Md. Might Cancel Voting Machine Contract

Didn't see this posted yet, so I'm assuming it's not a dupe:

http://www.nbc4.com/news/2395692/detail.html?treets=dc&tid=2652838160813&tml=&tmi=&ts=H

"
Maryland officials say they may cancel a $55.6 million agreement to buy electronic voting machines if an international computer security firm finds problems with the machines' security."

I'm assuming that the "international computer security firm" is SAIC. Personally I don't have any opinion as to whether "the fix is in" as some suspect, but I found it interesting that possibility of cancellation has even been raised.

Enron, in the person of Jeff Skilling, dismissively told questioners and skeptics, who wondered how Enron made its money, "You just don't get it, do ya?!" Enron was gleaming and hi-tech and cutting edge.

Mmhmm. Voting machines, same thing. New, electronic ... one ad says the machines have "rugged good looks" as if this plastic box is John Wayne or something.

You don't need any SAIC hand-in-the-pocket-of-the-Pentagon contractor to tell ya -- it's common sense. "Trust me" from the software developers and the election certifiers is not enough. I've never met them, and neither have most of you. We don't know them.

If the voter can see their result and verify it him/herself, with a printed paper ballot, and that ballot then has verifiable chain-of-custody and public counting in that precinct, with results posted, then you have a chance for a fair and honest and transparent and observable election.

Electronic is NOT transparent or observable by citizens or candidates. Period. The Hopkins study is great at pointing out a slice of the flaws (they didn't even LOOK at most of the code), but the concept is simple. Voters should be able to observe their votes.

So, if Maryland likes Diebold, require them to add a paper printer to the machines. Diebold says they can and will do this if required by a state.

And, then we need to change the laws everywhere, so that paper ballots are legally observable, and that they take precedent over electronic counts.