Get the Facts
TrueVoteMD - Protecting the Integrity of Voting in Maryland
The Problem:
The foundation of our democracy is the right to vote and a key
principle is that every vote counts. In reaction to the 2000 Presidential
election in Florida, nearly every state is upgrading their voting
system, and many have put in place electronic voting machines.
Maryland has already deployed the Diebold Accu-Vote TS system at
a cost of $77 million in public funds
Electronic voting machines (or DRE's) make it impossible to safeguard
the integrity of your vote. The voter cannot see that their
vote was recorded correctly by the computer voting system.
The election officials, the newspapers, and independent observers
cannot check that the computers are free of software bugs, viruses,
tampering or fraud. AND, if the results are very close, or
one of those computers breaks, there is no way to do a meaningful
recount.
Many of us have used computers and know that computers can make
mistakes-whether it is a virus, malfunction, human error or electrical
failure. With electronic voting machines, hundreds of elections
have already suffered significant problems.
In the 2004 election, many vote count discrepancies occurred, including:
- In Maryland, voters experienced machine crashes and screen freezes
during their vote leaving the election judge and the voter uncertain
about whether the vote was counted. There were large scale
reports of candidates missing from electronic ballots including
Senator Barbara Mikulski who received reports from voters in three
counties that they were unable to cast a vote for her. As
of July, 2005, Dieobld is still trying to explain widespread error
messages, erratic screen behavior and machines crashes that occurred.
- In Carteret County, North Carolina, 4,400 voters were lost due
to machine software error which caused the machine to start counting
backward after 3,000 votes. One statewide race had to be
done over at significant cost to the taxpayers.
- In Gahanna precinct in Franklin County, Ohio, only 638 ballots
were cast but 4,258 votes went to one presidential candidate and
260 to the other. Local election officials caught the error,
but when asked why it happened, they could not say.
The Solution
A voter-verifiable paper ballot (VVPB) and audit trail (VVPAT)
would:
- Allow ALL voters to inspect individual permanent records of
their ballots before they are cast
- Allow for meaningful recounts to be conducted if necessary
- Protect election accuracy against computer malfunction, human
error and tampering
- Accommodate citizens who require alternative languages
- Ensure accessibility for people with disabilities to an independent
and secret ballot.
Leading national computer professionals and security experts have
stated clearly that no computer voting system can be made completely
secure. They have formally recommended that any electronic system
have a verifiable paper record as the only way voters can be confidence
that their vote and all votes have been recorded correctly each
time, and that recounts and spot checks are possible. Alarmingly,
these recommendations have not been incorporated in the Maryland
system.
^ back to the top
^
What's happening in Maryland NOW? (Chronology of key documents)
Eight plaintiffs filed petitions with the Maryland Court
of Appeals seeking to force the Elections Board to either fix or
decertify the controversial Diebold electronic voting systems as
required by Maryland state law., August 09, 2004.
Overview
writ of certiorari (PDF 260KB)
appendix to writ of certiorari
(PDF 1.2MB)
writ of mandamus (PDF 5.73MB)
Takoma Park supports legislation to require modifications
to new voting machines purchased by the State of Maryland to create
a verifiable paper trail, February 25, 2004
http://www.truevotemd.org/2004-02-25_tp_resolution.pdf
House Bill 53: Election Law - Voting Systems - Voter-Verified
Paper Records, January 14, 2004
Support House Bill 53 which requires a voter-verified paper ballot
for all Maryland voting systems. It is currently in the House Ways
and Means Committee.
http://mlis.state.md.us/2004rs/billfile/hb0053.htm
Formal Complaint Filed, November 5, 2003
This formal Citizens Complaint is filed by the Campaign for Verifiable
Voting of Maryland. The Complaint requests that the Board of Elections
decertify and stop the purchase of electronic voting machines produced
by the Diebold Corporation of Ohio unless and until voters are able
to verify their votes before they are cast; and confirm their vote
so that a paper record can be produced for random audits and independent
recounts. ...
http://www.truevotemd.org/2003-11-05_Complaint.pdf
The Vote Counters: Computerized Ballot-Counting Systems
Under Fire, City Paper, October 30, 2002
The recount of the 2000 election in Florida, with its "hanging
chads," "butterfly ballots," and "overvoting,"
made a persuasive case for states to invest in modern voting technology.
The trend since, in Maryland and across the country, has been to
switch to something Baltimore City voters have been using since
1996: computerized voting, using systems known as direct recording
electronics (DRE). ...
http://www.citypaper.com/2002-10-30/mobs2.html
Computerized Balloting is Taking Over Elections In Maryland--But
Can We Trust the Results?, City Paper, December
11, 2002
On Nov. 21, a computer programmer for Autotote, an electronic-wagering
company, admitted in court that he was the "inside man"
in a computer-based scheme that manipulated horse-racing stakes,
culminating in an Oct. 23 Breeders' Cup wager that would have yielded
$3 million in winnings for a Baltimore man had the bet not raised
suspicions. ...
http://www.citypaper.com/2002-12-11/feature.html
Ballot Check: Computerized Voting Comes Under Fire in Georgia
and California, City Paper, February 19, 2003
In California and Georgia, skepticism is quickly growing over the
computer systems used to administer elections. The same type of
system in question--known as "direct recording electronic"
(DRE)--is used in Baltimore City and four Maryland counties, and
the entire state is committed to switch to DRE by 2006 ("Future
Vote," Dec. 12). Maryland elections officials are monitoring
the budding controversy but remain unconvinced that computer elections
in the Free State are risky, as critics contend. ...
http://www.citypaper.com/2003-02-19/mobs2.html
Analysis of an Electronic Voting System, Johns Hopkins Information
Security Institute Technical Report TR-2003-19, July 23, 2003
Recent election problems have sparked great interest in managing
the election process through the use of electronic voting systems.
While computer scientists, for the most part, have been warning
of the perils of such action, vendors have forged ahead with their
products, claiming increased security and reliability. ...
http://avirubin.com/vote.pdf
Rebuttal from Diebold, July 30, 2003
Diebold's "technical analysis" of the report.
http://www2.diebold.com/checksandbalances.pdf
The Hopkins Team response, August 1, 2003
Throughout [Diebold's] document, they refer to details of our paper
as "allegations," and they attempt to argue away these
allegations with logic that is often contrived. We have no personal
ill-will toward Diebold as a company; our aim was to provide a technical
analysis of the code that we had at our disposal. While our conclusions
have upset those who stand to lose financially from these conclusions
and those who are embarrassed by decisions they have made without
the knowledge of the insecurity in the code, we firmly stand behind
our findings. ...
http://avirubin.com/vote/response.html
The Diebold AccuVote TS Should be Decertified: And what this
tells us about the certification process, Dr. Doug Jones, University
of Iowa, Computer Science Department
Dr. Jones presented this paper at the USENEX Security Symposium
in Washington, DC, on August 6, 2003. This excerpt
is particularly relevant to the situation in Maryland.
Full text: http://www.cs.uiowa.edu/~jones/voting/dieboldusenix.html
Governor Ehrlich orders review of Diebold system, August
7, 2003
In the wake of a study revealing security flaws in the costly touch-screen
voting machines Maryland has agreed to buy, Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich
Jr. ordered an outside review yesterday of the electronic system
scheduled to be in place for next spring's presidential primary
election. ...
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/article_text.asp?articleid=91
Risk Assessment Report: Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting System and
Processes. SAIC Report (only 69 pages of the 200-page full report
are made public), September 2, 2003
This report presents the results of a risk assessment of the AccuVote-TS
voting system as currently implemented in Maryland by the State
Board of Elections (SBE) and the Local Boards of Elections (LBEs).
This Risk Assessment report includes evaluations of threats, vulnerabilities,
security controls, and risks associated with the AccuVote-TS system
and possible impacts to the State and the integrity of its elections
process from successful exploitation of identified weaknesses. ...
http://www.dbm.maryland.gov/dbm_search/technology/
toc_voting_system_report/votingsystemreportfinal.pdf
Maryland Board of Elections statement on the SAIC Report,
September 23, 2003
On August 5, 2003, Governor Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr. ordered an independent
security analysis to be performed on the Diebold AccuVote Touch
Screen Voting System and the election processes surrounding this
system. This security analysis identified improvements required
in the voting system and procedures, which will ensure the reliability
and integrity of the voting process. Based upon the findings of
this analysis, which is thought to be unprecedented in its scope,
a Voting System Security Action Plan has been prepared. ...
http://www.elections.state.md.us/pdf/
voting_system_cover_letter.pdf
Maryland Board of Elections Voting System Security Action Plan,
September 23, 2003
http://www.elections.state.md.us/pdf/
voting_system_security_action_plan.pdf
Commentary on the SAIC Report, David Dill, computer scientist
at Stanford University and founder of Verified Voting.org, September
26, 2003
Even if all of the recommendations of this report are adopted, the
most important question remains unanswered: Why should we trust
touch-screen voting? The report fails to consider, much less recommend,
the most obvious risk-mitigation strategy: Don't use touch-screen
voting. ...
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/article_text.asp?articleid=143
^ back to the top
^
Reports and Studies
Refutation of "Maryland's Better Way to Vote".
July 19, 2004. Dr. Douglas W. Jones of the University of Iowa, Computer
Science Department and a nationally recognized expert on voting
systems has published a point by point refutation of the Maryland
State Board of Elections brochure, Maryland's Better Way to Vote.
Dr. Jones' publication is entitled Confusion of Myth and Fact
in Maryland.
Read the full report
Also available from Dr.
Jones' Web pages.
You Can’t Trust Maryland’s Paperless Voting
Machines>, submitted by the Campaign for Verifiable Voting
in Maryland to the Maryland House Ways and Means Committee and Senate
Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee, Feburary
4, 2004
The paperless electronic voting system of Maryland has been reviewed
formally three times. Each time the reports produced alarming findings
of potential manipulation of the election or unintentional inaccurate
voting. This report focuses on the most recent report by the Maryland
Legislative Services Division highlighting areas of agreement, areas
of disagreement and misstatements made at the briefing before your
committee.
Read the full report.
A Review of Issues Relating to the Diebold Accuvote-TS
Voting System in Maryland, January 2004
Presented to the Maryland Senate Education, Health and Environmental
Affairs Committee and House Ways and Means Committee.
Read
the full report.
Trusted Agent Report: Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting System,
prepared by RABA Innovative Solution Cell, January 20, 2004
The State of Maryland election system, as configured at the time
of this report, contains considerable security risks that can cause
moderate to severe disruption in an election. However, each of these
vulnerabilites has a mitigating recommendation that can be implemented
in time for the March 2004 primary. With all these near-term recommendations
in place, we feel, for this primary, that the system will accurately
render the election and is worthy of trust. However, between the
March and November elections we strongly feel that additional actions
must be taken to mitigate increasing risks incumbent on a system
that will receive broad scrutiny. Ultimately we feel there will
be a need for paper receipts, at least in a limited fashion.
Read
the full report.
Operation Ballot Integrity: ELECTION 2003 Voting Machine
Failures and Beyond, A report by Fairfax County Republican
Committee, January 2004
... In the Report FCRC has compiled a list of conclusions and Recommendations,
proposed questions that must be answered before the voters of Fairfax
County should ever feel confident in the vote, and 12 proposed solutions.
FCRC’s main conclusion: neither the Fairfax County Electoral
Board, nor the new voting machines, was ready for Election Day.
... The primary recommendation: establish a local or state independent
study – open to the public - to review software, hardware
and failings associated with Fairfax County voting machines. Further,
FCRC recommends that the Virginia General Assembly enact statutes
that require: (1) a voter verified paper audit trail incorporated
into all state-certified voting systems; (2) that the voter verified
paper ballots be compared – in a select number of polling
places – to the vote totals recorded on the DRE; and (3) that
the law be amended to prevent the removal of voting machines from
polling places on Election Day. Essentially, FCRC is challenging
our elected and appointed officials to pro-actively return confidence
in the vote.
Read the full report.
Kucinich: Diebold Knew Of Flaws In Voting Software And
Advised Employees To Misrepresent Them
... “Diebold’s employee guidelines demonstrate why we
need more transparency in the development and implementation of
voting machines so that such failings are not tolerated,”
stated Kucinich. “Unfortunately, instead of working to improve
voting machine accuracy and security, this document shows that Diebold
has attempted to cover up voting machine failings with secrecy and
false statements.” ...
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/oh10_kucinich/
031202DieboldEmployeeHandbook.html
The Case of the Diebold FTP Site, Dr. Doug Jones,
University of Iowa, Computer Science Department
On Feb. 4, 2003, employees of Diebold Election Systems admitted
that they had been using an insecure FTP server to exchange and
update some part of Diebold's software. Bev Harris wrote this up
in the on-line journal Scoop. This FTP server was taken offline
on Jan 29, and it is alleged to have contained files with names
like "rob-georgia.zip", large parts of GEMS (the Global
Election Management System), and unknown other software. ...
http://www.cs.uiowa.edu/~jones/voting/dieboldftp.html
Comments on the California Touch Screen Task Force Report,
Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR)
CPSR is a public-interest alliance of computer scientists and others
concerned about the impact of computer technology on society. This
excerpt is particularly significant
to the situation in Maryland.
Full report: http://www.cpsr.org/issues/vote-catouchscreen.html
The Diebold AccuVote TS Should be Decertified: And what this
tells us about the certification process, Dr. Doug Jones, University
of Iowa, Computer Science Department
Dr. Jones presented this paper at the USENEX Security Symposium
in Washington, DC, on August 6, 2003. This excerpt
is particularly relevant to the situation in Maryland.
Full text: http://www.cs.uiowa.edu/~jones/voting/dieboldusenix.html
E-Voting Technology and Standards (Policy Brief), Association
for Computing Machinery, U.S. Public Policy Committee
Since computers are inherently subject to programming error, equipment
malfunction, and malicious tampering, USACM continues to recommend
that a voter-verified audit trail be one of the essential requirements
for deployment of new voting systems.
http://www.acm.org/usacm/Issues/EVoting.htm
The Need for a Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail, Kim Alexander,
President & Founder, California Voter Foundation
Voting system stakeholders -- voters, candidates and political parties
-- must believe the voting system is secure and accurate if they
are to have confidence in election outcomes. A fundamental component
of voting system security is the ability to conduct a reliable audit
of the election. ...
http://www.calvoter.org/votingtech/vvpat.html
Official Announcement from the Governor's Office, September
23, 2003
Upon the recommendation of the Maryland Department of Budget &
Management, Governor Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., today authorized the
State Board of Elections to proceed with the statewide installation
of the Diebold AccuVote-TS electronic voting machine. Governor Ehrlich
reached his decision after reviewing a positive independent analysis
of the Diebold machine and its source code.
http://www.truevotemd.org/facts_governor.asp
Voting Machines: A Threat to Democracy? Ethical Society
of Philadelphia, September 7, 2003
Walden O'Dell wrote a letter the other day. He wrote a fund-raising
letter to Ohio Republicans. And, in that letter O'Dell said that
he was, "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes
to (President Bush) next year." Walden O'Dell is the Chairman
of the Board of Diebold Election Systems, the second largest company
in America whose business it is - to count your vote. ...
http://www.ecotalk.org/VotingForumSpeech.htm
Letter from the U.S. Public Policy Committee of the Association
for Computing Machinery commending Rep. Rush Holt on his bill,
May 30, 2003
... Computers are inherently subject to programming error, equipment
malfunction, and malicious tampering. If we are to ensure fair and
honest elections, and retain voter confidence in our democratic
process, we need to ensure that there are no questions of any such
errors or tampering with voting equipment. Therefore, it is crucial
that any computerized voting system provide a voter-verifiable audit
trail: there should be an anonymous record of each vote that can
be can be checked for accuracy by the voter when the vote is cast,
and is difficult or impossible to alter after the vote is cast.
...
http://www.acm.org/usacm/Letters/Rep_Rush_Holt_Letter.htm
Special Committee on Voting Systems and Election Procedures
in Maryland: Report and Recommendations, February 2001
A review of voting alternatives done for Maryland in February 2001.
The report acknowledges the importance of a voter verified audit
trail.
http://www.sos.state.md.us/sos/admin/pdf/reportall1.pdf
^ back to the top
^
News
Bibliography of three leading Maryland newspapers' coverage
of this issue
We have selected some key articles to highlight to on this web site,
but there have been many articles written on the subject. You can
review a bibliography of three leading newspapers and their coverage
of the issue.
http://www.truevotemd.org/facts_biblio.asp
Maryland Activists Want E-Voting Receipts, Washington
Post, July 19, 2004
Read
the full article
Blackwell Halts Deployment of Diebold Voting Machines for
2004, Ohio Secretary of State, July 16, 2004
Read
the full release
E-voting regulators often join other side when leaving
office, San Jose Mercury News, June 15, 2004
Read the full article
Women Voters Drop Paperless Vote Support, Associated
Press, June 14, 2004
Read the full article
The Disability Lobby and Voting, New York Times,
June 11, 2004
Read the full article
Earthquake Development in Fight for Paper Trail: Calif.
secretary of state pulls plug on some e-voting, Associated
Press, April 30, 2004
Secretary of State Kevin Shelley called for a criminal investigation
of a leading electronic voting company Friday as he banned touch
screen voting in four California counties in the November election
and threatened to block computerized balloting statewide. Read
the full article.
Public Relations Campaign Promotes Diebold Voting Machines,
Associated Press, February 23, 2004
A public relations blitz involving billboards, radio and television
commercials, a Web site and more than 1.5 million pamphlets and
brochures is under way to familiarize Maryland voters with the electronic
voting machines many will use for the first time this year.
Read the full article.
Voting devices focus of ads; Critics claim PR campaign
is meant to shift attention from new machines' flaws; $1 million
outreach program; Officials say voters need to get used to terminals,
Baltimore Sun, February 23, 2004
There are ads for them on the sides of buses, on billboards, on
the radio and on television. There's a Web site devoted to them.
There will be hundreds more get-to-know-you events around the state
where they'll be on display for the curious. ...
Read the full article.
Voting Receipts Debated, The Washington Post,
February 11, 2004
Critics of Maryland's new $55 million electronic voting system came
out in favor of a bill yesterday that would require paper receipts
to be printed, verifying each vote. ...
Read the full article.
Md. Lawmakers Look at Plugging Touch-Screen Security With
Paper Ballots, by Stephanie Tracy, Capital News Service,
February 11, 2004
ANNAPOLIS, Md. - With only three weeks remaining until voters statewide
get their first feel of new touch-screen voting machines, lawmakers
are still working to plug the system's security holes, including
adding voter-verifiable paper records. ...
Read the full article.
Will the election be hacked? by Farhad Manjoo,
Salon.com, February 9, 2004
A Salon special report reveals how new voting machines could result
in a rigged presidential race -- and we'd never know.
Read the full article.
The Potential for Fraud in Voting Machines, by
Charles R. Smith, NewsMax.com, February 6, 2004
There is an old proverb in data processing: To err is human. To
really mess things up you need a computer. The flawed 2000 presidential
election in Florida unleashed a sudden and urgent effort to reform
the U.S. voting system. At the forefront of this effort are businesses
offering touch screen computer voting and Internet voting systems
to replace punch cards and physical paper ballots. ...
Read the full article.
How to Hack an Election, Editorial, The New
York Times, January 31, 2004
Concerned citizens have been warning that new electronic voting
technology being rolled out nationwide can be used to steal elections.
Now there is proof. When the State of Maryland hired a computer
security firm to test its new machines, these paid hackers had little
trouble casting multiple votes and taking over the machines' vote-recording
mechanisms. The Maryland study shows convincingly that more security
is needed for electronic voting, starting with voter-verified paper
trails. ...
Read the full article.
Md. Vote Machines Flawed, Consultant Says, Associated
Press, January 30, 2004
ANNAPOLIS, Md. - Maryland's new electronic voting system has many
potential security flaws that must be corrected but is nevertheless
"worthy of voter trust," a technical consultant told legislators.
Read the full article.
Md. computer testers cast a vote: Election boxes easy to
mess with, Baltimore Sun, January 30, 2004
For a week, the computer whizzes laid abuse - both high- and low-tech
- on the six new briefcase-sized electronic voting machines sent
over by the state. One guy picked the locks protecting the internal
printers and memory cards. Another figured out how to vote more
than once - and get away with it. Still another launched a dial-up
attack, using his modem to slither through an electronic hole in
the State Board of Elections software. Once inside, he could easily
change vote totals that come in on Election Day. ...
Read the full article.
Security measures urged for voting machines; Many forms
of tampering possible, consultant says, Baltimore Sun,
January 30, 2004
Results tallied by Maryland's 16,000 new electronic voting machines
can be trusted in their first statewide test during the March 2
presidential primary, but only with some added security measures,
a state official and a consultant told legislators yesterday.
Read the full article.
Md. Voting Machines Vulnerable, Firm Says, The
Washington Post, January 30, 2004
The "Red Team" members attacked Maryland's new electronic
voting system ruthlessly. They picked locks, yanked on wires, ripped
out monitors and hacked into central computers. One agent even slipped
a rubber keyboard into his polling booth to do his dirty work. ...
Read the full article.
Flaws, but hope, in voting report, The Gazette,
January 30, 2004
A third independent study of the state's $74 million Diebold voting
system found "considerable security risks" but endorses
it as "worthy of voter trust" if a number of fixes are
made immediately. ...
Read the full article.
Voting machine accuracy still in doubt, USA
Today, January 16, 2004
After the Florida election debacle in 2000, politicians vowed to
modernize the nation's voting system. But as the presidential primary
season kicks off this month, the bulk of the $3.9 billion Congress
promised to states to buy new voting machines has yet to be handed
out. And the commission set up to help states reduce election problems
was only confirmed by the Senate in December and still lacks office
space and computers.
Read the full article.
Fairfax Voting Machines A 'Failure': GOP Says County Was
Unprepared, Urges State Control, The Washington Post,
January 10, 2004
New touch-screen voting machines used in Fairfax County's local
elections in November were a "failure," and county electoral
officials were unprepared to deal with the equipment's problems,
according to a county GOP committee report released yesterday. ...
Read the full article.
How safe is your vote? Doubts will persist until secure,
accurate elections become a national priority, Baltimore
Sun, January 7, 2004
After the 2000 presidential race, many Americans saw new voting
technology as the obvious means to avoid the millions of votes lost
due to voter error around the nation. Following that botched election,
Georgia and Maryland were the first states to commit to a statewide
touch-screen voting system. ...
Read the full article.
Partisan goals undermine faith in vote machine,
Baltimore Sun, January 12, 2004
Let me see if I understand correctly. The column "How safe
is your vote?" (Opinion Commentary, Jan. 7), mentioned that
the CEO of Diebold Election Systems has written in a letter that
he is "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes
to the president." ...
Read the full article.
No grounds to trust touch-screen voting, Baltimore
Sun, January 12, 2004
Put simply, there is no scientific or factual basis for the assurances
of Gilles W. Burger, chairman of the Maryland State Board of Elections,
to Maryland's voters that our voting system is the most accurate
("How safe is your vote?" Opinion Commentary, Jan. 7).
...
Read the full article.
Touch-screen machines give state's voters the most reliable
system available, Baltimore Sun, January 7, 2004
I WANT TO assure Maryland's voters that they can have confidence
and trust in the state's electoral process. Our touch-screen voting
systems are the most accurate in use. They eliminate questions of
voter intent, prohibit over-votes, allow all voters - including
blind and visually impaired voters - to vote using a secret ballot
and are adaptable to accommodate the needs of Maryland's diverse
society. ...
Read the full article.
'Paper trail' of votes omitted, The Washington
Times, January 5, 2004
A request that Maryland's new touch-screen voting network include
printouts might have come too late because state officials already
have signed a $55.6 million contract that includes no such backup
system."That was not part of the contract price we negotiated
with Maryland," said Mark Radke, director of marketing for
Diebold Election Systems Inc., a Diebold subsidiary. "The voter
verification [paper trail] was not discussed." ...
Read the full article.
Don't just trust, verify, Takoma Park/Silver
Spring Voice, December 2003
Silver Spring resident Shelley Fudge has long been concerned about
the issue of voting maching accuracy. Like many people, she claims
the 2000 elections as a defining moment; "they led me into
an activist stance. I thought finally people would get serious about
voting reform." Ever since, whether spoken or not, the issue
has hung in the air, creating an uneasy backdrop to our democracy,
which depends on the trust of all citizens that their votes are
being counted. ...
Read the full article.
Trust in Voting Machines, Editorial, The Washington
Post, December 22, 2003
EVEN THOUGH experts continue to raise questions about the vulnerability
of touch-screen voting systems to fraud and computer glitches, Maryland
election officials seem determined to press a flawed plan to adopt
them. ...
Read the full article.
Maryland using controversial Diebold voting machines,
Montgomery County Sentinel, December 15, 2003
... And adding still further fuel to the national firestorm of debate
is a leaked comment made by Diebold, Inc. CEO Walden O'Dell. In
a letter to Republican donors in August, O'Dell wrote: "I am
committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president
next year." O'Dell has also contributed $100,000 to the president's
re-election campaign. ...
Read the full article.
Group Mobilizes Opposition to New Voting Machines,
Washington Post, Sunday, December 14, 2003.
...Who's to say that the machines -- Maryland just signed a $56
million contract with Diebold Election Systems to purchase 11,000
of them before the presidential primary -- won't misfire and throw
elections? Or worse, be programmed to do so?...
Read the full article.
Diebold e-mail discusses price gouging Maryland,
Gazette, December 11, 2003
An e-mail found in a collection of files stolen from Diebold Elections
Systems' internal database recommends charging Maryland "out
the yin-yang," if the state requires Diebold to add paper printouts
to the $73 million voting system it purchased. The e-mail from "Ken,"
dated Jan. 3, 2003, discusses a (Baltimore) Sun article about a
University of Maryland study of the Diebold system:
"There is an important point that seems to be missed by all
these articles: they already bought the system. At this point they
are just closing the barn door. Let's just hope that as a company
we are smart enough to charge out the yin if they try to change
the rules now and legislate voter receipts." ...
http://www.gazette.net/200350/princegeorgescty/state/192070-1.html
State Officials Knew of Voting Systems' Drawbacks,
Capital News Service, December 10, 2003
Maryland officials knew computerized voting systems wouldn't produce
paper audit trails months before they began spending a total $54
million on a controversial statewide touch-screen voting system
in December 2001. "The assurance of machine correctness is
very difficult to prove, as there is no paper audit trail,"
stated a February 2001 report by a state committee. To solve the
problem, Maryland's voting system should "be capable of creating
a paper record of all votes cast," the report said. ...
Read the full article.
Diebold gives paper trail for free to San Diego County
County proceeds on touch-screen voting machines, San
Diego Union Tribune , November 26, 2003
... [San Diego] County officials renegotiated its contract with
Diebold on Monday after learning that the state would require voting
machines to print a list of the voter's choices for review starting
in July 2006. The list would be behind glass, and couldn't be removed.
The latest Diebold machines come with a built-in printer, but they
only print voter reports for poll workers – not statements
that voters can view to verify their votes before casting them.
Diebold has agreed to modify the county's machines for free by the
2006 deadline so voters can review a printout of their ballots before
casting them. ...
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20031126-9999_7m26vote.html
Touch-and-Go Elections, Washington Post,
November 9, 2003
Are touch-screen voting machines fast and flawless, or glitch-prone
and vulnerable to tampering? No one can say for sure, which is reason
enough for Maryland and Virginia localities to conduct more extensive
testing before totally embracing the new systems they have inaugurated
with mixed results. On Tuesday it took Fairfax County more than
21 hours to get final election results from its new computerized
machines; when all was cast and done, enough doubts existed to prompt
legal action by some Republicans who lost. ...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14217-2003Nov7.html
California Halts E-Vote Certification, Wired
News, November 3, 2003
Uncertified software may have been installed on electronic voting
machines used in one California county, according to the secretary
of state's office. Marc Carrel, assistant secretary of state for
policy and planning, told attendees Thursday at a panel on voting
systems that California was halting the certification process for
new voting machines manufactured by Diebold Election Systems. The
reason, Carrel said, was that his office had recently received "disconcerting
information" that Diebold may have installed uncertified software
on its touch-screen machines used in one county. ...
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,61068,00.html
Aussies Do It Right: E-Voting, Wired News,
November 3, 2003
While critics in the United States grow more concerned each day
about the insecurity of electronic voting machines, Australians
designed a system two years ago that addressed and eased most of
those concerns: They chose to make the software running their system
completely open to public scrutiny.
http://www.wired.com/news/ebiz/0,1272,61045,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1
Touch-screen voting analysis sought, Associated
Press, Daily Times, October 22, 2003
Democratic legislative leaders are seeking an independent analysis
of the Ehrlich administration's decision to purchase an electronic
voting machine system found to have flaws that could allow tampering
with election results. The review by legislative analysts will also
consider whether an earlier study ordered by Gov. Robert Ehrlich
was objective, balanced and impartial. ...
http://www.dailytimesonline.com/news/stories/
20031022/localnews/495916.html
New voting machines to be reviewed, General Assembly asks
for its own analysis of possible vulnerability, Baltimore
Sun, October 21, 2003
The Maryland General Assembly yesterday asked for its own analysis
of the state's planned purchase of electronic touch-screen voting
machines, including a review to determine whether an earlier study
ordered by Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. was "free of outside
influence." ...
http://www.sunspot.net/news/local/bal-md.election21oct21,0,5783347.story?coll=bal-local-headlines
Electronic Voting: What You Need To Know, TruthOut, October
20, 2003
... an extended, free-wheeling interview in Denver with three of
the smartest people I have ever met. Rebecca Mercuri, Barbara Simons,
and David Dill have been at the forefront of the debate surrounding
the rise of electronic touch-screen voting machines in our national
elections. Sufficed to say, they are three computer scientists/engineers
who are as well versed on these matters as anyone you will ever
meet. ...
http://truthout.org/docs_03/102003A.shtml
Fears of more US electoral chaos after flaws are discovered
in ballot computers, The Independent, October 16, 2003.
Next year's US presidential election may be compromised by new voting
machines that computer scientists believe are unreliable, poorly
programmed and prone to tampering. ...
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/
story.jsp?story=453116
All the President's votes? The Independent, October
14, 2003
A quiet revolution is taking place in US politics. By the time it's
over, the integrity of elections will be in the unchallenged, unscrutinised
control of a few large - and pro-Republican - corporations. Andrew
Gumbel wonders if democracy in America can survive. ...
http://news.independent.co.uk/low_res/
story.jsp?story=452972&host=3&dir=70
Did E-Vote Firm Patch Election? Wired News, October
13, 2003.
Williams of Kennesaw State University denies Behler ever mentioned
patches to him and said, to his knowledge, no uncertified patches
were applied to the machines. He said he would be very concerned
if this happened. ...
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,60563-3,00.html
The Hightower Lowdown, The Austin Chronicle, October
10, 2003
We're told that the beauty of America's political system is that
we the people have the right to vote. Yes ... but do we have the
right to have our votes properly counted? ...
http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2003-10-10/pols_hightower.html
Voting system too vital to change, Frederick Gazette,
October 9, 2003
Frederick County is far from the electoral fiasco in Florida and
the current chaos in California, but problems there and elsewhere
have led to sweeping changes that will affect everyone. Some are
long overdue reforms, while others may be worse than the problems
they are trying to solve.
If anything is both secular and sacred in our country, it is voting.
Our democracy depends on a clear and honest system for casting and
counting votes. The system has never been flawless, of course, but
many Americans have long taken the basic process for granted. Periodic
problems and examples of corruption have been viewed as exceptions
that prove the rule. ...
http://www.gazette.net/200341/frederickcty/columns/181997-1.html
Democratic National Committee Resolution for a Voter-Verified
Paper Trail, October 4, 2003
This resolution was considered by the DNC Resolutions Committee
and was recommended for adoption by the DNC at its meeting October
4, 2003. It was passed unanimously.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/resources/documents/DNC_Resolution.pdf
Ohio replaces voting machine reviewer, Cleveland Plain
Dealer, September 30, 2003
Secretary of State Ken Blackwell has replaced a firm slated to help
conduct the security review of Ohio's newly certified voting machines
- after his office discovered that the firm had a financial interest
in one of the machine makers. ...
http://www.cleveland.com/ohio/plaindealer/
index.ssf?/base/news/1064914213164350.xml
Voting machines taking heat: Critics say touch-screen systems
lack a paper trail, among other things, Herald Tribune,
September 28, 2003
After the 2000 election turned Florida's punch-card ballots into
a national punch- line, state officials spent millions of dollars
on high-tech electronic voting machines.
But a growing number of critics have local officials around the
country wondering whether electronic voting machines -- like the
ones used in Charlotte, Sarasota and Manatee counties -- were impulse
purchases they will come to regret. ...
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/
article?AID=/20030928/NEWS/309280774/1060
Md. Plans Vote System Fixes After Criticisms: Security Review
Finds 328 Flaws in AccuVote, Washington Post, Thursday,
September 25, 2003
An independent review released yesterday found 328 security weaknesses,
26 of them critical, in the computerized voting system Maryland
has just purchased, flaws that could leave elections open to tampering
or allow software glitches to go undetected. ...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60825-2003Sep24.html
Jim Crow Revived in Cyberspace, by Greg Palast
& Martin Luther King III, Baltimore Sun
Martin Luther King III and investigative journalist Greg Palast
issued a petition to U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft on the
subject of computerized voter registration and touch-screen voting.
Here is the article that initiated the petition drive.
Read the article.
"News from Around the Web," a section of the VerifiedVoting.org
Web site
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/newsfeed.asp
^ back to the top
^
Editorial Support
Life imitates art in Annapolis, The Montgomery County
Gazette, March 24, 2004
The General Assembly is moving forward with an important bill that
would require creation of a "paper trail" for the state's
new touch-screen voting machines. This bill deserves quick passage
this year, to ensure public confidence will be maintained in the
presidential election this fall. Under the bill, the state's controversial
$74 million Diebold voting system would be required to provide paper
receipts. The paper receipts would be used as a check against possible
fraud or glitches in the machines and would be the official ballots
for recounts. The Diebold system has been under fire since July
when computer scientist Aviel D. Rubin of Johns Hopkins University
reported it was riddled with security holes that could result in
fraud or errors. The company also faced criticism after The Gazette
reported last year on internal Diebold e-mails that recommend charging
Maryland "out the yin-yang" should lawmakers mandate voter
receipts. Del. Karen S. Montgomery (D-Dist. 14) of Brookeville has
been working hard for passage of this measure, and last week picked
up the important support of Sen. Paula C. Hollinger, chairwoman
of the Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee. Hollinger
(D-Dist. 11) of Pikesville said Ehrlich must find money in the budget
for the paper ballots. The state's legislative analysts have warned
the upgrade could cost tens of millions. "There is no question
that the people want to feel that their vote is secure," Hollinger
said. We call on the legislators to complete action on the bill
and the governor to sign it. Then, the administration should hold
Diebold's feet to the fire to rectify a problem that the company
created, at a minimal cost to state taxpayers. ...
http://www.truevotemd.org/facts_2004-03-24_life_imitates_art.asp
A Paper Trail for Voters, The New York Times,
December 8, 2003
Ever since the voting trauma in Florida three years ago, election
officials have been trying to find a better way to cast and count
ballots. As progress is beginning to be made, it is critical that
the new strategies do not create as many problems as they solve.
With the help of $3.9 billion in federal funds set aside to improve
elections, states have begun the move to electronic voting machines.
The new A.T.M.-style machines are easier for most people to use
and undeniably faster. But recent glitches in Virginia and Florida
have revived questions about how to recount a computerized vote
after a close or suspicious election. New machines can already print
a total of all votes cast, but that is simply a reflection of the
computerized tally. What is needed is a paper record of each voter's
choices that the voter can verify. ...
http://www.truevotemd.org/facts_2003-12-08_paper_trail.asp
Trusting machines risky, especially at the polls,
The Columbia Flier, November 26, 2003
With automated teller machines old hat and self-checkout stations
at supermarkets and discount stores increasingly common, you'd think
touch-screen voting would seem as right as rain. But some private
citizens and public officials are wary of the newfangled contraptions
Howard County and most of the rest of the state will be using in
next year's elections. The most common complaint about the new system
is that it does not produce paper copies of individual ballots against
which the computerized tallies can be checked. ...
http://www.truevotemd.org/facts_2003-11-26_trusting_machines.asp
Computer Trouble, Baltimore Sun, November
18, 2003
Maryland should heed computer scientists' warnings and cancel its
$55.6 million purchase of touch-screen voting machines. E-voting
is so susceptible to errors and manipulation irregularities could
negate the whole idea of free and fair elections. ...
http://www.truevotemd.org/facts_2003-11-18_computer_trouble.asp
Problem with new voting method, Steven R. Guy - Republican,
Jacksonville Daily Progress, Saturday, September 20, 2003
If America is to switch to DRE then we must consider requiring voter
verifiable audit trails be part of every machine. A paper trail
should include the DRE printing a paper ballot for each voter showing
the votes cast by that individual. The voter will check that for
accuracy before leaving the booth. The voter would turn in his paper
ballot to a secure lockbox as we do now. This would provide the
most reliable backup in the event of computer tampering. ...
http://www.jacksonvilleprogress.com/articles/
2003/09/20/opinion/opinion02.txt
A Soft Touch -- for Voter Fraud? The Washington
Post, August 3, 2003
Maryland recently committed more than $55 million to buy touch-screen
voting machines. Now a study from researchers at Johns Hopkins University
suggests that the machines may be vulnerable to fraud and other
abuse. The warning deserves to be taken seriously. ...
http://www.truevotemd.org/facts_2003-08-03_soft_touch.asp
^ back to the top
^
Links to Key Sites
Although we think these websites are important, the
Campaign for Verifiable Voting of Maryland does not necessarily
endorse or agree with everything stated on them.
VerifiedVoting.org
An excellent site for background information and resource for issue
at a national level. This site was started by Dr. David Dill, Professor
of Computer Science at Stanford University.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org
Electronic Voting
Web site of Dr. Rebecca Mercuri, Computer Security expert from Bryn
Mawr College and originator of the concept of a voter verified ballot.
http://www.notablesoftware.com/evote.html
Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
A public-interest alliance of computer scientists and others concerned
about the impact of computer technology on society.
http://www.cpsr.org/issues/vote-catouchscreen.html
U.S. Public Policy Committee of the Association for Computing
Machinery
Professional society that issued a "Policy Brief: E-Voting
Technology and Standards"
http://www.acm.org/usacm/Issues/EVoting.htm
California Voter Foundation
A nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to promoting and
applying the responsible use of technology to improve the democratic
process.
http://www.calvoter.org/votingtechnology.html
Voting and Elections
Web site of Dr. Doug Jones of the University of Iowa Computer Science
Department. Read his paper entitled "The Diebold AccuVote TS
Should be Decertified and what this tells us about the certification
process."
http://www.cs.uiowa.edu/~jones/voting/
The Center for Voting and Democracy
Dedicated to fair elections where every vote counts and all voters
are represented.
http://www.fairvote.org
Scoop (NZ)
Scoop is the most extensive site for articles about the issue. Scoop
is a “fiercely independent” press release driven Internet
news agency accredited to the New Zealand Parliament Press Gallery
and also fed by a multitude of Business, Non-Government-Organisations,
Regional Government and Public Relations communication professionals.
Scoop also publishes a variety of raw, unedited material from national
and international commentators while producing its own editorial
content on important current issues – often giving voice to
perspectives not being addressed through "traditional media”
sources. Although very opinionated, this site has the most comprehensive
listing of articles that are linked to the original source.
http://scoop.co.nz/mason/features/?s=usacoup
Vote America, Vote!
A voter rights organization with lots of great information on the
issue of voting and how to become more proactively involved in protecting
the right to vote.
http://www.voteamericavote.com
Where's the Paper Trail for Each Ballot Cast?
A Web site dedicated to verifiable election results, featuring the
"Fraudulent Voting Machine."
http://www.wheresthepaper.org
Count the Vote
Count the Vote is a Georgia-based advocacy group whose Web site
provides updates on news and helps people get active.
http://www.countthevote.org
Black Box Voting
Black Box Voting is a site focused on ballot tampering in the 21st
Century. It includes a copy of the book Black Box Voting
by Bev Harris.
http://www.blackboxvoting.org
Where's The Paper
A New York based group dedicated to verifiable voting election results.
It includes the fraudulent voting machine as a teaching tool.
http://www.wheresthepaper.org/index.html
Miami-Dade Election Reform Coalition
A Miami-Dade based group working for a vote verified audit trail
in Florida elections.
http://www.reformcoalition.org
VoteWatch
Votewatch is a nonprofit non-partisan organization of citizen volunteers,
statisticians, lawyers, technologists, journalists and election
officials who monitor public elections in the U.S.A., analyze patterns,
and make their findings public prior to the certification of the
election.
http://www.votewatch.us
Coloradoans for Voting Integrity
http://www.countthevotecolorado.org/
Vermonters for Voting Integrity
http://www.geocities.com/vtvoting/
|
