I think my vote counted but how can I be sure?

Today's editorial notes that despite several successful S.C. elections with paperless voting machines, concerns about the reliability of the electronic voting terminals won't go away:

How important is it - really - that voters be presented with a piece of paper verifying their participation in elections? According to the S.C. Election Commission, not very. But the agency hardly has an objective view of this issue.

A few years back, the commission mandated that all 46 S.C. counties use the iVotronic electronic voting system manufactured by Election Systems & Software. In reaching this decision, the commission turned a deaf ear to complaints that voters would lack confidence in a paperless voting system such as the iVotronic: How could a voter be sure that the voting terminal did what she or he told it to do?

Since then, several election cycles have passed. But this concern just won't go away.

It came up again here at home this week. Members of a special committee appointed in March to study local election problems said they wanted to recommend that the county's iVotronic machines be retrofitted with equipment to print receipts for voters. But because the retrofit would be expensive, they didn't.

At the same meeting where the committee delivered its report to an Horry County Council panel, an Election Commission spokesman said it would cost county taxpayers $700,000 to attach receipt printers to the county's voting terminals. He warned that the retrofits are subject to paper jams. In a meeting with The Sun News earlier this month, the same spokesman said adding printers to the voting terminals could compromise the secrecy of the ballot.

These may be valid points. But the special committee's report is only the latest evidence that S.C. voters find paperless voting to be eerie and unsettling. Voting, at heart, is an emotional experience. Even voters who have a sophisticated understanding of the iVotronic's architecture sometimes come away from the polls with a sense of futility.

They may be aware that their votes are recorded in a "ballot activator cartridge" affixed to the terminal. But they have to take on faith that when the polls close, election workers will hand-carry the cartridges to county election headquarters for computerized tallying, and that the computers will work right.

The manufacturer's literature says the cartridge eliminates "the need for a traditional paper ballot." There's an element of tech-speak arrogance in that assertion.

What voters really "need" is a rock-solid sense that their participation in our most important civic exercise made a difference. For some, digitized paperless voting does not provide it.

Like the members of the special election committee, we, too, stop short of recommending today that County Council find $700,000 to fit the county's iVotronic terminals with voter-receipt printers - for the same reason: cost.

Considering that there's no hard evidence the terminals have failed - for design reasons - anywhere in South Carolina, such an expenditure would strike many taxpayers as irresponsible. But if county residents, over time, can't get past the sense that they're voting on faith, not certitude, that their ballots will count, such an expenditure may someday make sense.

Comments?

Comments

[Brett]

In my opinion, these modifications are not only justified, they are immediately necessary to ensure the continued stability of our democracy! Electronic voting is obviously here to stay, but it seems extemely foolhardy to have this system in place without some kind of a fail-safe measure to ensure that all votes are secure and accurate.

By way of example... did you know that between the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections, it was discovered that a relatively simple FTP search would grant you access to the computer code used to run electronic voting machines produced by the nation's largest manufacturer, Diebold? Or maybe you'd be interested in hearing that in 2004 a chief executive at Diebold wrote a letter to George W. Bush informing him that he was committed to delivering Ohio's electoral votes to the president. This smacks of the opening to some grand, Orwellian drama.

As a voter I would feel much more secure knowing that my vote is, in fact, recored in some impenetrable, hard-copy rather than having it stored only in the corruptable memory banks of an electronic voting machine.

[Patrick Hill]

I think I made a payment to my credit-card account, but how can I be sure? I flipped the light switch on, but I don't trust anything I can not explain - what should I do if I need light?

I know Obama said he would never take PAC money, but why do people keep talking about MoveOn.Org? What really is "Xchange we can believe in?"

[DanielC]

The iVotronic machines do not allow for any auditing or recounting of votes. We are left to trust (pray) that the votes are counted by the chips and retained for the end-of-the-day processing. The end-of-day processing is the only time you get results from the machines. No paper trail other than this printout.

After the sanfu in 2003 and 2004 FL elections, it is my understanding they have gone to a paper trail system.

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1084316008117

And from Brad Blog which has been a source of information that deals with nationwide issues on all the electronic machines, we have this report from April, 2007:

"...
Since the EAC refuses, as our report detailed, to do their job in notifying Elections Officials about this incredibly serious vulnerability, it looks like it's up to you to notify your state's Secretary of State and/or county Election Officials! Details on the vulnerability and mitigating steps that may be taken are detailed in this brief report at VotersUnite.org as written by a computer scientist and voting system expert well familiar with the newly discovered flaw. Please refer your voting officials to both our original article, and that scientific report for more details at the following URLs:
..."

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4416

Until there is a paper trail, these machines will not be trusted to have counted votes correctly or at all.

My .02,
DanielC

[Patrick Hill]

Denny, tell him its "SNAFU" not "sanfu". Which means "situation normal all ......ed up."

[DanielC]

Mr. Hill,

Your funny. Just a laugh, thanks.

Ok my fingers worked faster than my brain for two characters. But at least I didn't talk about something totally unrelated to the topic as in your comments on Credit Card transactions.

If you don't know, a CC has to go through four confirmations before it hits your account at minimum. Unlike the voting machines which go through one verification and that verification is not remote or actually verified except within the chips on the board.

Thanks for pointing out my mis-type.

Beside the misspell did you actually read the content?

DanielC

[Denney Clements]

Daniel: Possibly not. Cheers, dc

[Nick]

I hate to do this...

Up north, our machines were these huge bulky devices. Anyway, they made a sound that was the confirmation a vote was cast. A sound that the workers could even hear, it was like a ring. Once you pressed "Cast Vote" the screen would go dark and the sound would occur. No sound = no vote was cast. Sometimes the screen went dark with no sound, so they were told to vote again. In my three years of working the polls, this happened just once or twice. Not bad, but that was our verification.

[Patrick Hill]

Denny, you should not be so combative!

I read several articles. The Articles of Confederation, the articles to which I respond, and the articles above.

Unlike Denny, who could have known that YOU, Daniel did not respond to an comment to which he ascribed to you.

It is such an unfortunate loser limp with which Denny walks.

He has begun to act hatefully, as if that is my pimp.

I try, unlike the most of you, to keep your attention.

Thanks for the hate, Denny.

[Patrick Hill]

It is not just the stupid question. it is the reality that the question was posed here.

My stupid questions mirror the dumbness of Denny's choices. Thanks for attacking my dumb questions!

Denny stop walking that way. Loser limp?

[Denney Clements]

Hate? Not so, Mr. Hill. That's a waste of emotional energy. I don't hate -- or even dislike -- anybody. And in remembrance of the Good Lord's exhortation to turn the other cheek when attacked, let me ask you to explain, in neutral terms, WHY this editorial was a dumb choice. I await your answer with 'bated breath.

Your friend, dc

[Nick]

Some people think hip-hop isn't music because they don't like it. Some people think art made with feces isn't art because they don't like it.

But because somebody doesn't like hip-hop or fecal art doesn't mean that either isn't music or artwork. It just means it's not that person's taste. But individual taste does not determine what something is classified as on a global scale.