Ensure reliable & trustworthy election technologies
Electronic voting machines are insecure, unreliable, and prone to a variety of problems that undermine trust in our elections process. Optical scanners and other technologies have some problems as well.
The CTO can create a clear roadmap to get reliable, trustworthy, verifiable voting technology into every precinct in America by the time of the 2010 elections.
Additionally, the CTO should employ information designers to create a national standard for ballot designs so that all citizens are ensured the right to a ballot that is clear, easy to use, and reliable.
jesse_kocher
shared this idea
61 comments
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 30
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source
Open Source can and has produced code that is more robust and secure than proprietary code.
And it is not sane to have any code running our public elections *hidden* away from us by corporations who have a huge stake in the outcome of elections.
But invoking the phrase "Open Source" does not magically make EVMs secure...
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 29
From what studies had been performed it was obvious that EVM software was buggy and insecure... the obvious first idea was to make the software Open Source and open up the machines to public inspection. Of course this flew like a lead balloon with the EVM shills (both corporate and state) but it would no doubt be a vast improvement.
But would it make EVMs actually secure?
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 28
Ideas were proposed among election integrity advocates and debated. Given the fact that HAVA was the law (one based on unrealistic concepts), and given that EVMs were in place and that states had no budget for replacing them (said budgets instead being drained by the corporations for "maintenance and setup fees"), the ideas had to start with the EVMs in then in place.
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 27
People tried to find solutions. Studies of EVMs were done where feasible, and always the same results: Unsecure. Hackable. And the people who by games theory and by long history in politics were the most likely to game the system were the ones entrusted with providing the security that the EVMs themselves lacked: the insiders at state and corporate levels.
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 26
But election integrity schisms did not start or end with Daily Kos.
With HAVA wrecking the rule of law in state electoral processes and EVM shills spewing vast amounts of lies, excuses and deceptions concerning EVMs, with scientists and researchers banned by law from investigating EVMs or reporting their findings if they did investigate... reactions were fragmented.
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 25
A very unfortunate pattern was set early when the popular netroots site Daily Kos banned talk of malfeasance during the 2000 elections as "conspiracy theories"... and not incidentally banned by default any talk of election integrity (EI) that questioned the status quo.
This was a self-destructive policy that effectively *enforced* the right-wing talking points on EI issues.
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 24
The budding netroots encountered the election integrity question and wrestled with it... but since the ""bipartisan"" HAVA act actually followed a very right-wing agenda at its core the same screaming tsunami of lies, denial, distortion, deception, even more lies and faux outrage greeted *every* inquiry into elections, HAVA and EVMs.
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 23
And the EVM wave washed across America! Well... mostly.
Some places like New York simply said "No. Not until you answer some of the questions about these machines."
And questions there were. Lots of them. The HAVA steamroller had raised awareness of EVMs and then as EVMs began affecting places that had not had to deal with them before many people began asking "WTF?"
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 22
And EAC officials often falsely told state officials that HAVA mandated EVMs for Federal elections... when even *that* power-grab of a bill didn't dare go that far.
But the EVMs were still EVMs. The machines were always labeled as "Unhackable!" even though the EVMs' inherent vulnerabilities remained *unchanged* from the earliest reports (back in Analysis part 6).
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 21
HAVA mandated billions for election "upgrades" while outlawing punch-card and mechanical lever machines.
A "temporary" agency called the Election Assistance Commission was created and guess what? It turned out to be all about EVMs and assisting corporate control of elections and has failed abjectly at every one of its *mandated* duties.
http://www.bradblog.com/?cat=159 -
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 20
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine
I think the parallel to Klein's theory is appropriate and it turned out that, yes indeed!, HAVA was not about "helping Americans vote" but instead was all about converting the various states' electoral systems to, essentially, corporate control and transferring billions of dollars to the corporations.
Sound familiar?
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 19
Regardless of the various causes of the 2000 debacle...
The event and its aftermath waved a huge red flag emblazoned "Shock Doctrine!" in the faces of certain parties... who proceeded to slam through Congress a profoundly misnamed bill called the "Help America Vote Act" (HAVA) that was *supposedly* aimed at preventing a repeat of 2000.
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 18
(I am the zapkitty. Snark or die!)
Hey, I even gots a genuine conspiracy theory about that incident reported here by a left-wing liberal kook to back it up. It's towards the end of this video:
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 17
And then it happened.
The event that changed everything and put America on a wartime footing against a deadly new enemy and thus, we were told, forced the abandonment of the rule of law and the gutting of the U.S. Constitution and all state constitutions.The event: the terrorist attack known as the 2000 elections...
The enemy: "hanging chads"...
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 16
"Proprietary!", "Tinfoil!" and "Luddite!" became common battle cries from the EVM shills.
But the corruption of the electoral process was perforce piecemeal, with some states refusing to allow their strict concepts of electoral law to be compromised despite the presence of EVMs, and others even refusing to allow EVMs at all.
To certain parties this was intolerable...
-
the zapkitty
commented
gots to beware the ^c 'n' ^v from the main essay... apostrophes are running amuck amidst the verb tenses...
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 15
And the electronic elephant of EVM's grew larger and larger and sporting ever-fancier frills while pirouetting on the coffee table in the living room. Still spewing toxic crap all over American elections because the supposed fixes to EVM's built-in security vulnerabilities were as far away as ever.
More studies were done, more warnings were issued and ignored...
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 14
Through the late 90's the non-electronic components of the various state electoral systems were systematically corrupted by intent and also by the mere presence of EVMs themselves, corrupted further than ever before in the checkered past of America's electoral history because "we need the machines even if our laws and state constitution don't allow it. It's progress!"
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 13
(Ironic because the EVMs have been (ab)used in some of the most racist voter disenfranchisement campaigns seen since the days of Jim Crow with the simplest being "No Working EVMs = No Vote." But those particular stories are for later...)
-
the zapkitty
commented
Analysis part 12
The States are to be responsible for elections, an inevitable move at the time of the Revolutionary War but also a deliberate one by the Founders in order to place a necessary check on that aspect of Federal power.
Yeah, it's that civics lesson checks and balances thing again... but don't mention it nowadays or the EVM shills will begin screaming "RACISM!" Ironic, yes?
