You Can Vote,But The Elections Over:County election board forum gives electronic voting skeptics chance to rant,but little else
http://www.freetimes.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=2688By Charu Gupta
MONDAY’S CUYAHOGA COUNTY Board of Election forum at Myers University on electronic voting had all the trappings of a public hearing: an attentive panel, a podium and microphone for citizens to speak, video cameras and a court reporter. But what it didn’t offer — a chance to influence the board — weighed heavily on the minds of many in attendance.
The forum, filled with appointed and elected public officials, representatives of a voting machine manufacturer, reporters and activists, was largely an effort by county election officials to justify their actions. But if anything, the event underscored the continued lack of confidence many Ohioans have in their election officials, electronic voting and Cuyahoga County’s vendor of choice, Canton-based Diebold.
The CCBOE and Diebold focused much of a morning session on telling a 60-member-plus audience why electronic voting is the best choice for Cuyahoga County. In the afternoon, about 20 people took the mic for the public testimony phase (time ran out before 14 more could speak). Most questioned Diebold’s integrity, the security of its machines and cost analyses. Few, if any, left satisfied.
THE HISTORY
Two systems are vying to replace traditional methods of voting: optical scan systems, and Direct Recording Equipment (DRE).
In optical scan systems, voters darken a circle next to the names of their candidates. Ballots are then electronically scanned and tabulated. Some computer scientists prefer optical scan systems because they have built-in, paper-based voter verification. But many researchers and veteran election officials maintain that optical scan systems are fraud-prone, because a simple mark added later can easily invalidate a ballot...
WELCOME TO THE MACHINE
A demonstration of the marvels of electronic voting.