The Fallout From California's Ban on Electronic Voting Machines
EMAIL
PRINT
25 COMMENTSShare & save this story:
Also in Top Stories
Can Oprah Help Get Obama into the White House?
Felix Gilette, Leon Neyfakh, New York Observer
The End of 'Easy Oil'
Michael T. Klare, Tomdispatch.com
Ghettonation: A Journey Into the Land of Bling and the Home of the Shameless
Leah Samuel, The Progressive
Cheney, Lieberman and the Iran War Conspiracy
Gareth Porter, HuffingtonPost.com
AlterNet Readers' 10 Best Comments of the Week
AlterNet Staff, AlterNet
Iraq Round-Up!
Joshua Holland, AlterNet
The decision by California Secretary of State Debra Bowen to replace an estimated 33,000 electronic voting machines in 20 counties before the 2008 presidential primary wasn't that surprising because the machines' security flaws were known, said Rep. Rush Holt, D-N.J., the lead sponsor of the House's first bill to regulate the machines.
"It is not really new," said Holt, speaking of the design flaws that prompted California Secretary of State Debra Bowen, also a Democrat, to issue a series of directives ordering counties to replace most of the touch-screen voting machines made by Diebold Election Systems and Sequoia Voting Systems by the Feb. 5, 2008, primary. Bowen acted after University of California computer security experts issued a detailed report finding the machines could not prevent people from altering vote counts.
"The report is one more strong piece of evidence, but it is not dramatically different from what's been found in New Jersey, Ohio, Florida, and by independent investigators over the last few years," Holt said. "It all adds up to a really compelling case that we have to have new standards for verifiability, accessibility, accountability and reliability. We need federal standards, and that is what H.R. 811 (The Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007) will do."
Last week, Bowen decided that certain touch-screen electronic voting systems could not be used in precincts because of security flaws that could corrupt the vote count. The voting machines could only be used in limited ways, she said, such as for voters with disabilities, who prefer the machines. In isolation, the security threats are minimized, Bowen said.
While Bowen's decision has been greeted with dismay by many California county election officials who have transitioned to the new paperless electronic voting systems -- and will now revert to voting with paper -- Holt said California's actions will increase the chance that HR 811 will come before the full House later this year.
Holt's bill would require electronic voting machines to produce a paper trail for every vote cast and encourages states to return to using paper ballots that are counted by computers. Bowen opted for the later of these choices, the optical-scan ballot system, because marked paper ballots show the voter's intent if there is a recount. Adding a printer to the new all-electronic voting systems has been problematic, she said.
"It just adds more weight, more urgency to the need to pass federal standards," Holt said, speaking of Bowen's decision to restrict the touch-screen machines. "We can't go into another federal election with machines that do no allow voters to verify their votes and have people in 20 states saying they do not believe the results."
On Tuesday, Kentucky's attorney general, Gregory Stumbo, asked his state board of elections to re-examine their paperless voting machines, citing California's actions. Earlier this year, Florida's Legislature followed its Republican governor, Charlie Crist, and passed an election reform package that included returning to paper ballots and optical-scan counters by 2008.
See more stories tagged with: california, debra bowen, rush holt, verified voting, election reform
Steven Rosenfeld is a senior fellow at Alternet.org and co-author of What Happened in Ohio: A Documentary Record of Theft and Fraud in the 2004 Election, with Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman (The New Press, 2006).
No comments:
Post a Comment