[North-NV-Greens] Fwd: [usgp-dx] Voting System Panel Focuses on Verification (ELECTIONLINE.ORG)

[Paul Etxeberri]

>
>electionline Weekly ñ April 28, 2005
>
>electionline.org
>
>
>
>Voting System Guideline Panel Focuses on Verification
>
>By Elizabeth Schneider
>
>electionline.org
>
>
>
>GERMANTOWN, Md. ñ The Technical Guidelines 
>Development Committee, a panel chaired by the 
>National Institute of Standards and Technology 
>(NIST) and created to make recommendations to 
>the federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC) 
>on voluntary voting system guidelines, met to 
>finalize draft standards earlier this month, 
>wading through the oft-controversial topic of 
>verifiability with electronic voting machines.
>
>
>
>The recommendations must now be adopted by the 
>EAC. So far states have relied upon 2002 
>technology standards set by the Federal Election 
>Commission.
>
>
>
>Because of the rising use of direct-recording 
>electronic (DRE) machines, some of the debate at 
>the two-day meeting focused on security measures 
>for these systems.
>
>
>
>Among the recommended security measures was the 
>use of ìindependent dual verificationsî systems 
>such as voter-verifiable paper audit trails 
>(VVPAT), modified optical-scan machines and 
>ìwitnessî or capture screen technology.
>
>
>
>Recognizing the rapid pace in which technology 
>evolves, voting systems may encounter an 
>increase in operational problems causing 
>potential hitches in higher stakes elections and 
>an increase in fraud, said John Wack, a voting 
>security researcher at NIST.
>
>
>
>VVPAT advocates have pushed their case before 
>and since the November election, and with the 
>January 1, 2006 HAVA deadline approaching to 
>replace antiquated voting systems, 34 states 
>have introduced, and in some cases passed, 
>legislation to add paper trails to electronic 
>machines.
>
>
>
>However, some say alternative methods to 
>increase DRE security are still worth 
>investigating.
>
>
>
>ìIt appeared to some individuals that NIST was 
>only providing requirements for VVPAT systemsÖ 
>that NIST was somehow promoting it,î Wack said. 
>ìThat was an unintended consequence of our work.î
>
>
>
>In October 2004, Democracy Systems, a 
>Florida-based company, introduced the VoteGuard 
>verification system which captures every image 
>that a touch-screen voting system generates, 
>including voted ballots, provisional ballots, 
>write-ins, summary screens and vote totals and 
>audio output from a DRE machine.
>
>
>
>According to Democracy Systems president John 
>McLaurin, the VoteGuard is unique because of the 
>independent nature of its capture as opposed to 
>using software created by voting machine vendor 
>software.
>
>
>
>In the 2004 election the system was put to the test in Virginia.
>
>
>
>Election officials in Caroline County made 
>arrangements to outfit one precinct with one 
>touch screen using the capture screen 
>technology. ìIf it is determined that a 
>verification system should be used [VoteGuard] 
>is certainly the way to go. It is like the video 
>replay they use in football games. You can 
>replay exactly how the voter intended to vote,î 
>stated Park Dodd, county chairman of the board 
>of elections.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Natlcomaffairs mailing list
>To send a message to the list, write to:
>Natlcomaffairs at green.gpus.org
>To unsubscribe or change your list options, go to:
>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/natlcomaffairs
>
>You must know your password to do this.
>
>If you can't figure out how to
>unsubscribe, as a last resort only,
>send a message OFF LIST to
>steveh at wagreens.us
>
>If your state delegation changes, please see:
>http://gp.org/committees/cc/documents/delegate_change.html
>
>For other information about the Coordinating Committee, see:
>http://gp.org/committees/cc/


-- 
Paul Etxeberri

"Forests precede civilizations and deserts follow"   ---Chateaubriand