Voting Machines Routinely Failing Nationwide 237
palegray.net writes "Voting machines in several critical swing states are causing major problems for voters. A Government Accountability Office report and Common Cause election study [PDF] has concluded that major issues identified in the last presidential election have not been corrected, nor have election officials been notified of the problems. How long can we afford to trust our elections to black box voting practices? From the article: 'In Colorado, 20,000 left polling places without voting in 2006 because of crashed computer registration machines and long lines. And this election day, Colorado will have another new registration system.'"
Re:Voting machines (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it's insane that this is left to a private company to do anything more than fit the parts together.
I mean this is the sort of thing which Open Source would be perfect for.
There would be no shortage of coders willing to review the code and point out any problems.
It would help with the "open" part of "open and fair" election
Easy Solution... (Score:5, Insightful)
Paper. Pencil. Manual count. Done.
I love tech as much as the next geek. It's my life, and my living. But sometimes, the better solutions are the simpler ones.
Freedom and Democracy EPIC FAIL (Score:4, Insightful)
it's not too late to fix many of these problems. Although many states don't have the laws on the books to require some safeguards, they can act now to make sure that there are enough back up ballots at the polls, workers are properly trained and there are enough poll workers on election day.
Why does this exact same scenario happen every 4 years? Haven't we learned ANYTHING?
Re:Easy Solution... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Easy Solution... (Score:5, Insightful)
Paper. Pencil. Manual count. Done.
I love tech as much as the next geek. It's my life, and my living. But sometimes, the better solutions are the simpler ones.
Its not that computer based voting is a bad idea, its just that it was tackled as a means to make money, not to provide a better voting service. Corners were cut in the name of profits, and the result is the shit systems currently giving the concept a bad name.
Re:Voting machines (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean this is the sort of thing which Open Source would be perfect for. There would be no shortage of coders willing to review the code and point out any problems. It would help with the "open" part of "open and fair" election
You make an excellent point. A community reviewed and verifiable voting machine system is the best way to ensure that the voters have faith in the vote. Democracy as a concept is worthless if the voters have no ability to verify the vote. If voters can not have faith in the system of elections, then the voters cannot have faith in their government. Electronic voting machines are eroding voters faith in their government and faith in democracy. It's hard to convince people to trust their government if they can't even trust the system that elects the government.
Re:Voting machines (Score:1, Insightful)
Depending your state and party, November 11th will be a test vote.
Re:How hard can it be? (Score:1, Insightful)
It's hard to implement backdoors to manipulate the votes in such a way that it appears to be faulty equipment.
Re:Easy Solution... (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course it's a bad idea! At the end of the day, any computer-based system is inherently opaque and impermanent, whereas paper-based systems are inherently transparent and permanent. It requires the simplest of skills (literacy and numeracy) to check out the veracity of a paper poll, and once a mark is made it's difficult to erase. Contrast that with computer systems.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I just don't get it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Or:
4) They liked the money the Diebold lobbyists contributed to their reelection war chests.
Re:Easy Solution... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes it is. Computer based voting is a bad idea. Computer based vote counting is a bad idea. I cannot fathom how any honest person who knows anything about computers and computer programming would ever condone the use of computers to count votes in elections. A lot of Slashdotters in particular need to get real on this issue. Technology is great, but sometimes it's better to keep things simple.
When it comes to elections the most important thing is that people have faith in the vote. Computers have never, and will never be able to provide this. This is true today, and it will be true a thousand years from now. A thousand years from now democratic societies will be voting and counting on paper ballots. Lip service democracies and the like will be using computers.
Re:Voting machines (Score:2, Insightful)
...this is the sort of thing which Open Source would be perfect for.
There would be no shortage of coders willing to review the code and point out any problems.
It would help with the "open" part of "open and fair" election
Then why not do it? That's how open source works, isn't it? Identify a need and get to it?
Don't stop at just software though. Make a playbook for the entire system that any precinct is free to implement. Call out the check in procedure, how to handle privacy, how to aid people with disabilities, minimum manning requirements, the redundant paper trail, etc. Make an open source rock solid "how to run an election without blowing it" guide.
Re:Problems: (Score:1, Insightful)
True that. 'Cause companies ain't people. Get that enshrined into law and you'll be much better off.
Re:web based (Score:3, Insightful)
Why don't we just go with a web based voting system. Everyone could vote from home. Surely noone could figure out how to break that.
You're right. The inter-tubes are perfectly secure and safe. It's unpossible that anyone could break them ;)
Ooh, how about american idol style. And the candidate you vote for could send you a personalized message back asking for more donations.
Now yer on to sumthin. Vote by texting REPUB or DEMO to 6657. Normaltextmessagingfeesapply.
The idea of web voting is a really interesting one, with some really interesting consequences. If you look at broadband penetration and home computing numbers, you'll see an interesting pattern. The highest connectivity to the web is among affluent white folks. These are the same folks that shop from their bathrobes at 2:00 am.
One possible consequence of online voting is that the bathrobe-shoppers are more likely to vote than if they have to go to a poling place. Because they are more likely to vote and represent only one segment of the population, the vote can become skewed in one particular direction or another. It could effectively disenfranchise other groups that are less likely to have computers at home.
Re:Voting machines (Score:4, Insightful)
You make an excellent point. A community reviewed and verifiable voting machine system is the best way to ensure that the voters have faith in the vote. Democracy as a concept is worthless if the voters have no ability to verify the vote. If voters can not have faith in the system of elections, then the voters cannot have faith in their government. Electronic voting machines are eroding voters faith in their government and faith in democracy. It's hard to convince people to trust their government if they can't even trust the system that elects the government.
You know the problems with these machines and I know the problems, but are you willing to bet (and how much) that the majority of Americans are aware of the problem or even care? Ask yourself how much you would be willing to bet that the majority of Americans care, and if you can't justify a significant amount of assets, you'll have your answer.
Party On! (Score:3, Insightful)
It mattereth not much as the nominating process has been privatized as well.
Re:Easy Solution... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Voting machines (Score:1, Insightful)
Democracy as a concept is worthless if the voters have no ability to verify the vote.
and everyone shrugs when you ask them why the percentage of people who vote is so low in this country.
Re:Voting machines (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm surprised that these municipalities don't hold mock elections to test the machines.
Au contraire, that's what they've been doing all this time.
The People (Score:3, Insightful)
The majority of the people who vote think that they are making a real choice. They believe that Tweedledee or Tweedledum are, in fact, meaningfully different. It's true! They saw it on television.
Re:Voting machines (Score:3, Insightful)
Why do you need open source?
Make a mark on a bit of paper, and putting said bit of paper in a closed box - It's easy to operate, easy to understand, failure tends to be highly localised (one bit of paper, or possibly one box full of bits of paper).
Closed source - very bad, only gets reviewed by those that own it.
Open source - bad, only gets reviewed by techies.
Bits of paper with a tick on it - good, anyone who can read can review it.
Does it matter that it takes a bit longer to know the result? Is the potential for fraud on a massive scale worth the saving of a day or two of people counting?
Sometimes technology makes things worse.
Re:Voting machines (Score:5, Insightful)
Keep in mind that the message is clearly and loudly being sent:
"Profit is the most important thing in the United States of America."
Never in so few, or just those words, but sent nonetheless.
"Government should not do anything that can be done by the private sector."
"The Medicare Part 4 specifically prohibits the government from using its buying power to negotiate a better price on pharmaceuticals."
"A company is *only* responsible to return value to its shareholders, while obeying the law."
etc, etc, etc
With mantras like these, what do you expect?
Re:This whole election is crazy... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:This whole election is crazy... (Score:4, Insightful)
I've noticed that liberalism has been redefined to include socialism. Liberals used to be guys like Jefferson and Paine
Obama's liberalism is socialism. liberalism in the classic, jefferson / paine sense is really what you would call libertarian... particularly with jefferson.
Bush is more of a conservative socialist, like Hitler.
Except, for well, that democracy part...
If Bush were like Hitler, then, the Michael Moore and Al Gore would not be making billions bashing the guy, but would be in concentration camps. If Bush did what Hitler did, it would be like he would send Dick Cheney to go out and murder Nancy Pelosi to touch off a single night, have Republicans go and murder the leadership of the Democratic Party.
Re:Voting machines (Score:3, Insightful)
I work retail. Most people wouldn't notice if I added an extra dollar to every purchase with over three items.