[Voterescue] write your letters to the editor! Austin American Statesman

[Jenny Clark]

send your letters to <letters at statesman.com>

The Statesman reported on the June 25th hearing about electronic 
voting, lots of chances to write a response! (This article was 
printed on the front page of the June 5 metro/state section with a 
headline "Electronic voting has support".)

Also, Dan Wallach, Rice University computer science professor who is 
quoted in the Statesman article wrote a follow up report from the 
hearing on Bradblog ...

Vendor Misinformation in the E-Voting World
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6139


http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/07/04/0704evoting.html

BALLOT SECURITY
Texas sticks with electronic voting
Several states shifting back to paper ballots.
By Laylan Copelin
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Thursday, July 03, 2008

Paper or electronic?

As the debate over e-voting continues around the country, more 
Americans will be returning to paper ballots in the fall as several 
states, including California, Colorado, Ohio and Florida, shift away 
from electronic voting machines.

Texas, however, remains wedded to the technology because of its large 
investment in the machines (at least $93 million, mostly with federal 
dollars) and the solid track record of e-voting during the March 4 
primaries despite record turnouts.

"When everyone woke up, the conversation was about who won or lost, 
and not about voting systems," said Jack Dyer, general counsel to the 
Texas Secretary of State, the state's chief elections officer. Most 
of the problems reported this spring in Texas were about long lines, 
not counting ballots.
After a hearing on the topic last month, Rep. Leo Berman, chairman of 
the House Elections Committee, pronounced it unlikely that the 
Legislature would mandate a switch to paper ballots in 2009, barring 
"wholesale fraud with the machines."

"If the Legislature tried to mandate paper ballots," said Berman, a 
Tyler Republican, county election officials "would think we're out of 
our minds."

That's not to say the debate is over, or that the Texas election 
officials don't think the system can't be improved. (The state 
actually has a hybrid system of paper ballots, mostly in rural areas, 
and machines in larger counties.)

At the hearing, the committee heard from the detractors of 
e-machines, who argued that any electronic system - even optical 
scanners that count paper ballots - can be compromised.

Dan Wallach, a Rice University computer science professor, 
participated in the California study of e-machines that prompted that 
state to begin phasing out electronic voting machines.

Wallach told Texas lawmakers that e-machines that are not 
Internet-based can still be "internally hacked." To do it, he told 
reporters he would need three or four skilled engineers, three or 
four months, $500,000 and a couple of minutes of "alone time" with 
one machine.

"It's unrealistic to assume poll workers won't make mistakes or one 
poll worker can't be corrupted," Wallach said of getting access.

Under his scenario, that one corrupted machine - programmed to switch 
votes, for example - could corrupt other machines when they are 
returned to a central location to be prepared for the next election.

Travis County Clerk Dana DeBeauvoir, who also advises the U.S. 
Elections Advisory Commission, said the testing of the machines 
before, during and after an election would catch any problems.

"How many advantages are we going to lose to deal with a fantastic 
scenario?" DeBeauvoir asked. "In their world, no system is 100 
percent."

Indeed, both sides agree no voting system - not even paper ballots 
counted by hand - is 100 percent foolproof.

DeBeauvoir said there are three tests that should ideally be used to 
double-check e-machines. State law only mandates one, and the state 
doesn't know how many Texas counties use more than the one test.

"Never will one test answer all your questions," DeBeauvoir 
testified. "It takes all three."

Travis County, which has won national awards for election security, 
uses all three.

Expense is one hurdle to extensive testing. The cost of programming 
the ballot is another.

DeBeauvoir suggested the Legislature create a Texas Election Center, 
under the auspices of the Secretary of the State, with the work 
contracted out to a university.

The center would provide support, particularly to smaller counties 
who still rely on the vendors of the machines to program their 
ballots. (The thinking is, the center would be a middle-man between 
the vendors and the county election officials.)

Berman said he would work with DeBeauvoir on her suggestion.

Election officials - from the secretary of state's office to county 
authorities - testified that the Legislature should focus on better 
training and pay for poll workers as the crucial safeguards of any 
balloting system.

"No one can responsibly say there's a zero chance of problems," Dyer 
said. "Despite all of our technical advances, elections remain a 
human endeavor."
lcopelin at statesman.com; 445-3617
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://voterescue.org/pipermail/voterescue_voterescue.org/attachments/20080709/6a649ea9/attachment.html