machines are an issue that ALL voters should be looking at and taking seriously, not just Democrats and other progressives. Right now, it’s mainly the left that’s been discussing the matter because, at the moment, we seem to be the ones with the most to lose, and given the close connections between the officers of these companies and the Republican party, plus the promise of the CEO of one company to “deliver” the votes of a state to Bush in 2004, it’s not unreasonable to have questions.
When you get down to it, though, the security flaws with the software and systems used by these machines that have been documented so far could be exploited by any number of people - regardless of party affiliation - to screw around with election results, and then erase any trace of their having done so.
Read some of the material posted around the internet on these machines. Go ahead and ignore anything that points to one party or the other being “behind” it or trying to exploit it - just read about the basic security issues. There are a number of sites publishing a number of memos that were obtained from Diebold’s own computers (and which they have indicated are valid by having sites closed on the grounds that they’re violating Diebold’s copyright by publishing them - or even linking to them, which is why I’m not posting a link here - you’ll need to to look them up yourself if you do want to read them - but that way you can also choose what soure you read them from). There are also sites that have posted copies of the software that runs the voting system, along with several data files and instructions showing exactly how to use Microsoft Access to change passwords, vote counts and the audit log to erase any indication of tampering.
These problems don’t have a party affiliation. Yes, I’ll admit, right now I’m concerned about Republicans using these programs to rig elections, which is why I don’t want to see anyone become so discouraged that they decide not to vote at all. But the overall problem is much bigger than which party is most likely to benefit from the security flaws now. It’s not hyperbole to say that these machines, in the condition they’re in right now, could put our democracy at state.
Posted by: Kriselda Jarnsaxa at October 21, 2003 02:57 PMAs a Congressional candidate (U.S. Senate candidate Joe Hoeffel’s seat, Philadelphia area) and longtime state legislative leader on election issues, I share your concern about tampering with somftware. It would seem all too easy to have, say, Republican votes multiplied by 1.1 and have Democratic votes multiplied by 0.9. I would welcome specific website citations from those who are well-informed on this. I would also welcome any help people interested in having a progressive, anti-Iraq occupation legislator could offer.
Posted by: Mark B. Cohen at October 22, 2003 02:21 AMI thought about posting more specific links, but currently Diebold seems to be trying to track down sites that are posting links to things like the memos or files that are floating about the Internet right now and when they locate a site with such links, they are sending the hosting companies cease-and-desist letters demanding that the sites with such links be taken down. I have no desire to see that happen to Watch Blog.
One site I can refer you to, though is the Black Box Voting.com site. This is run by Bev Harris, who has been instrumental in bringing the problems with these machines to light. She’s currently in the process of writing a book about them and as she finishes each chapter, she’s posting it as a .pdf file on her site for free download. Her site does have a very strong anti-Republican bias, but she does have some good information, and it’s a good place to start looking into the matter. You might also want to check the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s website (http://www.eff.org) - they are representing an ISP that is challenging Diebold’s claim to be able to demand the shutdown of any site offering links to their copyrighted material posted elsewhere, and they also have some good stuff to help you get started into learning more about the issue as a whole.
Good luck!
Posted by: Kriselda Jarnsaxa at October 22, 2003 07:50 AMI am a conservative who generally votes Republican.
I also think the integrity of voting is vitally important for a democracy.
My current take (not having read that much) is that there is no real evidence of any actual fraud having taken place using voting machines, but I think even the appearance of a problem is too much. The system needs to be beyond reproach
It seems to me that each machine should print out a copy of the voters completed ballot which is then deposited in a locked box. These printouts are available for recounts and to check the integrity of the machine counts
Andymac
Posted by: AndyMac at October 24, 2003 02:00 PMAndymac - Yes, that’s an excellent idea - the people at http://www.verifiedvoting.org/ are working to lobby Congress for a law that would require such measures. They’ve made contact with a number of congressmen and are working in support of HR 2239 - http://holt.house.gov/issues2.cfm?id=5996 - that would:
[…] require all states to use election equipment that provides a voter-verifiable paper audit trail.
* This means that voters could check a paper ballot for accuracy before casting the vote —without having to trust the voting machine. Voter verification of ballots is crucial, because only the voter can check whether the ballot is accurate.
* A paper audit trail makes it possible to reconstruct the election results from the original voter-verified records, without having to trust the election equipment. In other words, it is possible to do a meaningful recount if an election is in dispute.
It’s a good place to start, and they seem to be working from a fairly non-partisan position, and is run by Dr. David L. Dill, who’s background is in computer science rather than politics. You might want to check it out.
Posted by: Kriselda Jarnsaxa at October 25, 2003 07:10 AMI’ve been following this story for weeks… and have been spreading the word to friends and co-workers here in Sioux Falls. It finally hit the national media. Ten minutes ago Lou Dobbs did a package on CNN. This is the first time I’ve seen it covered on national TV. His on-air poll asked “…do you think electronic votes should be backed up by a paper record of each vote?” (not an accurate quote) The quick poll results were about a hundred-to-one in favor of hard-copy verification.
Posted by: Del at December 3, 2003 06:45 PMAnd interesting note about this whole question is recently on Lou Dobbs Secretary of State for Florida, Glena Hood, said that she would be open to creating a printed record, but the equipment/techonology to do so is not availible. The next day a represent from Diabold said the option for a printout was availible, but there was no demand for that option.
Posted by: Francesca at March 12, 2004 06:51 PM
