|
May
16, 2006
The Honorable
Nancy K. Kopp
State Treasurer
Goldstein Treasury Building
80 Calvert St.
Annapolis, MD 21401
Dear Treasurer Kopp:
I am writing in response to your
request for clarification of several issues raised during the May 3rd
Board of Public Works meeting.
First, I want to confirm your understanding about the
renewal of the Election Management Support Contract that was before the Board
for approval. As you correctly noted,
that contract is not related to early voting or electronic poll books. Instead, the contract simply ensures that,
through the 2006 elections, we have a knowledgeable and experienced contractor
to provide maintenance and support for our Election Management System.
The Election Management System is the backbone of our
election processes. It supports the
electronic filing and campaign finance report disclosure for all campaign
committees; manages all candidate filings both at the State and local boards of
elections; implements election parameters; hosts a statewide database of
polling places including details on each site’s accessibility for disabled
voters; uses complex logic to design the content and arrangement of ballot
styles – approximately 500 different ballot styles just for this upcoming
primary election; collects and reports election results; and prepares all
official election certification documentation. I thank you for supporting its
renewal and recognizing the importance this contract is to the daily operation
of the State and local boards of elections.
Second, the Governor raised concerns about the statewide
voter registration database.
Specifically, he stated that the system was “not stable” and had
“crashed three times.” Instead, the
statewide voter registration database (MDVOTERS) is in use in all twenty-four
counties, is functional and has never “crashed.” While the system is undergoing continued fine-tuning, testing,
and additional development to meet functional specifications, the project is on
schedule and will prove to be a critical resource for elections administration
and Maryland citizens.
Third,
the Governor raised concerns about whether electronic poll books could be
successfully deployed. The governor’s
question assumed incorrectly that MDVOTERS was not functional, and therefore
integration of electronic poll books with the MDVOTERS system would not be
possible. However, as already noted,
MDVOTERS is, in fact, functional.
Further, the electronic poll books only use the data from MDVOTERS –
they are not networked to, integrated with, or a part of MDVOTERS. In other words, voter registration data is
transferred between these two independent systems.
The Governor also stated that electronic poll books have
never been used in a statewide election.
While that is true, it does not mean that electronic poll books are not
proven technology and should not be used.
Electronic poll books are a common elections administration tool
throughout the country, and are being implemented statewide in Georgia for use
in its primary election this summer. They have been used successfully by
Maryland election officials in several municipal elections last year. After
deploying electronic poll books or observing them in use, the State’s Election
Directors overwhelmingly support the use of electronic poll books and, in fact,
consider them a requirement to successfully manage early voting.
I recognize that early voting is a very contentious
political issue. The General Assembly
has now enacted into law the early voting statute. It is the role of the state’s election officials is to administer
the provisions of that statute fairly and effectively, without regard to the
political debate.
In this regard, I appreciate your continued efforts to
ensure that the State and local election administrators have the tools and
resources necessarily to carry out their responsibilities under Maryland
law.
Finally,
I would like to provide some clarity on a new issue that has arisen since the
meeting. The issue, which has been
widely reported, involves the manner in which software changes are applied to
the voting units. Specifically, some
computer scientists have stated that the software update protocol does not
provide enough safeguards to ensure against unauthorized updates being loaded
on to a voting unit. However, given the
strict set of procedures employed in Maryland, this security threat is very
minimal.
In
order to conduct the type of attack contemplated by the experts, physical access to the voting
unit is
required. In Maryland, we do not give
access to voting equipment to anyone who is not an authorized election
worker. We have strict requirements for
warehouse facilities including physical security, logging in and out of all
workers, and requiring criminal background checks of all workers. In addition to strict access rules, we also
employ seals and tamper tape to the voting units that make unauthorized access
of a voting unit immediately detectable.
Nonetheless, we take this issue very seriously. Staff is reviewing a proposed risk
mitigation strategy and Diebold has already developed new software that
addresses. In addition, a team of
voting system experts is starting a scheduled security assessment of Maryland's voting system this
week. They will be asked to review this
issue and provide their expert analysis on any and all corrective actions that
should be taken.
Thank you for your
interest in this matter. I am available
if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Linda
H. Lamone
State
Administrator of Elections
cc:
Governor Robert Ehrlich
Comptroller
William Donald Schaefer
Secretary Cecilia Januszkiewicz
|
