| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
![]() Impeach George Bush Diebold Experiment Fails Poll workers in Alameda County noticed something strange on election night in October. For an unknown reason, the computerized tally program had begun to award votes for Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante to Burton, a socialist from Southern California. Source: Mercury News, 2004-02-01 Candidate: Big Government Alameda County officials still don't know why the computer program failed on election night. In fact, they only discovered the malfunction because they could compare the paper absentee ballots the software was counting to the computer's tally. The rest of the county's voters cast electronic ballots. Alameda County officials still don't know why the computer program failed on election night. In fact, they only discovered the malfunction because they could compare the paper absentee ballots the software was counting to the computer's tally. The rest of the county's voters cast electronic ballots. Nor were election workers aware at the time that their touch-screen machines were running unauthorized Diebold software in violation of California law, as a state investigation later discovered. ``There was something in the software,'' said Elaine Ginnold, assistant registrar of voters for Alameda County. Alameda County officials refused to allow the Mercury News to review the software code used to test its electronic voting system, saying it was a Diebold trade secret.Similar mishaps have occurred across the country since election officials embraced electronic voting in the wake of the Florida vote-counting debacle of 2000. When Californians go to the polls next month to choose a presidential candidate, many voters will cast a virtual ballot by pressing a computer touch screen that records their votes digitally. The only tangible proof that a citizen has voted -- and how he voted -- will be fingerprints left on the machine's screen. Electronic voting removes the risk of election officials misinterpreting hanging chads. But it raises another electoral peril: that a digital ballot box might miscount votes without anyone noticing. As the black box replaces the ballot box, concern is growing that local officials are becoming dependent on a handful of corporations to guarantee the integrity and accuracy of elections. Nor were election workers aware at the time that their touch-screen machines were running UNAUTHORIZED Diebold software in violation of California law, as a state investigation later discovered. ``There was something in the software,'' said Elaine Ginnold, assistant registrar of voters for Alameda County. Alameda County officials refused to allow the Mercury News to review the software code used to test its electronic voting system, saying it was a Diebold trade secret. Counties, including Santa Clara County, rely on these voting-equipment companies to manage the software that runs digital voting machines and counts electronic votes -- and to fix things when they go wrong on election night. The companies, however, consider such software a trade secret, making independent confirmation of contested elections difficult, if not impossible. To guard against error and fraud, the state requires that the companies only install approved software on electronic voting machines. But in California, one of the biggest voting-equipment companies, Diebold Election Systems, provided 17 counties with uncertified software that was used in recent elections. Review of practices County election officers remain responsible for overseeing electronic voting systems, but a review of past elections and current practices raises questions about how closely they're monitoring voting-equipment companies. ``My biggest concern is the lack of accountability,'' said David Dill, a Stanford University computer-science professor and a leading expert on electronic voting. Election officials and company representatives dismiss concerns about computerized voting as overblown, citing safeguards designed to ensure the reliability of computerized voting systems. votes without anyone realizing. Critics are alarmed that touch-screen voting systems do not create a paper record that allows for a physical recount of ballots. Rather, the machines record votes on digital memory cartridges. When the polls close, the cartridges are removed from the touch-screen machines and plugged into a computer which downloads and tabulates the voting data. In November, California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley ordered that by July 2006 all touch-screen machines must print paper receipts so an election can be independently audited. To meet that mandate, the voting-equipment companies must manufacture new state-approved hardware and software. Computer scientists acknowledge a paper trail will help ensure the accountability of electronic voting systems. However, they say such a requirement does not resolve concerns over counties' dependence on voting-equipment companies and the security of computerized voting. Until voting machines produce paper receipts, the The only way a candidate can investigate questionable election results is by examining the voting systems' software code. But there's a catch: Election companies consider such software a trade secret not open to public scrutiny -- or subject to challenge from losing candidates, as Emil Danciu found out. Danciu ran for city council in Boca Raton, Fla., in March 2002. A popular former mayor of the seaside town in Palm Beach County, Danciu expected to win in a landslide but lost by 16 percentage points. After some voters complained that Sequoia's touch-screen machines appeared to have recorded ballots cast for Danciu as votes for his opponents, Danciu sued to obtain the Sequoia software code. But Palm Beach County didn't have the code. ``All of this stuff that they are asking for are all proprietary items owned by the manufacturer,'' a county attorney told the judge hearing the case. The attorney argued that even if the county did have the documents, it would be a felony to disclose them" Add a comment to this Message in our Forums. While you're at it, check out our forums too! User Originated Comments: From: too simple, really 2004-02-25 23:47:42 this is too simple. From: simple 2004-02-25 00:00:00 is too accountable. From: Georgia 2004-02-03 03:38:58 what happen to a piece of paper and a pencil and put it in a ballot box. then have the votes counted by both parties. simple |
|
Related News |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() owned by TheTIP. [ Skip Next | Next | Random Site | List Sites |Previous ] NEWS | ACTION | RESULTS | POLLS | MEMBERS | SEARCH |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. |
Thetip.org assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions in these materials. Thetip.org makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Further, Thetip.org cannot edit, control, review for truth or accuracy, or screen for defamation or obscenity any content provided to the Website by a third party through postings, uploaded files, or any other form of communication, nor can Thetip.org ensure prompt removal of defamatory, obscene, inappropriate or unlawful content after transmission. Any such third party postings, files or other communications do not necessarily represent the opinions, beliefs, or positions of Thetip.org. Thetip.org makes no, and expressly disclaims any, representations or warranties, express or implied, regarding the Website, including, without limitation, any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. Thetip.org makes no, and expressly disclaims any, warranties, express or implied, regarding the correctness, accuracy, completeness, timeliness, and reliability of the text, graphics, links to other sites and any other items accessed from or via this Website or the Internet, or that the services will be uninterrupted, error-free or free of viruses or other harmful components. Under no circumstances shall Thetip.org, its affiliates, or any of their respective partners, officers, directors, employees, agents or representatives be liable for any damages, whether direct, indirect, special or consequential damages for lost revenues, lost profits, or otherwise, arising from or in connection with this Website, the materials contained herein, or the Internet generally. |