Voting integrity an imperative for both parties
A very intriguing diary entry from Kos explores the issues of voter fraud.
Let's explain what these "central vote-counting" machines are. Basically, it's a machine running Microsoft Windows with a Microsoft Access database attached. (Note to the computer-savvy among you: Yes, I shit you not. MS Access. Jeez.) The database keeps track of the votes in each precinct, county, etc., much like an Excel spreadsheet. The software is deemed secret and proprietary; previous lawsuits to examine the code that tabulates the votes have been denied.
I have no hope and basically no interest in attempting to overturn this election. I think that is a fruitless task. However, it can't be denied that there are some incredibly suspect vote totals coming out of Ohio and Flordia. Note the discrepancy between the total number of ballots cast and Bush votes in this Ohio county:
Franklin County, OH: Gahanna 1-B Precinct
638 TOTAL BALLOTS CAST
US Senator:
Fingerhut (D) - 167 votes
Voinovich (R) - 300 votes
US President:
Kerry (D) - 260 votes
Bush (R) - 4,258 votes
Because these machines are made on really bad technology and are proven to be fundamentally unsecure, resolving the technical issues with them is a democracy issue, not a partisan issue.
UPDATE:
I should make myself slighty more clear:
I do not have an interest in starting an investigation of electronic voting from the assumption that it is corrupt. However, I fully support the efforts of Bev Harris at Black Box Voting to use the Freedom of Information Act to examine the Hard Drives and the security protocols of the enterprise-wide architecture for Ohio and Florida. This should be done as a way to test the system. American's have nothing to fear in this process. We are all interested in the truth, right?
posted by Chris Dykstra @ 2:46 PM |
| 
1 Comments:
It's funny. At my office we have a couple of large SGI servers running IRIX that have been patches religously (miles more secure than a Windows machine with an Access database). Mind you this is advertising collateral and not votes. I have a hard time understanding why we would protect such valuable data with something as a computer running Microsoft Windows? On top of that, I seem to remember reading that some votes were transmitted via modem. Ugh. Real secure.
I would agree that these results look rather suspect. I think that this type of thing is precisely why we need a printed receipt to accompany our ballot so that in the case of a computer malfunction (and even the most secure computers are subject to crashes, kernel panics and hardware failure, albeit fewer and further between with some systems), tampering or the need for a manual recount.
Post a Comment
<< Home