|
Editorial: Why Do We HAVA Get Flawed Voting Machines? |
|
|
|
by Dan Veaner
|
|
Friday, 12 October 2007 |
 I disagree with many of the things our State Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton says. I agree with some of them. And one thing that I am behind her on 100% is her influence on New York's response to the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002.
In short, after the 2000 presidential election, infamous for introducing the phrase 'hanging chads' into the popular lexicon, the federal government decided to do something about it. They instituted a law that said that all states will replace punch card voting systems, create election assistance commissions, and establish minimum election administration standards. What that meant was that states must have electronic voting machines certified and in use by January 1, 2007, extended from an earlier deadline. And extended again to September, 2008. What will it take to get this right?
New York has taken a lot of heat for being the only state not to put
new voting machines into its polling places, but the way things have
turned out it may be the smartest thing the state government has ever
done. While other states rushed to purchase new machines, New York
held back, methodically evaluating the machines and attempting to see
which were certified before they rushed to purchase. And a good thing,
too! Because the testing lab many states including New York depended
on was unable to meet standards that would have allowed it to become a
certified lab. And many of the machines have been proven to be
'hackable,' with vulnerabilities that would allow some computer-savvy
politico to throw elections, discarding votes wholesale if they went
against his candidate.
 Levers or electronics???
Lifton notes that New York passed a state law required by required by HAVVA in 2005. She says New York wanted higher standards including machines that produce a paper trail, no wireless equipment in the vicinity of the new voting machines, and proper certification, and that manufacturers never said they couldn't meet the State's standards. She also attributed federal incompetence for holding up implementation and oversight of the law. "The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) didn't get set up until two years after the federal law was passed," she says "There really was no federal commission overseeing any of this. "
Lifton says that she and other state legislators have been trying to insure that the machines are secure, transparent, and have a paper trail that can be used to verify votes in case of a recount. She says that even though voters in Tompkins County are generally happy with the existing lever machines they have two problems: handicapped accessibility and the fact that they are getting old and will eventually wear out. But she also rightly says that new electronic machines are not secure.
I used to write software for a living, and I'm here to tell you that she couldn't be more right about that. Version 1.0 of any software (or hardware) is bound to be fraught with bugs and vulnerabilities. Recent studies ay Johns Hopkins and Princeton Universities have found multiple vulnerabilities due to poorly written software, a failure to provide vote privacy, and removable storage units. I'd rather deal with a hanging chad than thousands of votes disappearing into the ether either due to error, power outage, or malicious attacks.
What's the rush? We have voting machines that are as reliable as Old Faithful. Let's deal with the accessibility issue instead of spending millions throwing the baby out with the bathwater and replacing it with a Barbie that is missing limbs! Computer voting machines are like Star Trek science: a great idea that is attractive and emotionally appealing that can't be practically realized with the current state of technology. I'm just not willing to face the possibility -- or certainty -- that someone can beam my vote up (or down), Scotty.
Lifton has it right on HAVA. No system is perfect. But just because a state 1200 miles away broke down, we shouldn't leap from a system that has served us well to something that is less reliable and secure, even if it does have a spanky new electronic screen. Lifton and her colleagues have earned 'I Told You So' rights, and if the deadline isn't extended again our state has the best chance of getting the best of the worst by the next primary election day.
----
v3i39
|
Archive Opinions 
