This recent news item completely infuriated me -- The Associated Press reported yesterday that:
GAITHERSBURG, Md. (AP) -- A federal advisory panel on Monday rejected a recommendation that states use only voting machines that produced results that could be independently verified.
Who are these people who take such a cavalier attitude to the security of our national elections? The U.S. Election Assistance Commission, that's who. How a panel supposedly charged with overseeing our election process can come to this conclusion boggles the mind. I want to let this group know that Americans are paying attention to this issue and that we demand secure and fraud free voting machines.
More below the fold...
More from the AP report:
The failed resolution, proposed by Ronald Rivest, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology computer scientist and panel member, closely mirrored a report released last week warning that paperless electronic voting machines are vulnerable to errors and fraud and cannot be made secure.
So let me get this straight... the one guy on the panel who is a computer scientist recommends this and half of the group ignores what he says.
Some panel members who voted against the proposal said they support paper records but don't think the risk of widespread voting machine meltdowns is great enough to rush the requirement into place and overwhelm state election boards.
''They should be longer-range goals,'' said Britain Williams of the National Association of Election Directors. ''You are talking about basically a reinstallation of the entire voting system hardware.''
Well, how about a "long range goal" of secure, open source, fraud-free, glitch-free voting machines? Hell, a short range goal would be kind of a good idea, wouldn't it? Like say, before Nov. 2008?
Some panel members worried that the systems with audit trails could present problems of their own, including printer errors.
What? The possibility of some printer errors are more worrisome than no paper trail at all? Even while at this moment a Congressional election race in Sarasota FL is being disputed due to the a likely malfunction or hacking of voting machines, the panel members can't seem to find a compelling reason to recommend some changes. (Check this excellent diary on this race posted Tuesday by Christine Jennings for Congress.
The Brad Blog has an interesting story about the Election Assistance Commisson:
Rev. DeForest Soaries, Former U.S. Elections Assistance Commission Chair... resigned from the commission in April of 2005. Soaries goes on to explain that he believes he was "deceived" by both the White House and Congress, and that neither were ever "really serious about election reform."
The Brad Blog to read the full short interview with Soaries in which he blasts the Republicans for underfunding and neglecting the commission, which apparently exists as just another Bushco figleaf/unfunded mandate/public relations non-solution.
If you are interested in joining me in expressing displeasure and disappointment iwith this group's findings, here is the contact info:
United States Election Assistance Commission
1225 New York Avenue N.W., Suite - 1100
Washington, DC 20005
EAC website
E-mail Address
HAVAinfo@eac.gov
Telephone
(202) 566-3100
Toll Free
(866) 747-1471
Fax
(202) 566-3127