Can We Count on Voting Machines to Count the Votes?

From: Alan Dechert <dechert_at_gmail_dot_com>
Date: Sun Aug 05 2007 - 14:04:52 CDT

Can We Count on Voting Machines to Count the Votes?
August 02, 2007

There has been much hoopla and concern over the past few years with the
extreme secrecy surrounding the electronic voting equipment that has invaded
our election process. With so little knowledge about the accuracy of the
machinery, due to assertions of privacy by Diebold and the other companies
manufacturing and selling these magical boxes, their accuracy and
reliability have naturally come into question.
Not to be bullied into revealing the contents of the equipment, to insure
objectivity and accuracy in counting ballots, they've refused to divulge or
even allow the state to examine their product, so the state, under the
focused direction of Secretary of State, Debra Bowen, has hired its own
experts to determine whether the voting machines are reliable, or hackable.
The results came out just days ago, creating a hub-bub of activity and
denials. Like most of the right-wing's approach to anything they don't like,
instead of attacking the facts, they attack the messenger.
This situation is no different.
The fact is, this equipment has real problems and legislators like
Assemblymember Paul Krekorian have legislation pending that will address the
concerns about voting machine reliability and what we can and must do to
restore public confidence in the fundamental principle that every vote cast
will be counted. Here's Assemblymember Krekorian's take on the situation:

Lift the Shroud of Secrecy from Electronic Voting Systems
And Restore Confidence in Our Elections

On November 4, 2008, millions of Californians will go to their polling
places to cast their votes using electronic voting machines. By the end of
that evening, we will know who will take office as our next President. What
we will not know that night --what we may never know with certainty -- is
whether our votes were in fact properly counted by those electronic voting

After the debacle of the election of 2000 focused the nation's attention on
"hanging chads" in Florida, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act, which
encouraged the wide use of electronic voting machines. Since then, corporate
vendors of these machines, such as Diebold, have actively promoted them
throughout the country. Many county registrars are investing heavily in this
new technology in an effort to streamline the voting process, and to provide
greater opportunity for some disabled citizens to vote independently.

Despite their effusive claims of security and accuracy, however, Diebold and
most other manufacturers keep the actual workings of these machines a
closely held secret. Although the public has an absolute right to observe
every aspect of the process of counting paper ballots, the public is
completely deprived of that right with regard to electronic voting.

That is why I've authored AB 852, the Secure, Accurate and Fair Elections
(SAFE) Act of 2007. Simply stated, the SAFE Act would require public
disclosure of the computer source code that runs our state's voting
machines. If a manufacturer refuses to disclose a voting system's source
code for public scrutiny, that system would not be certified for use in
California elections -- period. This important reform will ensure that
voting rights advocates, computer scientists, the media, and any member of
the public with an interest in technology and democracy, could analyze the
source code and identify any potential errors or security risks.

The SAFE Act is currently held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee. If
there is sufficient input from the public about the importance of secure
elections, however, I am confident that my colleagues in the Legislature
will agree that preserving the integrity of our democratic process outweighs
minor concerns about potential costs.

The risks presented by the current certification process are not
hypothetical. Secretary of State Debra Bowen has launched a laudable
"top-to-bottom" review of voting systems in California, and that review has
already produced troubling results. For example, the review found that some
voting machines in Los Angeles County contained software that was different
than the software that the manufacturer had delivered to the Secretary of
State for review and analysis.

President Kennedy once observed that "the very word 'secrecy' is repugnant
in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and
historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret
proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and
unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which
are cited to justify it." Certainly any secrecy concerning the manner in
which our votes are counted should be repugnant to us all. The operation of
our voting systems must be open and accessible to scrutiny so that the
veracity of these essential implements of our democracy is always beyond

If we don't act now, the cost could be democracy itself! Now is the time to
tell your County Clerk, Secretary of State Bowen, and Assembly
Appropriations Committee Chairman Mark Leno not to rely on empty promises
from Diebold and Sequoia, Hart and ES&S. Call, write, and email your State
and Local officials and tell them to support AB 852, the SAFE Act, and take
back our democracy from the voting system vendors!

For more info on AB 852, see:

Assemblymember Paul Krekorian represents the 43rd Assembly District.

OVC-discuss mailing list
By sending email to the OVC-discuss list, you thereby agree to release the content of your posts to the Public Domain--with the exception of copyrighted material quoted according to fair use, including publicly archiving at
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Fri Aug 31 23:17:04 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Aug 31 2007 - 23:17:07 CDT