FAQ: What's Wrong with Computer Voting Machines? by the National Ballot Integrity Project

January 22, 2007 at 20:24:21
by Sharona Merel

SNIP... Similar language has been noted in the case of the computer voting industry, as follows:

· On July 8, 2003, an article was published, by Bev Harris of Black Box Voting, elections investigator and author of Black Box Voting – Ballot Tampering in the 21st Century, stating that Johns Hopkins and Rice University technologists had discovered secret "back doors" in the Diebold GEMS software source code (which accounts for the tabulation of 50% of America's votes) by which votes could be changed, in real time, by remote, during America's elections.

· In January 2005, it was reported at Boston.com, that SAIC was awarded a $170 million contract for a PROMIS-type computer software program for the FBI, intended "to help agents share data about terrorist threats and criminal cases." Could SAIC be the keeper of the "improved" PROMIS technology?

· Robert Gates has personally presided over election engineering, in association with SAIC and VoteHere (satellite cryptography technology).

· An electronic voting project is in progress, at MIT and Caltech, funded by Carnegie and others, that is based on satellite cryptography technology, and which entrusts the security and control of whole elections to five individuals, possessing one-fifth, each, of a single encryption key. Encryption is as much about secrecy as it is about security. Exactly what is being encrypted and who is to be entrusted with the secrets?

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_sharona__070122_faq_3a__what_s_wrong_w.htm

Not many believe that they are reliable/provide an honest tally.....Experience backs this 'perception' up....it's not just 'perception'....it's FACT....computers can keep track of my bank account (and EVERYTHING that I purchase with my "rewards card? (although I've NEVER seen any reward, except that AXCIOM knows what I like to buy....), but not my vote. The computers can't keep track of my vote.....hmmmm.......

Paper voting - without auditing - has much the same problem as computer voting. It is just easier to steal elections with computers - while leaving few obvious, other than statistical, clues.

And the math fearing American public includes judges that will not convict on statistical "proof" - indeed those judge will stop any search for the physical proof of the theft at the first claim by the thief that the way he stole was a "trade secret".

we live in a democracy is worth billions, otherwise why would the crooks go thru all this trouble, Holt can not and/or will not be able to fix this problem, we can e-mail him all we want, there has to be a "SURGE" to tell the Politicians that WE know what is going on, the BUCK stops here, if we aren't on the SAME page they will continue to think, that they can fool us, into believing that the machines are the only way to count the votes.

HAND COUNTED PAPER BALLOTS NOW, OUT IN THE OPEN, FOR ALL TO GODDAMN SEE!!! :)

Anyone who makes the connection secret ballot <==> encryption has a very serious mental illness or is up to no good.

Encrypting a secret ballot simply makes any sort of audit impossible. Controlling satellites is not the same problem as counting votes, not by a long shot. Electronic banking is not the same sort of problem either.

A secret ballot must remain in a human readable form at all times, or it is very easy to question it's validity. Even a clunky old mechanical voting machine is superior to any voting machine that stores votes as electronic bits. At least a human being can see the workings of the machine, electronic bits are invisible, and easily manipulated by covert means.

A voter verified paper ballot allows for many means of audit, including many non-computerized means, from simple electronic counters to hand counts.

A secret ballot stored as electronic bits is inherently untrustworthy, and encryption of any sort only makes the vote less trustworthy.