A CIA expert in electronic voting machines officially declared last month that they are not secure. Just this month, Germany has joined 11 U.S. states, the Netherlands, and other countries which have banned electronic voting of one form or another. Dozens of professors and hundreds of computer experts around the country have shown that electronic voting machines can easily be manipulated and elections results changed.
How is it that electronic voting machines were approved in the first place? A 2004 MSNBC/Associated Press article started with this quote, "The three companies that certify the nation's voting technologies operate in secrecy, and refuse to discuss flaws in the ATM-like machines to be used by nearly one in three voters in November." A 2006 Washington Post article was titled "A Single Person Could Swing an Election," yet these machines are still widely used across the U.S. How can we allow this clear threat to this basic foundation of democracy to continue?
Below are key excerpts of an article on these revelations in the Miami Herald, one of the few newspapers to publish this story.
CIA cybersecurity expert [Steve] Stigall told the Election Assistance Commission ... that computerized electoral systems can be manipulated at five stages, from altering voter registration lists to posting results. Stigall summarized what he described as attempts to use computers to undermine democratic elections in developing nations. His remarks have received no news media attention until now. The commission has been criticized for giving states more than $1 billion to buy electronic equipment without first setting performance standards.
Numerous computer-security experts have concluded that U.S. systems can be hacked, and allegations of tampering in Ohio, Florida and other swing states have triggered a campaign to require all voting machines to produce paper audit trails. Stigall, who has studied electronic systems in about three dozen countries, said most countries' machines produced paper receipts that voters then dropped into boxes. However, even that doesn't prevent corruption, he said. Eleven U.S. states have banned or limited wireless capability in voting equipment.
Germany just this month banned computerized voting. Yet what's important is why they did this. Newspapers gave the impression that Germany banned e-voting due to "security issues" or bugs. Yet in fact, the ban was based on human rights violations. For more on this important development, click here. The Netherlands also banned electronic voting computers last year.
Isn't it time for the U.S. to ban voting systems than can be easily manipulated, too? The box immediately below provides several ideas on what you can do to make a difference on this issue so vital to our democracy. We also invite you to comment below and let us know what you think. Do you think the U.S. should ban electronic voting machines?
