Electronic voting divides county political leaders

 

By: Amy Morenz
09/20/2004

 

Local Democrats and Republicans are already sparring over the reliability of touch-screen voting machines Collin County will use on Nov. 2.

Advertisement

 
Deployed in 2003, Collin County has used electronic voting machines in 28 elections. It bought AccuVote-TX machines from McKinney-based Diebold Election Systems after Florida's 2000 problems tallying punch cards in thepresidential election.

Electronic voting has been a national lightning rod since then. Touchscreen systems prevent undervoting and overvoting, punch card flows and voting for the wrong candidate, Diebold says. Opponents question the reliability of underlying code, potential software glitches and the chances of hacking into the electronic system. Nationally, 50 million voters are expected to cast ballots on electronic equipment this fall, according to an Election Data Services study.

In a press release issued Monday, Collin County Democrats expressed "series issues" about Texas' electronic voting system and Collin County's purchasing process.

"Considering the millions of taxpayer dollars spent, Collin County election officials have a duty to demand from Diebold the highest accountability for the security and reliability," said Shawn Stevens,the Collin County Democrat's vice chair who leads a Voting Rights team.

"The Collin County government officials should not hesitate to ask hard questions just because Diebold Election Systems is a prominent business based in McKinney," Stevens said.

"We fully expected Collin County to be targeted because we are one of the five top counties that vote Republican," said Collin County Republican Chair Rick Neudorff. This is all part of national agenda to challenge a close election using legal means. I'd like the Democratic Party to provide proof that county was mislead."

The Texas ACLU filed an Aug. 10 lawsuit seeking access to the Voting Systems Examiners Board meeting. The board considers potential certification of all voting systems used in the state. The secretary of state routinely approves the group's recommendations, but has rejected requests for the public to observe meetings, the Texas ACLU says.

According to Collin County Democrats, videotapes of the voting board's January 2004 meeting showed a vendor demonstration. "It was not apparent that any comprehensive testing process was followed or that the new machines were compared directly with the older version," the release said.

The Voting Systems Examiners Board was scheduled to review certification applications from Diebold and Accupoll when the Texas ACLU filed suit. Board members delayed the Aug. 18 meeting until January. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott is expected to rule on the Texas ACLU lawsuit Nov. 21, said Bill Kenyon, a spokesman for Texas Secretary of State Geoff Connor.

The state board has ultimate responsibility for analyzing prospective touch screen systems, making sure they pass security and reliability tests, Kenyon said. We want every part of the meeting to be open," Kenyon said. "The problem is that part of the meeting is when the company divulges its software codes ... to prove the machines are accurate and secure."

"Texas' voting system certification and testing are among the most stringent in the nation," says a July 13 Texas Secretary of State news release.Texas has not experienced any fraudulent activity in nine years of using electronic systems, it said.

"If Collin County was misled by Diebold's marketing efforts about the quality and dependability of these products, then Collin County officials should consider taking appropriate legal action against Diebold for deceptive trade practices," Stevens said.

Collin County purchased the Diebold system after it was certified and accepted by the Secretary of State, said a statement by Collin County Public Information Officer Leigh Hornsby. The county appointed task force comprised of "bipartisan members" who looked at various options and ed Diebold, she said.

"The commissioners court accepted that recommendation, and the court is comfortable with the choice," Hornsby said. "The county does not send vote tabulations via modem to a central location. Each machine's totals are stored on a memory card and hand-carried to election central."

"I'm not the least bit concerned about the security ore reliability of the Diebold system," Neudorff said. "They can't be hacked because there is no network or dial-up." Diebold has come under fire from critics questioning past performance. Johns Hopkins University Professor Aviel D. Rubin has become a leading opponent against high-tech voting systems. Rubin published the first in-depth security analysis of Diebold's touch-screen voting software.

"He studied 49,000 lines of leaded code from Diebold...and found it contained incorrect use of cryptography and bad software engineering," the Collin County Democrats' release states.

The system has performed flawlessly, there has never been a factual security issue... after hundreds of elections," said Diebold spokesman David Bear.

Electronic voting is more accessible to meet Americans With Disability Act rules, can handle varied languages and provides "dramatic cost savings," he said.

Electronic systems prompt questions because voters are unfamiliar with their use. Diebold's systems have to meet federal and state requirements. All of its machines are sealed until election day, with running tallies easing monitoring.

Critics, though, point to Diebold's situation in California, where four counties purchased 14,000 machines.

"Diebold installed uncertified software on the machines without notifying the secretary of state, and over half of San Diego county's polling places opened late on election day due to part malfunctions, turning uncounted voters away," Collin County Democrats say.

Bear, Diebold's spokesman said all of California's touch screens were decertified while vendors were given the chance to add additional security measures. California systems also have to deliver a printed receipt of every vote, he said.

California recently Diebold AccuVote-TS touch screen voting system firmware and software for use in the November elections, according to an Aug. 13 Diebold press release.

"The (Texas) process is reviewed by those persons who understand safety and robustness and know the election environment," Bear said. "The election is not about a piece of equipment, it's about dedicated volunteers and the rules and regulations of the audit process."

Unlike other states, Texas does not require a printed receipt for every voter. Democrats and the ACLU prefer printed receipts.

"The easiest fix...is to have a voter verified paper trail," Stevens said. "The problem is that the machines just report totals, there's nothing to handcount." Providing printed receipts for each voter could create problems. The voters could use the printed document to prove they voted in return for a fee, Neudorff said.