US Election Day

[piasabird]

So I go to the polling place and I fill out this sheet by shading the circles. Then it is scanned and sucked into a big metal box. I had no way to even know if my vote was counted or not. I dont know if the scan was functional, if it counted my vote, or if it just rejected my vote. There is no way in hell I can get any confirmation of who I voted for or even review it to make sure it is correct. This is a lousy voting system.

My occupation is that of a database programmer. I think I could trust a system that would write the results to a database and then read them again and let you change what was written. However, I do think that it should write the results to a local hard drive and also a network database for security reasons. That way you have a backup. After all, this is not rocket science. If you can trust what your bank tells you with real money, then why not a voting system?

[doctorgonzo]

Originally Posted by piasabird So I go to the polling place and I fill out this sheet by shading the circles. Then it is scanned and sucked into a big metal box. I had no way to even know if my vote was counted or not. I dont know if the scan was functional, if it counted my vote, or if it just rejected my vote. There is no way in hell I can get any confirmation of who I voted for or even review it to make sure it is correct. This is a lousy voting system.

On our optical scan machines, you are supposed to wait to see if the counter is incremented on the display. If it is, it was counted. If the ballot is rejected, it means you voted too many times. The confirmation of who you voted for is looking over your ballot before you take it to the machine and proofreading it.

Really, it's not different from marking a paper ballot and dropping it in a locked box, but with the optical scan machine you will at least know if you overvoted. If you are unsure of whether the people at the polls are going to actually sit down and look at the ballots, you can volunteer to be an election judge next time around to see the process yourself. I'm sure they would love the help!

I'm a database programmer too, which is why I would never trust an electronic voting system. If I know how to change a database without leaving an audit trail (and I don't consider myself to be a very good programmer), then so can lots of other people. With an electronic system, all it takes is one person to change things without anybody's knowledge. With paper ballots, everybody who comes in contact with the ballots would have to be in on the cheating. That's a lot less likely with a large group of people.

[pam123]

Go vote, it's your duty and your privilege.

[piasabird]

You dont get it. The user should be able to verify the accuracy of the vote. Scantron has no way for me to verify for each issue to verify how I voted. I just have to trust the system. Excuse me, but I have never trusted a computer in my life. I beliieve in Trust-but-verify.

I do have a friend who was an election judge last year maybe I can ask her about this.

I dont mistrust computers per se, however, everything breaks down sooner or later. Not only that, someone has to program these machines. All it takes is one error and the votes could be manipulated. The user can not even verify the machine actually can read the ballot correctly.

[doctorgonzo]

Originally Posted by piasabird You dont get it. The user should be able to verify the accuracy of the vote. Scantron has no way for me to verify for each issue to verify how I voted. I just have to trust the system. Excuse me, but I have never trusted a computer in my life. I beliieve in Trust-but-verify.

Well, that's because the Scantron machine is just a convenience. The actual vote you made is the paper ballot. If there is a problem with the machine, then the paper ballots are counted. In this state, a random number of precincts have to count the ballots by hand and ignore the machine. The paper ballot is all that matters.

Which is why electronic machines with no paper trail are so dangerous. Like you said, things break down. You can't always trust a computer. If you use an electronic voting machine and somebody changes the code to manipulate the results, you have no paper ballot to fall back on. "Verifying" your ballot choices on a screen doesn't matter if the code is lying to you, or worse, the totals are changed after the polls are closed and you have gone home. With a paper ballot, that's the legal document, and it can be looked at after the fact.

[ktkendall]

Here in PA, we might become the third state to get an Athlete/Celebrity type for our next Governer.

[faulkner132]

It seems most of the arguments against electronic voting assume one of the following:

- Incompetence [Faulty machines/software/implementation/infrastructure]
I can understand this because it is what we deal with in "electronic" voting as it is implemented now. As I stated earlier, funding solves this problem.

- Conspiracy
There isn't going to be some sort of high level conspiracy where the database will be magically erased and the clever system admin will cover their tracks. There is a reason 5 people have to turn their keys before launching a missile and the same would be true for any system with this much importance. A single person would not be in charge of this or have complete control. Yes, software and hardware can be designed and implemented this way.

- Machines breaking down
Simple, the data is stored on a redundant disk system. If it's good enough for Iron Mountain, it should be more than adequate for online voting. Let's be realistic and not deal in hypotheticals. A voting station could just be a bunch of PC's loaded with special software (like ATM's as mentioned below).

- High school students hacking the machines
Seriously, do I even need to counter something as rediculous? ATM's run off Windows XP and they are never hacked, at least not that I know of (I'm not talking about the card readers, but the actual software which dispenses the money).


A lot can go wrong with the system we have today, here are a few examples:
- Fire: oops, all the ballots are gone... oh well. I highly doubt ALL paper ballots are stored in a facility such as a high end data center.
- People incompence: much more likely than a well designed electronic system.
- Tampering with mechanical voting machines: much more likely a high school student would do this.
- Polls closing before everyone can get in: Yes, it happens even though it is illegal.


It seems the conversation is getting to the point where rediculous "what if" scenarios are being thrown around to counter points, instead of focusing on the *actual* problems and solutions.

[HAL9000]

So that is why you have the redundancy... electronic AND hard copy.... makes sense to me.

[fleeingpepper]

One of the only things Oklahoma does well is it's voting system, simple, secure, and easy.

[David M]

To put it into accounting terms....voting with paper is a double entry accounting system. It is very hard to cheat a double entry accounting system because it all has to balance in the end. Signature's have to match the number of votes and there are physical records which can be used a a backup with which to verify and confirm. Records can be double or triple counted if necessary or audited in other words.

With electronic voting there is no way to verify anything. Auditing is not possible. You have one chance to get it right. If there is a problem and the record is wrong, then there is no way to double check the results. There is also no way to confirm that the record is correct.

The system with the physical backup that is not alterable, although not perfect, is far superior to a system where there is no backup.

[jimmyrules712]

so why not have electronic voting machines that simply print out some sort of voting receipt for each vote, so you have a paper trail?

[rspassey]

Originally Posted by jimmyrules712 so why not have electronic voting machines that simply print out some sort of voting receipt for each vote, so you have a paper trail?

Then it would be harder to rig the results

[HAL9000]

Originally Posted by jimmyrules712 so why not have electronic voting machines that simply print out some sort of voting receipt for each vote, so you have a paper trail?

You already have the reverse of that... as mentioned.. the paper where you fill in the oval and submit to the machine... paper trail is at the beginning of the process... physical number of ballots must equal the number of votes cast.

[Paintbait]

Go vote, it's your duty and your privilege.

Second'd Even though all the polls have probably closed by now.

[TallTravel]

Originally Posted by jimmyrules712 so why not have electronic voting machines that simply print out some sort of voting receipt for each vote, so you have a paper trail?

I believe that is precisely what the new Diebold system does, the one I used to cast my votes this morning.

[juppy]

Originally Posted by doctorgonzo On our optical scan machines, you are supposed to wait to see if the counter is incremented on the display. If it is, it was counted. If the ballot is rejected, it means you voted too many times.

That's how our machines do it here too. We don't have the little bubbles everyone's talking about though....on ours there's an arrow beside each candidate's name but it looks like someone erased the middle of the arrow. Whichever candidate you want you just reconnect the front part of the arrow with the back part of the arrow by drawing a straight line between them (we just had to be different I guess ). Then you put the ballot into the machine and if it accepts it you see the counter increment by 1 and hear a "bleep" sound. If you forgot to vote on something or voted for more than one candidate for the same office, the machine won't beep and it'll spit the ballot back out at you. I always proofread mine before I submit it though, because you feel like a real doof when this machine takes your ballot and goes "patooey!" and shoots it back out the slot!

[TallTravel]

What system did everyone use to vote yesterday? Was it electronic? How did it work? Mine was an electronic system made by Diebold. It was a touch screen system which generated a hard copy backup for every person's vote.

[Redfallon]

Paper ballot that was electronically scanned. I'm in Ohio.

[doctorgonzo]

Originally Posted by Sunset What system did everyone use to vote yesterday? Was it electronic? How did it work? Mine was an electronic system made by Diebold.

Like I said earlier, I used the optiscan ballot where you fill in the bubble like a standardized test then stick it in a machine. Results were tallied pretty quickly where they were used. I was only up until 2 A.M. last night watching the returns from around the state, and at that point very little was not yet counted, mainly from rural precincts.

[rjfvillarosa]

Just a thought..
If Jeb Bush carries on the family tradition and follows his brother into the oblong box oops (slip of the knife....I mean tongue) into the oval office and he serves two terms in office, does that mean we will have a double Jeberdee on our hands?

[David M]

Originally Posted by rjfvillarosa Just a thought.. If Jeb Bush carries on the family tradition and follows his brother into the oblong box oops (slip of the knife....I mean tongue) into the oval office and he serves two terms in office, does that mean we will have a double Jeberdee on our hands?

Biting my tongue and trying to do my best at not firing back. I hope your proud of me glc

[pam123]

No clemency for bad puns

[clroberts]

We had one Electronic Voting Machine at our Precinct and it was not working. The other way we use is the Pencil Fill in Oval method. I still remember the old voting machines with the curtains and the little levers that you flipped when you voted and when you flipped the big red handle lever to open the curtains, it cast the vote.