Diebold completes e-voting printer prototype

[rainbow4321]

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D87SP7680.html


Diebold Inc. said Thursday it has completed a prototype printer designed for use with touch-screen electronic voting machines, allowing voters to print, review and verify ballot selections.

"Voter verified paper receipts are something new," said David Bear, a spokesman for subsidiary Diebold Election Systems in McKinney, Texas.

"No other type of voting provides a receipt for voters. But some states are asking for it, so we needed to develop a product that meets standards for functionality," he said.

Voters can view their selections, but will not be able to remove the printout. The voter's printed selections would be placed into a secure enclosure, stored and numbered with a security tag. The printer weighs less than three pounds. The printer will be submitted to independent testing authorities to ensure that it meets federal standards as a prerequisite to certification in states, Bear said.

[Turbineguy]

1. They must have figured a workaround

to still steal the election.

[bemildred]

2. They still aim to keep control of the printouts. nt

[Stephanie]

3. We don't want a f*cking RECEIPT!

We want a Voter Verified Paper Ballot.

WHY are they talking about RECEIPTS?

[Ganja Ninja]

4. That's right, we need a ballot that can be recounted and

compared to the electronic record. Once people take their receipts home how could we cross check the accuracy of the recorded votes?

[durablend]

5. The printer will just repeat what the person chose...

Still no proof that the machine will tabulate it "correctly" (or should I say "not 'incorrectly' ")

[eowyn_of_rohan]

6. I would like to see something like this:

Voter goes in and receives a ballot with a number on it that cannot be connected to that voter's name (so nobody knows how they voted). A "receipt" comes out for this voter to keep in their possession, that shows the votes cast with the ballot number... After the election, a list of the ballot numbers with corresponding votes is posted publicly. That way, anyone who wants to can check to be sure their votes were tabulated accurately.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

24. Yep.

Gotta be a publicly accessable database that shows an ID with the subsequent vote(s) cast. Running vote totals would also be viewable.

[Wilms]

33. I like the publicly posted bit. But there's a rub.

Reciepts can be used to "buy votes". "Bring me a reciept that shows you voted/for the specified candidate, I pay you." I think that gets flamed and perhaps as well.

But you could write your own record if you wanted.

See post #19 below. Daleo is on to something.

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1191221#1193030>

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

34. I still want to see the transparency of a public database.

[MissWaverly]

35. how about a voting card

how about getting the state lotteries or the campaign funds to pay for a voting card, it has your magnetic stripe, your photo ID, you run it thru, when your done, it's spits out, then you go to a website put your ID in (your social security #) and see your vote on-line, I'm convinced that they padded the vote by having the machines vote multiple times for Bush when someone pressed Kerry like I did and the Button for Bush keep lighting up, I pressed the button for Kerry 5x, GWB lit up 5x and on the 6th try, the Kerry button lit up and stayed lit. I am convinced that the Bush votes were counted and my vote for Kerry was considered an overvote or a blank vote. How Rovian, take someone's vote, twist it to Bush against that person's will and then make sure that their vote for their candidate is totally voided. Yep, yep, I can see that happening. What a mandate!

[eowyn_of_rohan]

36. I like the idea BUT

we shouldn't have to have our social security number tied to our vote--we have a right to anonymity regarding our votes. Also I am so mistrustful of them that I wonder if what would show up for an individual online might not be what was actually tallied--like there might be 2 "sets of books" so to speak...

[hvn_nbr_2]

7. That's exactly the point of this part of the story...

Voters can view their selections, but will not be able to remove the printout . The voter's printed selections would be placed into a secure enclosure, stored and numbered with a security tag.

The voter sees and verifies the printout but doesn't take the printout home. The printout stays in the enclosure, and can be recounted. However, I'm sure they've thought of a way around it. Probably expect that most voters won't even check the printout closely. Of course, Katherine Blackwell will ignore or even destroy the security tags.

[Ganja Ninja]

8. They'll use disapearing ink.

[Rob H.]

9. They completed the prototype? Just in time, too!

:eyes: Nice try, Diebold.

And what about this?

"No other type of voting provides a receipt for voters," said. But some states are asking for it, so we needed to develop a product that meets standards for functionality," he said.

Okay, but...

Voters can view their selections, but will not be able to remove the printout.

I dunno about anyone else, but that doesn't sound like the definition of "receipt" to me, nor does it sounds like it "meets the standards for functionality." If I can't have a slip with my name (maybe my voter registration number would be better, though) and the names of the candidates for whom I voted recorded on it, what good is it?

When I worked in retail (17 years ago!), the cash registers we had used two rolls of paper: one for the customers' receipts, and one for the store's records. How damned difficult would it have been to do the same thing this election cycle?


Edit: I like eowyn_of_rohan's idea above better--I like that it would allow an online double-check that the vote I cast matches their electronic records.

[w4rma]

18. You don't want reciepts so not being able to remove that is a GOOD thing

Taking home what is essentially a printscreen doesn't help. However having these hardcopies there for counting purposes *does* help. These hardcopies need to be the actual ballots, however.

I'll need to reseach what they are doing a bit. This appears, on the surface, to be moving in a positive direction.

[intheflow]

10. Can't remove the printout?

Tell me how that's a real voting receipt! It's like being able to review your choices on a screen, but when it comes to the tally, there's no way of knowing if what ultimately prints out is what you reviewed and approved.

It amazes me that ATMs can print receipts for 25 years, but vote receipts appear to be beyond Diebold's programmer's abilities. :eyes:

[TomClash]

11. Surprise!!

The receipts all say "YOU VOTED FOR GEORGE W. BUSH IN THE 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION"

[VegasWolf]

12. Jeezus, designing a verifiable system is not exactly rocket science,

my only conclusion has to be that they don't want a
verifiable system. Since the spineless dems don't raise
a stink about this, there is no sense in wasting time voting
anymore.

[Igel]

13. Another part of the voting equipment to break. n/t

[rainbow4321]

14. Yup..."oops, we ran out of printer ink..."n/t

[Igel]

16. And so another voting machine is taken out of use ...

in a minority-majority precinct.

[MadisonProgressive]

15. I t hought it was 'impossible'???

[w4rma]

17. Are these ballots that are printed or just unverifiable receipts?

I'll need to read more, but this is definitely movement in the right direction.

[daleo]

19. 1-Vote, 2-get printout, 3-inspect, 4-put in ballot box

5-Ballot box sealed, with representatives of parties observing,
and
6-stored in secure location.

7 - Printed ballots then used for recounts to compare with computer totals, especially for major races (pres, senate, house of representatives). Printed ballots are official ballots, thus need to take step 3 seriously.

I suppose there might be some hanky panky potential in steps 5 and 6, but appropriate use of tamper-proof seals should prevent that.

[SoCalDem]

20. Paper...pen....box....

easy as 1...2...3...

and if you take it one step further, and make the nationally held offices even-year elections, you only have 2 or 3 choices per election..

president (every other election)
senate
house


a 5x7 card would suffice, be durable enough to count and recount

odd year elections would be statewide elections, and I don't give a Rip how they choose to run them except in my own state.

those would be the ones where they include 943 propositions, judges, governor, state reps and council people

[daleo]

23. I agree with that

That's what we do here in Canada, but our elections are pretty simple due to the nature of the system (we generally are only voting on one office at any given time). I was under the impression that U.S. elections could get awfully complicated due to the number of offices and propositions that are sometimes being voted on, and that is why a lot of people like to keep the computer step in there.

But the simpler the technology, the easier it is to detect fraud.

[DireStrike]

27. There are some places it's complicated.

And that needs to stop. Election reform is more than just checking the machines - we need a national holiday for national elections. Local initiatives and props should not be on the same ballot as national.

I'd move to Canada, but it's too close to the U.S. Guess it's Europe for me...

[DireStrike]

26. Receipt doesn't have to be actual "counted" vote

And you'll never know until there's a recount. Recounts are expensive... And if there is machine fraud, you can bet someone will be along to clean up any ballots.

[donkeyotay]

21. If you need to have a paper trail to verify your computerized vote

why not get rid of the computer? With all the money you save you could hire more election workers.

And there was a guy who had already invented this and pitched it to the state of Ohio. I read about him in the vote/election forum. I think he died in a plane crash. Surprise.

[truthisfreedom]

22. IT HAD BETTER NOT BE F*@%ING THERMAL. thermal printouts break down in

a matter of weeks. it should be archival ink on acid-free paper. period.

[meisje]

25. What are you going to do, frame it?

[magellan]

28. Absolute waste of time

I don't care if the damn machine prints a gold-embossed receipt to take home, match against a public list to "verify" my vote, and cherish forever after. It still doesn't address the proprietary software used to tabulate the votes behind the scenes.

Gimme a rock and a chisel and I'll give you my vote, Diebold!!

[lala_rawraw]

29. oh how nice... then the fake results can be printed...awww

Diebold can stick their printer, in fact their entire machine collection inside their own arses... I will not allow my vote to be privatized... never got to vote to make it so, and will not let these jerks use their machines... nope... Diebold needs a nice class action law suit for fraud...there is more than enough for a grand jury to approve a case...if only i had millions of people with me, we could each pay 10 bucks for an attorney...imagine that kind of power. 40 or 50 people suing apparently is not getting us anywhere. Imagine the power of "millions"

So anyone? Attorney? We need at least 1 million class action multi-corporate suit...diebuildship and es/s, triad... all of them.. they stole, our right, to vote.

[tuvor]

30. Bush's second term is a week old. Isn't the timing amazing????????????????

[yurbud]

31. A thought: they get out of voting business, O'Dell doesn't go to prison

[yurbud]

32. Do they have any Diebold equipment in NY?

Elliot Spitzer would wipe the floor with their ass.

[no_to_war_economy]

37. we need Diebold out of the picture completely

I want a federal agency that is independent and non partisan - democracy isn't a corporate product