A while ago, I posted a video by Princeton researchers that showed how electronic voting machines could be hacked. Dave Johnson has a solution:
Here is the solution: The machine is used as a data-input device ONLY. This solves all the problems from earlier ways of voting, including "hanging chads" etc. It then prints out a paper ballot, filling in the voter's choices from the touch-screen. The voter looks over the ballot and, if it has the right information, puts it into a separate ballot box. Then there is a way to PROVE how the voters voted. AND it doesn't MATTER what software is on the machines.
I think this is exactly what should be done. And if one were clever, there would be a way the paper ballots could be optically scanned to speed the counting process.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
The Days When Democracy In America Was Bogus
First, three stories. One comes from other sources, not verified, but everyone at the time (it is said) knew it to be true. Political operatives in the Boston area used to visit the train yards during the days and hours before a local mayoral election…
Wanna get scared about the upcoming election? Read this Wired article. I dismissed all this talk of election fraud for the last two years as just being an outlandish conspiracy theory, but the more I see reports like this the more real it becomes. And nothing less than our entire system of…
I've not said anything on the subject of election fixing over the last few years. I've seen lots of allegations of vote fixing in Ohio and other states, but never paid much attention to them. It would take extraordinary audacity for anyone to actually fix election results in any major way and I've…
After last week's New Hampshire primaries, I've gotten a lot of email requesting my take on the uproar surrounding recounts and voting machines.
For those who haven't heard, there's been some chatter
about cheating in the election. In polls leading up to the election, Barack Obama was
leading by…
Sorry, but 10 counties in FL in 2004 had Dieboldt optical scan machines, and had the exit polls just flopped from the alleged tallies. Optical scan machines can be hacked -- the only virtue is that there is paper to hand count against the machine's totals. Not ONE of those counties was recounted, leading me to believe that 2004 was also stolen... there needs to be a law that if the exit polls deviate from the machine tally there will be a hand count of the paper ballots, or there is no use in scanning results at all.
"And if one were clever, there would be a way the paper ballots could be optically scanned to speed the counting process."
Sure. Just have the voting machine fill out a Scantron form.
There seem to be about ten million easier and safer ways to handle electronic voting than the Diebold method. One wonders why it's the dominant e-vote solution.
Somehow, this reminds me of an April Fool's story in one of the electronics trade journals back in the 70's/early 80's. A new product, the WOM (write-only memory) was introduced. It would have been a clever way to sell dead memory ICs. Nowadays, we would call it a black hole. Therefore, I applaud the idea of printing out the ballot before it's flushed down the oubliette.
That's exactly how it worked last week here in Hawaii. We had a choice of optical scan ballots or a machine. The machine printed out a slip of paper with my choices on it and gave me the opportunity to confirm or reject it.
There were some complaints about how long it took to merge the results from the two systems and there was at least one mishandled ballot box, but altogether it seemed reasonable. I'm not particularly troubled that final results weren't known until well after midnight.