Clear76°
5 Day Forecast


NEWS SEARCH

Advanced search
 
News | Today's Print Ads | Classifieds | Community | Directory | Marketplace | My Zwire!
Tuesday 8 November, 2005        Home > News > News > Top Stories
 

News
 Top Stories
 Births
 Business
 Editorial
 Entertainment News
 Letter To The Editor
 Lifestyles
 Wedding Information Forms
 Neighbor's Page
 Obituaries
 Police/Courts
 Sports
 Weather
Sports Wire!
Furniture
Newspapers In Education
Entertainment
Classifieds
Business Directory
Links
Our Newspaper
Circulation
Advertising
Community
Web Services
Commercial Print
Fun and Games
Consumer Guide
Personal Finance
Lifestyles
Archives
Feedback

  Top Stories

Column: Devices may not pay off
By: Tom Blount, Editor05/09/2004
Little did I realize, four Sundays back, that Paul B. Johnson was on the cutting edge with his front-page story titled, "Making votes count."

Advertisement
In that article, Johnson cited "a growing chorus of activists ... arguing that electronic touch-screen voting machines have serious reliability problems that could lead to incorrect vote counts either through random glitches or nefarious meddling."

In a companion story, Johnson wrote, "The State Board of Elections doesn't want to certify any new voting machines in North Carolina until ... federal standards are in place."

In Johnson's "Making votes count" story, Guilford County Board of Elections Director George Gilbert said critics "are at best misinformed, at worst alarmist."

Further study and recent revelations indicate we were a bit hasty in saying, in an editorial, that Gilbert probably was correct in his assessment, as both David Allen and Richard Stimson, a couple of High Pointers who have studied the subject in depth, quickly pointed out.

At the end of April and the beginning of May, because of (a) opposition by computer experts to the electronic voting machines now on the market, (b) action taken by government officials in some states, (c) situations that have exposed the flaws and vulnerability of electronic voting machines, and (d) an electronic voting machine manufacturer who seems to be seriously politically challenged, the topic seems to be cooking on nearly everybody's front burner.

Allow me to list some of the negative twists this story has taken:

Scientists told a federal panel that electronic voting isn't completely reliable and suggested a backup paper system, one Associated Press report said.

That same article noted that Aviel D. Rubin, computer science professor at Johns Hopkins University, said, "Not only have the vendors not implemented security safeguards that are possible, they have not even correctly implemented the ones that are easy."

"Computer security experts say the Diebold machines - and those of rivals - have been carelessly developed and are to vulnerable to tampering and malfunction," M.R. Kropko, AP business writer told readers on Friday. Kropko also said that, during the primaries, "vote counts in Maryland were delayed because of modem glitches, and machines in much of California's San Diego County malfunctioned, potentially disenfranchising hundreds of voters." And Diebold failed to pass federal testing until April 21 (well after the primary) and still hasn't qualified for final certification, according to Erika D. Smith of the Akron Beacon Journal.

California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley decertified touch-screen voting systems in his state, citing concerns about security and fraud, The Press Enterprise in Riverside, Calif., wrote. He banned use of Diebold elections systems in four counties, but gave 10 counties that use other systems the chance to recertify by complying with 23 security standards.

The League of Women Voters apparently has jumped on the Rubin bandwagon - president Kay Maxwell has declared "the 2004 election is in danger - and at least 20 states are considering legislation to require a paper record of every vote cast, according to both Knight Ridder and AP reports. Rubin contends his students hacked into Diebold touch-screens with ease and that "on the spectrum of terrible to very good, we are sitting on terrible."

Walden W. O'Dell, Diebold's chairman and chief executive, obviously is smart in some categories of the electronics industry. Diebold, one of three companies eligible to sell electronic voting machines, runs a company that, mainly with ATMs and safes, has built a $1.2 billion company. But, in the voting machine area, he's either naive or just plain dumb. It has been verified that he or "people affiliated with the company made more than $325,000 in political contributions since 2000, mainly to President Bush or Sen. George Vinovich, R-Ohio," Kropko said. Kropko also wrote that O'Dell said in a fund-raising letter last August that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes" to Bush.

On the other hand, another AP writer noted that, "since switching to electronic voting in 2002, voters in Georgia have overwhelmingly supported the system with few complaints," citing Kathy Rogers, director of election administration as the source. And Riverside County became the first in California to use high-tech voting machines and officials have said 29 accurate elections have taken place since.

The AP reports that "about 50 million Americans this fall are expected to use the ATM-like voting machines."

We very well may be in for another roller coaster ride as votes are counted in the November election, and, if we are, hanging chads will be minor by comparison to the ruckus that will be raised, no doubt by both Democrats and Republicans.

You may be just as successful voting on a one-armed bandit.

Anybody who uses a computer beware!

Tom Blount is editor of the Enterprise. He can be contacted at 888-3543 or tblount@hpe.com


©The High Point Enterprise 2005

TODAY'S PRINT ADS


High Point Enterprise :: High Point, NC :: (336) 888-3500



Copyright © 1995 - 2005 PowerOne Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.


News | Today's Print Ads | Classifieds | Community | Directory | Marketplace | My Zwire!