Apparently, Vote Tampering Is Only Acceptable If It's Done By Americans

from the Hugo-Chavez-To-Win-2008-election dept

Typically, when we write about voting machines, the stories have a predictable, though depressing, plot. A machine will be shown to have some sort of vulnerability that allows it to be hacked, while the company that produced it (usually Diebold, though not always) will try to prevent them from being made safer. Yet while politicians ignore these very real threats, they won’t pass on an opportunity to scaremonger about a foreign conspiracy to subvert American democracy. So politicians are up in arms about voting machines made by Sequoia Voting Systems, whose major shareholders are Venezuelan. They fear that there may be built-in vulnerabilities that would allow Hugo Chavez to throw an American election should he please. One alderman from Chicago claims it’s more than just a theoretical possibility, claiming that, “We’ve stumbled on what we think could be an international conspiracy to subvert the electoral process in the United States.” This all sounds like an incredible stretch, and very similar to the fears about Lenovo products being used by the federal government. What’s strange is that the uproar is an implicit admission that voting machines possibly could be tampered with in some way, so as to give inaccurate results. If they’re willing to believe in a far-fetched conspiracy such as this one, why aren’t they concerned about the actual cases demonstrating problems with voting machines?


Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Apparently, Vote Tampering Is Only Acceptable If It's Done By Americans”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
34 Comments
TriZz says:

How about...

The old school voting cards. This was never an issue then.

Or – how about a receipt that’s printed. When you submit your vote, there’s a window (protected) that confirms your vote. Then you hit “yes” or “confirm” or something like that – then you have a paper trail.

Sometimes the solution is so simple that it’s hard to see it.

dave says:

Re: Re: How about...

I’m sure the packets from diebold machines traveling over AT&T’s networks are never, ever touched by the NSA.

but I digress…I live in Tallahassee (yes we screwed up a few times) and our election supervisor said screw you Diebold, I’m testing your machines. Thank god for him.

If we’re going to rely on these machines with no records, we C A N N O T ascertain after a vote if the election supervisor or ANYONE on his staff tampered with them. And we can’t be sure the machine wasn’t faulty in recording votes.

For some of the same reasons we have issues with others knowing how we vote, we cannot allow only certain people(election workers) to be the only ones able to alter votes. Thats confusing, basically if its possible to alter elections we need a record trail to prove it didn’t happen afterwards. And we need continuous testing and improvement in our election machines. Diebold makes healthly profits off their machines and they have unwavering support from many government officials. They need to allow as transparent a testing process as possible so the voting public can have faith in their machines.

I understand it will cost them money to do that, fine, we can find the money. Whats the point of supporting a process with state and federal money(buying diebold or anyone elses’ machines) without verifying they work properly and are impossible to falsify results from.

Or if results are falsified, at least the machines should show evidence of tampering.

Luci says:

Re: Re: How about...

Do you honestly think they can’t trace the votes, already? Ballot cards are numberd. You sign in when you come to vote. The two can be put together. Besides, with the electoral college your vote is effectively meaningless if the person representing your vote decides to vote the other way. There are no laws or rules of any kind in place forcing electoral voters to follow the popular vote of their region.

Anonymousie says:

Re: Re: Re: How about...

*Ballot cards are numberd. You sign in when you come to vote. The two can be put together.*

Luci. Dude. Before you (literally) cast a paper voting ballot into the locked box, the number on the ballot card is torn off. Something tells me you didn’t hang around long enough to see that part of the voting process.

I think we should stick with paper ballots. But, I’m Luddite who doesn’t want a cell phone.

Jimmy Bear Pearson (user link) says:

Perhaps physical card retention...

I agree. I think physical paper material is probably the most important aspect of this issue. I don’t mind saving paper when I send my family emails, but when it comes to the election of governmental figures, I think the use, handling, and storage of paper artifacts is quite reasonable (given the importance of accountability.)

What we must keep in mind is that voters in the U.S. must be kept secret – it is important that “how someone voted” not be tied to an identifiable individual.

The Truth Beacon says:

Having been frauded against

I can tell you that no system will ever be perfect no matter how much you bitch and complain about some company you think is evil actually – Heaven Forbid – making a profit off a product they produce. Having seen my vote last election cast for Kerry (and similarly entirely along the Democratic party lines) while I was at work (documented) even on the ‘old’ card system (which my county still used) you can be frauded against. Just because your propaganda isn’t the one being pushed the hardest doesn’t mean the other party is the devil.

For shame – wasting so much of our time with your propaganda blatently biased. Why don’t you just report the news like we all want, without your bias.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Having been frauded against

For futher clarification – I know how my votes were cast because I sued and won to get the votes fraudulently cast under my name stricken.

I’m sorry, but i still fail to see how it is possible that, even if you had proven that someone fraudulently voted for you, anyone could possibly have known who that person voted for. No records are kept of who votes for whom – just of who votes. It’s called a “secret ballot.”

Professor HighBrow (user link) says:

Re: Having been frauded against

I fail To see how you’ve explain this “bias..” that you’ve agrgued here:

How much you bitch and complain about some company you think is evil actually – Heaven Forbid – making a profit off a product they produce

Electronic voting machines are a little different than “Those guys that made the paper.” Or, those old ladies that actually looked you up old school style to make sure you were in the book as a registered voter.

Yes, heaven Forbid anyone make profit from it, because that’s ridiculous to profit from voting. Where’s there’s profit, there’s just another chance to link money into politics again. I voted the same way, but I still don’t like the idea of any company being in complete control of machines that decide a narrow election. It’s just another chance for corrupton to enter “the system.”

Of Course, we could always Reurrect Jimmy Hoffa and the ballot wouldn’t matter…

I Like the “Documented Receipt of Vote” idea. So simple! if it comes to question, here’s a non-forgable (as good as our money) document of the vote. How much would that really cost when it comes to people that didn’t unch the right “chads”?

Wanna Recount? Here’s my reciept. It’s as good as a $20 bill.

–Prof HiB

Dan says:

Voting

The only kind of voting that makes sense to me is Internet-based. For those who don’t have PCs or Mac’s, the voting booth’s would have them. Every citizen would have a public key (ssn?) to prevent duplicates, and communication would be encrypted with completed ballots stored in redundant databases (at least) three for post-election error/fraud correcting. Gee, if that happened, we could even vote from home, work, or at the airport–but then more people would vote–could be bad for congress. On important things like “should we go to war?” they would know how we feel immediatly. I doubt the lobbyists would like the idea since it would have the potential of reducing their influence.

Stu says:

Re: Voting

Hey! I like the idea you’ve come up with here! Other than the key would have to be something other than SSN as mine was recently stolen with millions of other vets. However we could take it a few steps further and eliminate the need for the House or Senate. After all they are there simply to represent our vote.. If we can vote for ourselves we won’t need theirs!

Dan says:

Voting

The only kind of voting that makes sense to me is Internet-based. For those who don’t have PCs or Mac’s, the voting booth’s would have them. Every citizen would have a public key (ssn?) to prevent duplicates, and communication would be encrypted with completed ballots stored in redundant databases (at least) three for post-election error/fraud correcting. Gee, if that happened, we could even vote from home, work, or at the airport–but then more people would vote–could be bad for congress. On important things like “should we go to war?” they would know how we feel immediatly. I doubt the lobbyists would like the idea since it would have the potential of reducing their influence.

jerwhite says:

Re: Voting

Voting on the internet will never happen because we would have to vote for someone who agreed to let us vote on the internet, then he would have to submit this idea, then congress would have to vote on this. This is our moronic government that set this up this way to make sure nothing ever got done except for when you see it on paper. It always looks good on paper.

Emceay says:

Soul-less for office.

They turn a blind eye to the real issue because it’s how they found themselves in office. I’m amazed that diebold can almost say they’re gonna rig it and no one listened. Lately I’ve just begun to adopt the ideal of not giving a shit. Because, frankly every time I want some law or bill passed these assholes vote it down, so what do I care if they’re finally afraid of a taste of their own medicine.

Our system is broken, we’re losing freedoms as time passes. So I just can’t bring myself to care about these fools in suits. They care about nothing concerning me unless it involves incarceration or taxes.

Emceay says:

It's not democracy, it's government that's broken.

“If we can vote for ourselves we won’t need theirs!”

Switzerland has a direct democracy, they vote on initiatives individually. In 120 years they’ve voted on 240 initiatives and 10% passed.

I don’t like how we vote in clowns that don’t listen to us and pass laws that hurt us without reading them. It’s gotten worse over the past 4 years, but I don’t see our congress conceding power, ever. It’s far too easy for them to not go to jail when their buddies can change the law without asking the people.

I don’t like how we split the power into branches but one branch has a solitary individual at the top. Personally I think vice presidents should never be on the ticket. Rather, the second runner up (in this case kerry) should be vice to truely balance out the people. It makes no sense that about half of the people in this country are currently under-represented, now democrats know what it’s like to be black.

Pro Choice? says:

Re: It's not democracy, it's government that's bro

“now democrats know what it’s like to be black.”

???

I don’t recall being asked what color pigmentation I would like to have in my skin. You still have choice on which flavor of poison you would like with your election day breakfast… At least you do here in the good old USA.

Mark says:

Scaremongering

I once sat across the dinner table from my cousin, who explained at length how Russian Communists were using technology to control the weather in order to destroy the American heartland. Turns out she was repeating word-for-word what her high school history teacher was “teaching” every day in his classroom.

International plots to overthrow elections via rigged voting machines? That conspiracy theory is somewhat tame by comparison. The sad truth remains that certain segments of the American population are always ready to believe the worst about foreigners — or, really, anyone who looks or talks differently than they do. The same folks also tend to think that complaints against Dieboldt are just Democratic sour grapes about the most recent presidential election. Stupid is as stupid does.

Anonymousie says:

Re: Diebold also makes...

*Diebold also makes the automated Teller Machines for banks (look at the logo on the next one you use).

Do you think the banks would put up with the security system (or lack thereof) in these machines?*

A company can produce perfectly both a cleansing soap meant for humans, and an acidic lye that would burn through human flesh.

So your point would be … ?

The subject is voting machines, not automated teller machines.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...