This story originally provided by the Charleston Gazette
July 8, 2004
Molly Ivins
Electronic voting machines augur fraud
Heads up, team, the voting machine situation requires sustained
attention, but not panic or paranoia. There is time to act, but act
we must.
Yes, it is high time to “view with alarm” (an editorial page
cliche rivaled only by “point with pride”), and with bipartisan
alarm at that. It’s in everyone’s interest to have the cleanest,
fairest elections possible — that’s one of those things you can
watch even the most partisan politicians serving on legislative
elections committees figure out in no time. The only way to make
sure nobody’s ox gets gored is to keep it clean. If you don’t
think there are just as many bright, 14-year-old hackers who would
rig a vote in favor of Democrats as there are who would rig it for
Republicans, you’ve been neglecting the 14-year-old hacker set.
I suppose I’ve been calmer about the possibility/probability
that electronic voting machines can be rigged than some others who
are now looking at the bad news because it’s an old story to me.
Ronnie Dugger, a veteran Texas journalist (despite the fact that
he’s taken to living in, of all places, Cambridge, Mass.), has
been on this case for years. I suppose I mentally assigned it to
some “Ronnie’s taking care of that” category.
But as Dugger’s questions and predictions keep turning out to
be more and more eerily prescient, it’s clear this is something
about which the general public needs be aroused and even plenty
upset.
The problems with electronic voting machines are numerous and
grave, starting with the fact that the software which runs them is
considered “proprietary information” by the companies that make
them. In other words, they won’t tell anyone what it is, how it
works or anything else about the systems, meaning we have no way of
knowing if they’re clean, reliable or even functional.
That uncomfortable situation was rather dramatically underlined
when Walden (Wally) O’Dell, chairman and CEO of Diebold Election
Systems and a Bush campaign “Pioneer” (meaning he raised at
least $100,000), wrote in a 2003 fund-raising letter that he is
“committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the
president.” At the time, Diebold was trying to get on Ohio’s
“favored vendor” list and is now on it. Elections Systems and
Software, the country’s largest maker of the machines, also has a
Republican pedigree.
It’s a shame Diebold isn’t a big Democratic fund-raiser who
said he was committed to delivering Ohio for Kerry, so the
Republicans could see how they like that. But I’m sure there are
enough Republican conspiracy theorists to contemplate the happy
proposition that, while chairmen and CEOs may lean Republican, there
are any number of partisan Democrats lurking in engineering
departments and liberal moles in software-writing offices.
Last July, a team of computer scientists from Johns Hopkins and
Rice universities studied the Diebold machines and concluded they
are “a threat to democracy.” Bev Harris, author of “Black Box
Voting: Ballot Tampering in the 21st Century,” reports electronic
voting machines are “designed for fraud.” Apparently, you can
rig these things so that Osama bin Ladin can win an election. One
experiment in how long it took to open one up and swipe its software
produced a record of 10 seconds.
Making the software for voting machines both bugless and
hacker-proof simply may not be possible, but as many have observed,
the things as they stand are an open invitation to voter fraud. As
The New York Times pointed out, slot machines in Las Vegas are held
to far higher standards of transparency and inspection.
The simplest way to make sure the machines aren’t miscounting
is to require a paper trail on each ballot. In California, the
Voting Systems and Procedures Panel recommended the machines be
shelved, and then Secretary of State Kevin Shelley revoked
certification of Diebold’s paperless electronic voting machines.
Eight other states now require a paper trail, something that is
not difficult to design or install, despite Diebold’s initial
protests that it is oh-so-hard. Florida, scene of so many painful
voting memories in 2000, had a single-race election in January in
Palm Beach where the victory margin was 12, but the machines
registered more than 130 blank ballots. You think 130 people came to
the polls to not vote? There was no recount because the machines had
no paper records.
There are bills in both the U.S. Senate and House to require
paper trails in time for the 2004 election, but they’re stuck in
committee. Take pen in hand and write (or email) your elected
representative, ASAP. Then bask in the benign glow of civic
rectitude that follows. Well done.
Ivins is a syndicated columnist.
|