(PHL) Forum on Voting Machines -- Sept 7

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

> Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:43:38 -0700
> Subject: Forum on Voting Machines -- Sept 7
> From: "Susan Evoy" <cpsr () sbcglobal net>
>
>
>
> To CPSR Members, past and present:
>
> ---------- Forwarded Message ----------
> Date: Friday, August 8, 2003 8:09 AM +0000
> From: Notable Voting <notable () notablesoftware com>
> To: NotableVoting () topica com
> Subject: Forum on Voting Machines -- Sept 7
>
>
> Forum on Voting Machines to be held in Philadelphia
>
> Philadelphia, PA -- A forum on "Voting Machines: A Threat To Democracy?"
> will be held Sunday, September 7, from 2-5 pm at the Ethical Society,
> 1906 S. Rittenhouse Square, in Philadelphia, PA.
>
> Voting machines and the private companies that sell and service them
> control the casting and counting of votes in over 98% of all elections
> in the United States, and in many countries around the world. Concerns
> about the security and integrity of elections are mounting among
> computer experts, politicians, and citizens. Most forums on this subject
> have concentrated on technical issues only. The following distinguished
> panel of experts will address the technical, constitutional, and
> political aspects of voting by machine.
>
> Panelists:
>
> Dr. Rebecca Mercuri is a leading expert in voting machine security and
> standards. She is an independent consultant, expert witness, and the
> owner of Notable Software, Inc. in Princeton, NJ. She is also affiliated
> with Bryn Mawr College and Harvard University's Kennedy School of
> Government. www.notablesoftware.com
>
> Marc Rotenberg is Executive Director of the Electronic Privacy Center
> (EPIC) in Washington, DC.  He filed an amicus brief in Greidinger v.
> Davis, one of the leading cases on voting integrity and voter privacy.
> Marc teaches information privacy law at Georgetown University Law Center
> and has testified before Congress on many issues, including access to
> information, encryption policy, computer security, and communications
> privacy. http://www.epic.org/epic/staff/rotenberg/
>
> Ina Howard is a producer, writer and researcher with Greg Palast, BBC
> Newsnight reporter and author of "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy". Ina
> is a former U.S. Director of Media Tenor International, a global media
> monitor based in Germany. She has also worked with Fairness and Accuracy
> in Reporting (FAIR), Mediachannel.org, the Global Information Network,
> and the Disinformation Company. ina () gregpalast com
>
> Lynn Landes is a freelance journalist who has specialized in voting
> issues for the past year. Her articles appear in several online news
> outlets and in print publications. Lynn has worked for the BBC, WDVR in
> New Jersey, and DUTV in Philadelphia, PA. www.EcoTalk.org
>
> * Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) has introduced legislation HR 2239  "The Voter
> Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2003" to require all
> voting machines to produce a voter-verified paper trail. Information
> about HR 2239 and a representative from Congressman Holt's Office will
> be on hand at the Forum.
>
>
> For more information and reservations: Lynn Landes 215-629-3553 /
> lynnlandes () earthlink net / www.EcoTalk.org
>
>
> ---------------------OVERVIEW
>
>
>
> In 1889 mechanical voting machines made their debut in U.S. elections.
> Around 1964 computerized optical scanners were introduced. Today less
> than 2% of U.S.citizens use a hand-counted paper ballot. While it
> appears that many other democratic nations still use hand-counted paper
> ballots, that situation is rapidly changing over to new technologies.
>
> Government Oversight: There is no U.S. federal government agency charged
> with oversight of voting systems companies. It appears that no
> government agency, including The Federal Election Commission (FEC), has
> a complete list of companies doing business in the U.S.. Worldwide there
> appear to be at least 70 vendors. The FEC lists only 19 that operate in
> the U.S., the Texas-based National Association of State Election
> Directors (NASED) lists 16, while the IFES Buyers Guide lists 64 vendors
> worldwide, with about 40 based in the United States. There is at least
> one company that is neither on the FEC nor NASED list, that is the
> Bermuda-based Accenture (formally Andersen Consulting) which has been
> awarded the contract for the online U.S. military vote in 2004.
>
> Ownership: There are no government standards or restrictions on who can
> sell and service voting machines and systems. Foreigners, convicted
> criminals, current office holders, political candidates, former CIA
> directors, and news media organizations can and do own these companies.
> It appears that these companies are dominated by members of the
> Republican Party and foreign investors.
>
> Standards: There are no federal mandatory standards or certification
> process for voting systems. The Federal Voting Systems Standards (FVSS)
> used by the three NASED's approved Independent Test Authorities (ITA) to
> "certify" companies software and firmware are voluntary, outmoded,
> industry guidelines. To date, 37 states have adopted them. The Help
> America Vote Act (HAVA) sought to establish a committee to formulate
> strong technical standards. Although no such committee has been created,
> $650 million of the $4 billion Congress appropriated for new voting
> systems are being authorized using HAVA funds.
>
> Paper Ballots, Paper Trails, Audits: There is no federal requirement for
> voter-verified paper trails, a paper ballot, or independent auditability
> of voting systems. Many experts say that a paper ballot that can be
> verified by the voter and then hand counted is vital to ensure that
> votes are cast and counted properly, and to allow for legitimate
> recounts. Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) has introduced legislation HR 2239 to
> require all voting machines to produce a voter-verified paper trail.
>
> Constitution/Voting Rights Act: Voting machines (without a voter
> verified paper ballot that could be hand counted) appear to constitute a
> concealed casting and counting of the vote (i.e., it cannot be observed
> by poll watchers or Federal Observers) which makes the federal Voting
> Rights Act unenforceable. Under Section 8 of the Voting Rights Act,
> Federal Observers may be authorized to observe "... whether persons who
> are entitled to vote are being permitted to vote ...(and) whether votes
> cast by persons entitled to vote are being properly tabulated." Nelldean
> Monroe, Voting Rights Program Administrator for the U.S. Office of
> Personnel Management stated in November of 2002 that there is no
> training and no opportunity for Federal Observers to observe the
> accuracy of voting machines.
>
> Election Fraud and Irregularities: Voting machines are relatively easy
> to rig and almost impossible to monitor. There are several ways the
> mechanical lever machines can be rigged. Whoever controls access to the
> machines could, one-by-one, rig the machines. Thus the opportunity for
> election fraud exists, but it is also somewhat limited. Computerized
> voting opens the door for a single individual to manipulate votes in
> elections across the country. Voting system firmware and software is
> proprietary (i.e, a trade secret) which can be hacked by outsiders or
> "updated" at any time by company technicians, much like Microsoft sends
> automatic upgrades to a home computer. In the same way, electronic
> manipulation of votes could take place before, during, and after an
> election. It can be done offsite and remotely. There is a long history
> of election irregularities that suggests that vote fraud using voting
> machines has been occurring. Republicans appear to be the main
> beneficiaries. In the 2002 election 74% of upset elections went to
> Republicans by as much as 9-14% outside of the margin of error of the
> pre-election polls, according to reporter Alastair Thompson of Scoop.
>
> Many voting security experts agree that voting machines represent a
> Pandora's Box for the election process. Some argue that voting machines
> should not be used in elections and that a return to the paper ballot is
> called for. Others say that if voting machines are used in elections,
> effective technical standards and a voter verified paper ballot that is
> hand counted are necessary to ensure honest elections. This forum will
> shed light on many of these important issues.
>
> ---------- End Forwarded Message ----------
>  --
> Susan Evoy   *   Managing Director
> Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
> P.O. Box 717  *  Palo Alto  *  CA *  94302
> Phone: (650) 322-3778    *  (650) 322-4748 (fax)
> Email: evoy () cpsr org
> http://www.cpsr.org/

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/