Vendors are Undermining the Structure of U.S. Elections

As we approach the 2008 general election, the structure of elections in the United States -- once reliant on local representatives accountable to the public -- has become almost wholly dependent on large corporations, which are not accountable to the public. Most local officials charged with running elections are now unable to administer elections without the equipment, services, and trade-secret software of a small number of corporations. If the vendors withdrew their support for elections now, our election structure would collapse. Case studies presented in this report give examples of the pervasive control voting system vendors now have over election administration in almost every state, and the consequences some jurisdictions are already experiencing.However, some states and localities are recognizing the threat that vendor-dependency poses to elections. They are using ingenuity and determination to begin reversing the direction. This report examines the situation, how we got here, and steps we can take to limit corporate control of our elections in 2008 and reduce it even further in the future

What did I really vote for? On the usability of verifiable e-voting schemes

E-voting has been embraced by a number of countries, delivering benefits in terms of efficiency and accessibility. End-to-end verifiable e-voting schemes facilitate verification of the integrity of individual votes during the election process. In particular, methods for cast-as-intended verification enable voters to confirm that their cast votes have not been manipulated by the voting client. A well-known technique for effecting cast-as-intended verification is the Benaloh Challenge. The usability of this challenge is crucial because voters have to be actively engaged in the verification process. In this paper, we report on a usability evaluation of three different approaches of the Benaloh Challenge in the remote e-voting context. We performed a comparative user study with 95 participants. We conclude with a recommendation for which approaches should be provided to afford verification in real-world elections and suggest usability improvements

Pathways to a Trusted Electronic Voting System

In 2002, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) [1], largely in response to voting irregularities in the 2000 presidential election in Florida. Congress intended that HAVA resolve the lingering public confidence issues arising from inconsistent local election administration procedures, punch card voting machines, and voter registration. With HAVA, Congress authorized payments to the states to implement significant reforms of the voting system. However, the use of electronic voting machines to meet HAVA requirements threatens to damage public confidence in the voting system. Several reports have been published that note security flaws in voting systems in use all over the country [2]. California sued a manufacturer claiming that the company had misrepresented the security of its voting machines and falsified certification information [3]. In Ohio, a battleground state, recount irregularities also resulted in a lawsuit [4]. The public outcry and enormous media attention on these problems prompted Congress's Government Accountability Office (GAO) to launch an investigation [5]

From Registration to Recounts Revisited: Developments in the Election Ecosystems of Five Midwestern States

As a follow-up to a study of problems during the 2006 elections, examines the states' continuing adjustments to institutional arrangements, voter registration databases, convenience voting, and post-election processes in the 2008 elections

Resolving the Unexpected in Elections: Election Officials\u27 Options

This paper seeks to assist election officials and their lawyers in effectively handling the technical issues that can be difficult to understand and analyze, allowing them to protect themselves and the public interest from unfair accusations, inaccuracies in results, and conspiracy theories. The paper helps to empower officials to recognize which types of voting system events and indicators need a more structured analysis and what steps to take to set up the evaluations (or forensic assessments) using computer experts

Final Report of the Cuyahoga County Election Review Panel

The Panel was charged with identifying the deficiencies in the May 2, 2006 Cuyahoga County election, ascertain the causes and contributing factors of those deficiencies and provide recommendations to remedy the deficiencies

Voting and Registration Technology Issues: Lessons from 2008

This chapter reviews the 2008 field performance and the scientific assessments of both voting systems and the statewide voter-registration databases. The federal Help America Vote Act (HAVA) mandated each of these technologies. Despite definitive scientific studies that documented grave security deficiencies that can cause voting systems to produce inaccurate vote tallies and “winners” who actually had fewer votes, these systems continue to be deployed. The Chapter traces the regrettable decisions on election technologies to a poorly designed regulatory structure and staffing, which continue to underweight and misunderstand security issues in election technologies

Judicial Protection of Popular Sovereignty: Redressing Voting Technology

My analysis seeks to underscore the gravity of technologically threatened constitutional voting rights and values, implicating both individual rights to vote and the structural promise of popular sovereignty. Resolution of the dispute over the meaning of Fourteenth Amendment17 principles properly derived from Bush v. Gore18 will be pivotal to assuring meaningful voting rights in the information society. If the Court should hold the Fourteenth Amendment to embrace a deferential standard of review or arduous intent requirements, allowing state political branches to persist in choosing voting technologies based on scientifically unfounded premises that do not achieve classic components of voting rights, the American Republic’s future is seriously endangered.19 The argument proceeds in two parts. Part I traces illustrative empirical findings of the two comprehensive, definitive voting systems studies, offers evidence derived from actual election calamities that substantiates the experts’ findings, and translates these findings into concepts meaningful for voting rights and election law. Part II considers the judiciary’s failures thus far to understand the legal import of the scientific studies of voting systems when adjudicating the structural legal sufficiency of deployed voting systems20 and identifies questions on which scholarship is critically needed. Throughout, owing to space constraints, the argument is illustrative rather than comprehensive

Voting Technology and the Quest for Trustworthy Elections

This chapter reviews four dimensions of the still-unresolved voting technology quandary. It begins by briefly reviewing the Florida Bush v. Gore background that, combined with the tradition of state governmental control over election administration, spawned the contours and limitations of new federal regulatory apparatus. It also surveys some illustrative voting system malfunctions and their consequences surfacing predominantly from 2009–12. The second part of this chapter, Federal Compulsion to Adopt Software-Based Voting Technologies, explains the misconceptions about software and digital equipment that led to both the flawed federal mandates and the ineffectual regulatory structure. The third part of this chapter, Litigation and Enforcement Strategies, focuses primarily on the curious omission of Federal enforcement of HAVA\u27s voting technology standards. This part also considers private party litigation that has sought to invalidate the use of allegedly defective voting machines. The final part of this chapter examines Federal Promotion of Problematic Internet Voting. The chapter concludes by advancing recommendations for preparing the legal system to realize voting rights despite the wide deployment of problematic voting technologies