"The experts thought about all the ways to do it. And they concluded in a report issued yesterday that it would take only one person, with a sophisticated technical knowledge and timely access to the software that runs the voting machines, to change the outcome. {Snip]The guys who are defending the current machines are the same ones who are selling those machines and have a large invested stake in seeing them used as is.
The report concluded that the three major electronic voting systems in use have significant security and reliability vulnerabilities. But it added that most of these vulnerabilities can be overcome by auditing printed voting records to spot irregularities. And while 26 states require paper records of votes, fewer than half of those require regular audits.
"With electronic voting systems, there are certain attacks that can reach enough voting machines . . . that you could affect the outcome of the statewide election," said Lawrence D. Norden, associate counsel of the Brennan Center. [Snip]
Voting machine vendors have dismissed many of the concerns, saying they are theoretical and do not reflect the real-life experience of running elections, such as how machines are kept in a secure environment.
"It just isn't the piece of equipment," said David Bear, a spokesman for Diebold Election Systems, one of the country's largest vendors. "It's all the elements of an election environment that make for a secure election."
"This report is based on speculation rather than an examination of the record. To date, voting systems have not been successfully attacked in a live election," said Bob Cohen, a spokesman for the Election Technology Council, a voting machine vendors' trade group. "The purported vulnerabilities presented in this study, while interesting in theory, would be extremely difficult to exploit."
There are ways to make sure the vote totals are accurate, but they depend on the honesty of a few people who are directly responsible for the machines. Such people are vulnerable to influence of various types.
Does anyone really think that Katherine Harris in Florida was concerned about Al Gore getting a fair count? I mean she was Florida Secretary of State at the same time she was the Co-chairperson of the Bush for President organization in Florida. The Florida Governor, Jeb Bush, was George Bush's brother. And the election was stolen.
What stops that kind of action in any state in the Nation?
No comments:
Post a Comment