Electronic voting systems …still aren’t good enough to be trusted with the state’s elections, … she admitted having doubts as to whether the electronic voting systems will ever meet the standards she believes are needed … “I don’t rule out the ingenuity of some computer science student now in the eighth grade,” but what’s available now isn’t as transparent or auditable as the paper ballot systems they replaced…“When the government finds a car is unsafe, it orders a recall,” she said. “Here we’re talking about systems used to cast and tally votes, the most basic tool of democracy.”
Read the entire story highlighting California Secretary of State Debra Bowen <read>.
The politically correct article also contains several quotes from advocates on both sides of the electronic voting debate. One side has logic and computer expertise. Unfortunately, some confuse voter fraud with election fraud/error. Perhaps there is ‘no record of anyone hacking into a voting machine’, however there is no lack of evidence raising suspensions or electronic fraud/error.. That is part of the problem with electronic voting, it can be difficult to find the evidence without a paper record. That is why computer scientists are so concerned. Even with paper records there needs to be sufficient audits and investigations. There is evidence of votes being recorded for the wrong candidates – was that hacking?, error?, or deliberate action by those trusted with programming the machines? There is a lack of sufficient audits, a lack of evidence of sufficient investigation, and a lack preservation of legally required records.
