Diebold Flops in Alaska 255
lukej writes "From the Anchorage Daily News, During yesterday's preliminary and ballot measure election across Alaska, Diebold built voting machines failed to 'phone home' causing a hand recount. As a party spokesperson said:
"I can say there are many systematic problems with Diebold machines that have been identified in many contexts."
Additionally, the state itself has mandated some hand counts of all electronic results, and the Democratic Party is simply suggesting voters request paper voting."
ted stevens? (Score:1, Interesting)
this is the best thing that could have happened (Score:5, Interesting)
Still buggy? (Score:5, Interesting)
So how come they are able to stay in business? Is it the power of the free market?
What's wrong with the old system? (Score:2, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Who's to blame? (Score:4, Interesting)
At least in this case lives were not at risksee here [scotsman.com], here [telegraph.co.uk] and here [128.240.150.127].
It could be argued that selection of companies such as Diebold comes from a lack of awareness of IT by governments, and is simply a cost/saving excercise, but even so- sensible questions should be raised about all contractors- have they got a track record, how are they trialling the product, are their guarantees more than verbal...do we have a backup?
Sure DIebold cannot make excuses...but can the government either?
Re:It's harder than you might at first think (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:It's harder than you might at first think (Score:5, Interesting)
A proposal for a Trustable Electronic Voting System
Seeing how the failure of electronic voting to earn our trust is a hot topic today, heres my shot at a proposal for a secure electonic voting system.
1. The voting process starts with a voter walking into a polling station and presenting his/her ID. This is verified by the officials, and possibly representatives of the candidates, and once verified, the Voter is issued a Physical Token. This Token is NOT generated on demand, and can be something like the tokens used at game arcades. Each token needs to have a globally unique serial ID, which would need be changeable. Each polling booth is issued a fixed number of voter tokens, enough for the total number of voters expected to show up at a booth. Any unused tokens need to be returned to the Election Authority.
2. The voter takes the token (remmeber that this token is not associated with his identity in any way) and walks up to the voting machine. This machine consists of a touch screen with the poll options on it. The machine activates when the voter drops the token into its slot. The user makes his/her selection, confirms it, and is issued a printed reciept of his/her choice. The machine keeps a running tally of the votes polled, but does NOT communicate the vote to any central server. This information is kept secure inside the machine itself, and the machine needs to be made physcially temper proof and temper-evident. At the end of the polling process, all the voting mashines can be collected together and an authorized elction officer can instruct the machine to reveal the poll results. All results from all machines can be tallied to get the final election result.
4. The receipt format would be a standardized one, established by the febderal election officals, including the fonts, sizes and the information content. It will have on it, printed, the day/date and identifier of the particular election and the id of the machine which issued the reciept, and in large fonts, the selection made by the voter.
5. The voter checks on the reciept to make sure the information on the reciept matches what he had punched in. If not, the vote is invalid, and he/she gets to vote again.
6. If the reciept information is valid, the voter proceeds to another machine, where he/she inserts the reciept into a slot. This second machine reads the receipt using Optical Character Recognition, and maintains its own independent tally of votes polled. It also securely holds all the receipts in a safe vault inside it. The first machine and this second machine are not linked in any way.
7. The first machine and the second machine must not be made by the same manufacturer, or by companies with substantial holding by common entities.
8. Ideally, the token and the receipt would be federal standards, and the machines themselves can be made by any number of companies. They would need to get certified by a testing body. The certification test would focus on standards compliance (including such standards as physical size, accessibility, etc).
9. A single company may make both the machines, but in any specific poll booth, machines from two indepepdent manufacturers need to be used.
At the end of the election, the polling officials return to a central location with all the unused tokens, and the sealed machines. The total number of votes polled by both the machines, and the number of tokens issued is first matched. Then both the machines are activated and the total tallies of votes taken and matched against each other. In case of mismatch, the paper reciepts are retrieved from the second machine, and counted by hand.
The crucial points are:
1. Two independent tallies of the same votes, with a trail between corresponding votes (the receipt carries the token ID, so from the machines databases, one can matc
Someone not doing their job ? (Score:2, Interesting)
Same here, as a Canadian I am mystified... (Score:3, Interesting)
We have an almost quaint system of voting here that requires only a few paid volunteers, some paper ballots and a pencil. It's quaintness is offset by its efficiency; I have never waited more than a minute or two to vote and the results are known within a few hours after the election. I believe the UK and many other European nations follow a similar system. There is no reason why a process like this would not work in the United States, save for the almost religious reverence for technology, as all the votes are counted within minutes of the polls closing, whether it be in a city as large as Toronto or as small as Dumbfuck, Saskatchewan. I know it's not as sexy as a flashing machine, but it's transparent, verifiable, and relatively fool proof.
Re:It's harder than you might at first think (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.eci.gov.in/EVM/index.htm [eci.gov.in]
OR
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_voting_machine s [wikipedia.org]
All that you have suggested is already in the machine.
Seems the country that has long been derided as Third-World, dirt Poor, unwashed masses can implement a technologically superior yet simple solution to maintaining Democracy amongst its unwashed masses with highest ethics.
Unless US loses its NIH syndrome, it is bound to be abused by companies like Deibold.
Re:Same here, as a Canadian I am mystified... (Score:3, Interesting)
As far as people really not caring, I think that has to do with something completely different. The problem here is the rampant partisan gerrymandering which all but guarantees a victory for most incumbent politicians. I don't believe Canada has much of a problem with it since, if I understand correctly, a non-partisan body draws the ridings. Gerrymandering, I think, behind verified voting is most dangerous to the democratic process. With a clever gerrymander, your party can theoretically win 75% of the seats with 25% of the votes.
Re:I don't understand (Score:1, Interesting)
In a democracy, could anything be more important than making sure that votes are counted correctly
Are you off your rocker? There is something infinitely more important than elections, vote counting, or even the existence of a voting process: limits on government power. They don't need to be voted on. That's what the consitution was supposed to be for, remember?
When those limits are overruled, look what you get: the most powerful world empire that has ever existed, with military bases in over 150 countries around the world; a continuous state of war and emergency, where innocent civilians of other countries are regularly slaughtered by "accident"; mass jailing of peaceful citizens at home; violent crime rates that increase proportional to the size of government; widespread corruption among the power elite; continuous attacks on our natural right (god-given if you prefer) to freedom, privacy, and self-ownership.
Who would you rather be ruled by: a government which is strictly bound to a constitution which guarantees an upper limit on revenue and power over the people, but no elections or voting process -- or a government which is unlimited in the amount of power it may seize, yet holds elections on a regular basis?
If you value your freedom, this is a no-brainer. Of course, I'd rather be ruled by nobody at all, but we don't exactly have that choice, do we?
Re:It's harder than you might at first think (Score:2, Interesting)
FedEx can do it... (Score:5, Interesting)
The sum of this problem is taking a number, and incrementing it. You must add a pretty, easy to understand interface, and then add a paper trail system.
Here's what I want:
- I walk into a voting center.
- I am asked for ID.
- I present my state Drivers License or Federal Passport for visual inspection.
- In return I'm provided with a re-usable line-tracker token (deli waiting line slip).
- I wait in line to vote.
- I enter the voting booth, surrendering my deli slip to a large box.
- I vote.
- The machine produces three bits of paper; my reciept, my official ballot, and my exit poll token.
- I retain the reciept for my own personal records. It contains no bare words, simply a tracking number, date and time, and location.
- My Official Ballot is dropped into a lockbox of a million similar others, to be stored for eventual hand-recount. It never enters my or anyone elses hands.
- My exit poll token may be presented to exit pollsters, or I may destroy it.
- I enjoy some milk and cookies, and leave.
- Much later, at home, I am able to look up my ballot based on the ID number on my reciept. From this, I can tell where my ballot is, in what box, in what warehouse, what machine I used, what voting center, and the date and time. It may also show what machine was used to process my vote in a recount, or if a hand recount had been done.
- I am able to sleep at night, knowing that democracy will take effect.
This is really not that difficult. Not as difficult as Diebold has made it, and surely not as cloak-and-dagger.Compare this to a Pure Digital camera (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It's harder than you might at first think (Score:3, Interesting)
(1) The ballot is a misprint ...
(2) The marker runs dry.***
The town I live in switched to optical scanning of ballots a couple of decades ago when a few thousand blank ballots turned up missing on election day. To this day, no one knows if the ballots were lost, stolen, or indeed ever existed at all. It's certainly remotely possible that they were marked up and somehow used to replace a like number of real ballots although it doesn't seem very likely. Nonetheless, the folks who looked at the issue felt that the optical scanning system offered somewhat better security than the paper ballots.
Personally I think that, if paper ballots are good enough for Canada, where they work fine, I think they are good enough for the US. It's not that hard to run an honest election, and it's probably easier to run a dishonest election if the system is complicated than if it is simple.
Re:ted stevens? (Score:2, Interesting)
Well, that is pretty good rhetoric but I would like to point out a couple of things.
You probably got your information from some place like http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/topic/11.htm l [taxfoundation.org] .
Even though their spreadsheet lists Alabama, not Alaska, I will assume that is a typo. Their calculations include federal income taxes and federal expenditures. They do not include Federal taxes on natural resources, such as oil, nor do they account for the fact that well over half the people here are employed by the Federal Government, mostly DOD. Once you start including taxes on resources, the numbers begin changing rapidly.
So, the Federal dollars spent have become a rather big issue nationally. Oddly enough, it becomes most shrill when awareness of other pork barrel projects arise, such as the Big Dig for example in Boston. So be it. It would seem that Congress critters like to point to others when their hands are caught in the cookie jar - or freezer as the case may be.
Another consideration is that many Alaskans (Natives in particular) live in absolute poverty with no or little infrastructure (no running water, etc). So, quite a bit of Federal money is required to be spent to upgrade that infrastructure. Now, if you are libertarian or otherwise small government, your response may be "tough shit" they should move to a more populous area for more efficient utilization of infrastructure dollars. Many people here would agree. If you are leftist, and believe in the forced redistribution of wealth, then you can be happy that your tax dollars are at work to fulfill your dream.
At any rate, my post isn't to change anybody's mind but merely to point out that there are more factors than those usually considered. But then, that is usually the case with everything.
By the way, just so you know how Congress works, after the big stink about the money earmarked for the "bridge to nowhere", which isn't true but that is a discussion for another time, Congress removed the earmark. Alaska STILL GOT THE MONEY but WITHOUT the strings attached. And BOTH sides considered it a victory.
Blink blink... blink blink... Yeah, that's what I though too.
Sensitivity analysis (Score:3, Interesting)
You make an extremely good point.
Wish I could remember their names, but one university team crunched the numbers and found that if you were to change just one vote in every precinct of the country you could reverse the outcome of a recent presidential election. That sounds strange until you stop and think how many precincts there must be in Florida and that the arguments were over dozens or hundreds of votes.