Texas Supreme Court: no e-voting paper trail required

ARS Technica 7/5/11

Texas Supreme Court: no e-voting paper trail required

A group of Texas voters seeking to stop the use of paperless electronic voting machines reached a dead end on Friday; the Texas Supreme Court ruled that their suits could not proceed without evidence that they have been personally harmed.

Texas has been using direct-recording electronic (DRE) voting machines for more than a decade. In 2006, a coalition of voters led by the Austin NAACP sued to stop Travis County from using the eSlate, a DRE machine made by Austin-based Hart InterCivic. (Hart does offer a printer as an optional component of its system.) The voters claimed the machines were insecure and did not allow meaningful recounts.

Travis County disagreed. In a FAQ on the county's voting website, officials answered questions about paper trails and security.

Q: Some computer experts claim that there is no way to audit the vote without a paper trail. Does this system have paper backup?

A: This system provides voters with confidence that their vote will be counted as they intended. First, the voting device provides each voter with a summary of all votes, alerting the voter of any skipped races, and allowing the voter to make changes. The voter has visual confirmation that the vote was cast exactly as intended. To ensure the votes are recorded correctly, the system is publicly tested and validated before, during, after each election to ensure that votes are counted and reported as they are cast. There are many security features designed to test procedures, equipment and software. Finally, the system can print out all Cast Vote Records should that be required for a recount.

http://www.statesman.com/news/local/texas-supreme-court-dismisses-challenge-to-electronic-voting-1575833.html">AAS 7/1/11

Texas Supreme Court dismisses challenge to electronic voting machines in Travis County

Dealing a blow to critics of electronic voting machines, the Texas Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a case brought by Travis County voters that alleged the machines were not secure or reliable.

The machines "are not perfect. No voting system is," Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson said in his opinion.

But "we cannot say that (electronic voting machines) impose severe restrictions on voters, particularly in light of the significant benefits such machines offer," he said.

The lawsuit, filed in 2006 but held up on procedural questions, sought to force Travis County to provide voters with a paper copy of their just-cast ballot to review for accuracy. That ballot would then be submitted to create a record that could be checked in event of a recount or problem with a machine.

The current system, which tabulates all votes cast on a machine but does not provide printed ballots, cannot ensure accuracy or provide a backstop to a voting system that has had problems in the past, the voters said in the suit.

Lawyers for Secretary of State Hope Andrade , the defendant in the case because she had certified the machines, argued the voters cannot show they have been harmed by the voting machines and therefore had no standing to sue.