By Michael Grebb, Wired News, May 6, 2004
Excerpts:
Passions ran high Wednesday at the first public hearing of the Election Assistance Commission, where activists and manufacturers of electronic voting machines clashed over whether new e-voting systems should include a voter-verifiable paper trail that auditors could use to recount votes if necessary.
-------
...the commission's chairman said he didn't expect the bipartisan panel would issue national standards requiring paper receipts when it makes preliminary recommendations next week, followed by more detailed guidelines next month.
"We will not decide on what machines people will buy," said the chairman, Republican DeForest B. Soaries Jr., saying it wasn't the panel's role to tell states what to do. "We will say, if California wants to have a backup paper system, what national standards it should follow."
--------
When California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley took the podium, a crowd of supporters cheered.
On Friday, Shelley banned the use of one model of Diebold's voting machines in four California counties, and decertified all touch-screen systems unless counties that own them implement 23 security requirements. At least one county is filing suit against Shelley for his actions, and others may follow.
Thursday, May 6, 2004
Wednesday, May 5, 2004
Senate committee approves bill to ban all e-voting machines in November
By Anna Oberthur, The Associated Press, May 5, 2004
Today the Senate Elections Committee passed SB 1723, a bill that would ban e-voting in California this November, on a bipartisan 3-1 vote.
At the beginning of the hearing, Senator Don Perata (D-Alameda), who co-sponsored the bill and also chairs the committee, said that given Secretary of State Kevin Shelley's decertification orders last Friday and plan to implement tighter e-voting security, he was ready to put this bill aside. But he changed his mind after learning that Riverside and possibly other counties and their registrars are preparing to sue the Secretary of State over his decertification order.
The next stop for this bill is the Senate floor, where it must receive a two-thirds vote before May 28 in order to advance to the Assembly.
Excerpt:
"The key to democracy is that everyone's vote counts and is counted. The electronic voting machines used in the March primary failed to meet that fundamental test," said one of the bill's authors, Sen. Ross Johnson, R-Irvine.
The bill would not allow the use of any form of electronic voting, including touch-screen machines, in the Nov. 2 general election. It would apply only to that election.
-------
On Tuesday, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to sue Shelley for decertifying the county's touch-screen voting system.
The board decided in closed session to go to court to stop Shelley's "assault on the touch-screen voting system pioneered by Riverside County," board chairman Roy Wilson said.
Today the Senate Elections Committee passed SB 1723, a bill that would ban e-voting in California this November, on a bipartisan 3-1 vote.
At the beginning of the hearing, Senator Don Perata (D-Alameda), who co-sponsored the bill and also chairs the committee, said that given Secretary of State Kevin Shelley's decertification orders last Friday and plan to implement tighter e-voting security, he was ready to put this bill aside. But he changed his mind after learning that Riverside and possibly other counties and their registrars are preparing to sue the Secretary of State over his decertification order.
The next stop for this bill is the Senate floor, where it must receive a two-thirds vote before May 28 in order to advance to the Assembly.
Excerpt:
"The key to democracy is that everyone's vote counts and is counted. The electronic voting machines used in the March primary failed to meet that fundamental test," said one of the bill's authors, Sen. Ross Johnson, R-Irvine.
The bill would not allow the use of any form of electronic voting, including touch-screen machines, in the Nov. 2 general election. It would apply only to that election.
-------
On Tuesday, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to sue Shelley for decertifying the county's touch-screen voting system.
The board decided in closed session to go to court to stop Shelley's "assault on the touch-screen voting system pioneered by Riverside County," board chairman Roy Wilson said.
E-Vote controversy comes to commission
by Andy Sullivan, Reuters, May 5, 2004
The first of what will be many reports on today's Election Assistance Commission hearing.
Excerpt:
A new U.S. election commission said on Wednesday it could not require districts using electronic voting machines to install printers or other secure backup systems to ensure that votes are counted properly.
Amid a heated debate over the merits of new touch-screen systems, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission said it hoped to develop voluntary guidelines for the electronic systems that will be used by one in three voters in November.
"At the end of the day, we can't tell districts what to do," said commission chairman DeForest Soaries at the first hearing held by the commission.
The commission, set up after the controversial 2000 U.S. election, is set to give out $2.3 billion to help states upgrade error-prone voting systems such as punch-card ballots that led to a protracted recount battle in Florida that year.
E-voting systems will be used in precincts in more than half of all states in November.
Election officials from Georgia, New Mexico and Los Angeles said the systems were easy to use, cut down on voting errors and allowed blind voters to cast their ballots in private.
Others were less enthusiastic. California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley decertified one-third of the state's e-voting machines last week following revelations that manufacturer Diebold Inc . installed untested software.
"Touch-screen systems can be reliable and secure, but the evidence to date suggests that they are neither right now," said Shelley, who mandated printers or other security measures for the state's remaining e-voting machines.
The first of what will be many reports on today's Election Assistance Commission hearing.
Excerpt:
A new U.S. election commission said on Wednesday it could not require districts using electronic voting machines to install printers or other secure backup systems to ensure that votes are counted properly.
Amid a heated debate over the merits of new touch-screen systems, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission said it hoped to develop voluntary guidelines for the electronic systems that will be used by one in three voters in November.
"At the end of the day, we can't tell districts what to do," said commission chairman DeForest Soaries at the first hearing held by the commission.
The commission, set up after the controversial 2000 U.S. election, is set to give out $2.3 billion to help states upgrade error-prone voting systems such as punch-card ballots that led to a protracted recount battle in Florida that year.
E-voting systems will be used in precincts in more than half of all states in November.
Election officials from Georgia, New Mexico and Los Angeles said the systems were easy to use, cut down on voting errors and allowed blind voters to cast their ballots in private.
Others were less enthusiastic. California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley decertified one-third of the state's e-voting machines last week following revelations that manufacturer Diebold Inc . installed untested software.
"Touch-screen systems can be reliable and secure, but the evidence to date suggests that they are neither right now," said Shelley, who mandated printers or other security measures for the state's remaining e-voting machines.
Time Magazine: The Vexations Of Voting Machines
Time Magazine, April 26, 2004
This issue is already off the newstands but the article is still online.
Excerpt:
Jeffrey Liss had finished making his selections on Maryland's Democratic-primary ballot and strolled out of the polling place at Chevy Chase Elementary School on the morning of March 2, Super Tuesday. On the sidewalk, he spied a campaign poster for Senator Barbara Mikulski, who is running for her fourth term. Funny, he thought, he didn't remember voting in the Senate race.
Liss went back inside to talk to an election official. And another, and another. He was told he must have overlooked the Senate race on the electronic touch-screen voting machine. But Liss, a lawyer, finally persuaded a technician to check the apparatus. Sure enough, it wasn't displaying the whole ballot.
This issue is already off the newstands but the article is still online.
Excerpt:
Jeffrey Liss had finished making his selections on Maryland's Democratic-primary ballot and strolled out of the polling place at Chevy Chase Elementary School on the morning of March 2, Super Tuesday. On the sidewalk, he spied a campaign poster for Senator Barbara Mikulski, who is running for her fourth term. Funny, he thought, he didn't remember voting in the Senate race.
Liss went back inside to talk to an election official. And another, and another. He was told he must have overlooked the Senate race on the electronic touch-screen voting machine. But Liss, a lawyer, finally persuaded a technician to check the apparatus. Sure enough, it wasn't displaying the whole ballot.
League of Women Voters' News Release on EAC hearing
LWV release, May 5, 2004
Excerpt from LWV President Kay Maxwell's remarks to the EAC:
"The League takes quite seriously the questions raised about DRE security, and the management and operational practices that affect DRE performance in the real world. It is vitally important to ensure that DRE systems, as well as other systems, are properly managed," she said. "Some have proposed a particular solution -- the so-called voter-verified paper trail (VVPT). There are many questions to be answered before we go down the VVPT route. After careful examination of these questions, the League has not been persuaded of the wisdom of the voter-verified paper trail for 2004," Maxwell said.
Excerpt from LWV President Kay Maxwell's remarks to the EAC:
"The League takes quite seriously the questions raised about DRE security, and the management and operational practices that affect DRE performance in the real world. It is vitally important to ensure that DRE systems, as well as other systems, are properly managed," she said. "Some have proposed a particular solution -- the so-called voter-verified paper trail (VVPT). There are many questions to be answered before we go down the VVPT route. After careful examination of these questions, the League has not been persuaded of the wisdom of the voter-verified paper trail for 2004," Maxwell said.
Monday, May 3, 2004
Stateline.org: Integrity of electronic voting questioned
By Kavan Peterson, Stateline.org, May 3, 2004
This article from a state policy oriented web site provides a good overview of how California's recent move to pull back on touchscreen voting may impact other states.
Excerpt:
Legislation requiring voter-verified paper ballots has been introduced in 15 states (Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Tennessee, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin) that currently use electronic voting machines, and four states (Arizona, Maine, Minnesota and Vermont) that have yet to upgrade their voting equipment. Sixteen states with electronic voting machines have not discussed paper ballots: Arkansas, Delaware, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas and Wyoming.
Election officials in Illinois, Oregon, Nevada and New Hampshire already have banned paperless, electronic voting systems.
Nevada Secretary of State Dean Heller recently made Nevada the only state to mandate that printers be installed on all electronic voting machines by November, despite the fact that Nevada had experienced no problems with the machines used by 70 percent of the state’s voters in 2002.
This article from a state policy oriented web site provides a good overview of how California's recent move to pull back on touchscreen voting may impact other states.
Excerpt:
Legislation requiring voter-verified paper ballots has been introduced in 15 states (Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Tennessee, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin) that currently use electronic voting machines, and four states (Arizona, Maine, Minnesota and Vermont) that have yet to upgrade their voting equipment. Sixteen states with electronic voting machines have not discussed paper ballots: Arkansas, Delaware, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas and Wyoming.
Election officials in Illinois, Oregon, Nevada and New Hampshire already have banned paperless, electronic voting systems.
Nevada Secretary of State Dean Heller recently made Nevada the only state to mandate that printers be installed on all electronic voting machines by November, despite the fact that Nevada had experienced no problems with the machines used by 70 percent of the state’s voters in 2002.
E-Voting Oversight Overwhelms U.S. Agency
By Rachel Konrad, The Associated Press, May 3, 2004
AP's Rachel Konrad reports on the upcoming Election Assistance Commission hearing. Details:
Wednesday, May 5, 9:00 am - 4:30 pm
EPA Headquarters
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Ariel Rios North Building
Room 3000, Rachel Carson Great Hall
Washington, DC
California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley will be addressing the EAC, along with a number of other speakers representing election officials, advocacy groups, and vendors.
-----
Excerpts from the AP story:
SAN JOSE, Calif. - As alarm mounts over the integrity of the ATM-like voting machines 50 million Americans will use in the November election, a new federal agency has begun scrutinizing how to safeguard electronic polling from fraud, hackers and faulty software.
But the tiny U.S. Election Assistance Commission says it is so woefully underfunded that it can't be expected to forestall widespread voting machine problems, which would cast doubt on the election's integrity.
The commission - which on Wednesday conducts the first federal hearing on the security and reliability of electronic voting - laments its predicament in a new report.
"We've found some deeply troubling concerns, and the country wants to know the solution," said DeForest B. Soaries, Jr., a Republican and former New Jersey secretary of state named by President Bush in December to lead the agency.
The Washington, D.C. hearing will focus on the security risks of touchscreen machines, which computer scientists say cannot be trusted because they do not produce paper records, making proper recounts impossible. Despite reassurances from the machines' makers, at least 20 states are considering legislation to require a paper trail.
-------
NASED plans to transfer its certification authority to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which is supposed to update the decade-old standards the labs use to make sure voting equipment is secure and reliable.
But that also is on hold because NIST "did not receive funding to support the work," the commission report says.
"I wish the EAC luck, but oversight of these systems is illusory," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. "As long as federal voting system standards are voluntary, voters across the country will not have the peace of mind they need to feel confident in their voting systems."
Currently certified by NASED to test all voting hardware for U.S. elections is a Huntsville, Ala.-based division of Wyle Laboratories Inc. All software is tested by two other entities - a Huntsville, Ala., lab operated by Greenwood Village, Colo.-based Ciber Inc., and Denver-based SysTest Labs LLC.
AP's Rachel Konrad reports on the upcoming Election Assistance Commission hearing. Details:
Wednesday, May 5, 9:00 am - 4:30 pm
EPA Headquarters
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Ariel Rios North Building
Room 3000, Rachel Carson Great Hall
Washington, DC
California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley will be addressing the EAC, along with a number of other speakers representing election officials, advocacy groups, and vendors.
-----
Excerpts from the AP story:
SAN JOSE, Calif. - As alarm mounts over the integrity of the ATM-like voting machines 50 million Americans will use in the November election, a new federal agency has begun scrutinizing how to safeguard electronic polling from fraud, hackers and faulty software.
But the tiny U.S. Election Assistance Commission says it is so woefully underfunded that it can't be expected to forestall widespread voting machine problems, which would cast doubt on the election's integrity.
The commission - which on Wednesday conducts the first federal hearing on the security and reliability of electronic voting - laments its predicament in a new report.
"We've found some deeply troubling concerns, and the country wants to know the solution," said DeForest B. Soaries, Jr., a Republican and former New Jersey secretary of state named by President Bush in December to lead the agency.
The Washington, D.C. hearing will focus on the security risks of touchscreen machines, which computer scientists say cannot be trusted because they do not produce paper records, making proper recounts impossible. Despite reassurances from the machines' makers, at least 20 states are considering legislation to require a paper trail.
-------
NASED plans to transfer its certification authority to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which is supposed to update the decade-old standards the labs use to make sure voting equipment is secure and reliable.
But that also is on hold because NIST "did not receive funding to support the work," the commission report says.
"I wish the EAC luck, but oversight of these systems is illusory," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. "As long as federal voting system standards are voluntary, voters across the country will not have the peace of mind they need to feel confident in their voting systems."
Currently certified by NASED to test all voting hardware for U.S. elections is a Huntsville, Ala.-based division of Wyle Laboratories Inc. All software is tested by two other entities - a Huntsville, Ala., lab operated by Greenwood Village, Colo.-based Ciber Inc., and Denver-based SysTest Labs LLC.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
