Stealing your vote, v989347 First Ruling in Florida's13th district

Thorgrim · 12-30-2006, 03:19 PM

In a ruling issued this afternoon just prior to the Holiday weekend, the presiding Florida Circuit Court Judge William L. Gary denied the plaintiffs motion to allow review of the source code for the paperless touch-screen machines used in the contested U.S. House race in Florida's 13th district between Democrat Christine Jennings and Republican Vern Buchanan.

Jennings, and a number of Florida voters and Election Integrity organizations, had filed suit asking for a revote and to allow them to review the software used on the voting machines made by Election Systems and Software, Inc. (ES&S), after some 18,000 votes seemed to have disappeared in the race to fill the U.S. House seat vacated by former FL Secretary of State Katherine Harris. The state has previously certified Buchanan as the winner by a 369 vote margin.

...

even ES&S's only expert put on the stand during the hearings in Florida --- notably, he was a political scientist, not a computer expert --- concurred that had it not been for problems with the voting machines, Jennings would have won the race. A study of the undervote ballots in the race had previously found the same thing. According to the study, had votes been recorded on those ballots, Jennings would have won the election by a near 3,000 vote margin

The BRAD BLOG : BREAKING: JUDGE DENIES PLAINTIFF MOTION TO REVIEW PAPERLESS VOTING MACHINE SOURCE CODE IN CONTESTED FL-13 U.S. HOUSE ELECTION, PLAINTIFFS TO APPEAL

D. The machines now challenged were tested as required by law prior to the early voting and election day voting and were found to be working properly.
F. Two parallel tests were conducted on the subject screen systems and representatives of both Plaintiffs and Defendants were present. The test results revealed 100% accuracy of the equipment in reporting the vote selections.
G. Plaintiffs have presented no evidence to demonstrate that the parallel testing was flawed and or the results not valid.
H. The testimony of Plaintiffs' experts was nothing more than conjecture and not supported by credible evidence.
I. For this Court to grant Plaintiffs' motions would require this Court to find that it is reasonably necessary for the Plaintiffs to have access to the trade secrets of Defendant, Election Systems & Software, Inc., based on nothing more than speculation and conjecture, and would result in destroying or at least gutting the protections afforded those who own the trade secrets

http://www.bradblog.com/Docs/FL13-12.29.06.pdf

If you guys want a brief history:

Most counties in Florida had an "undervote" (Vote was cast for Gov, Sen, etc but didn't include a vote for the Congressional Representative) of several thousand

Sarasota, a democratic-leaning country, had an undervote of 18,000, so in a normal election and in other countries of the SAME DISTRICT, about 1 out of 50 undervotes occur, in this county, it was 1 out of 6...thats a 600% increase in one only country...the election was determined by 329 votes

The tests, taken and maintained AFTER the election by the company, were operated outside normal conditions (ie an election) and finally their was normal, voting, leading the judge to conlude that the 600% increase in one country was just odd and nothing more

The testimony of mathematical and statistical experts of PhD's ranging from MIT to Stanford were deemed "speculation" even when they were backed up by studies showing a regular undervote would have handily changed the outcome or even slightly less undervote error would have changed the entire outcome

Possibly like in "hacking democracy" where the machines start out with negative votes and when voters come in they are simply feeding their vote to a void and by the time they get to 1 vote, the other candidate already has thousands
Hacking Democracy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It seems pretty easy how to rig an election now, pick a country where the party you don't like is popular, and make it so their vote in a the critical election (everyone knew the Sen and Gov were going to be Nelson and Crist) just disappears

RMNIXON · 12-30-2006, 04:44 PM

I don't like these machines but thank the Crybaby:

R-Type · 12-30-2006, 09:59 PM

theoretically, closed source code has no place in government use. All funds are publically owned and therefore all government property purchased with them is publically owned as well. Software 'licenses' create situations where ownership/control of government property is retained by private individuals, and this should be avoided for the very reasons this case is an issue.

1. a controlled test in a courtroom could be easily rigged...even with the same exact devices which are under question. Any conditional nefarious activity is masked by the fact the code itself is not being analyzed...just the input and the output.

2. closed source 'blackbox' devices effectively circumvent the usual anti-counterfeiting procedures from working properly because the data is manipulated outside the election officials' visual inspections and possibly their comprehension as well (are they programmers? hell no).

3. the patent rights of those who design machines which enable governmental processes like voting should never supersede the transparency of political process. (whether 'intellectual property' is or should really be property at all is a whole separate debate)

Honestly, until this can be sorted out, these machines should be avoided. It's more important that the process be transparent to everyone than it be efficient.

motivez · 12-30-2006, 10:48 PM

Another example of something I think is fine as a "public works" rather than done by privately owned companies.

Those who are in favor of privatization of everything should look at this as a real world example of what happens when things that shouldn't be entrusted to a company who's only motive is profit, are.

RMNIXON · 12-31-2006, 06:14 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Another example of something I think is fine as a "public works" rather than done by privately owned companies.

Those who are in favor of privatization of everything should look at this as a real world example of what happens when things that shouldn't be entrusted to a company who's only motive is profit, are.

Because people in government are above corruption and political influence? Hardly!

The old system was better because it was too hard to tamper with. Everyone had to cast a single paper ballot that had to be counted one at a time. And they were all subject to re-count. There is no easy and quick way to tamper and manipulate that kind of vote. Were these made by government printers or the private sector? Who cares!

Sure you can get a hanging chad or an invalid ballot because of more than one punch, but if this is a statistical accident then it is reasonable to conclude that in a close election you will have near the same invalid votes for each candidate. Not 100% but much better than outright fraud.

motivez · 12-31-2006, 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

Because people in government are above corruption and political influence? Hardly!

I never suggested that, but we have the ability to influence the government through elections, with a company we're less powerful as individuals.

AVengeance · 01-01-2007, 12:52 PM

Time to set off some EMPs, so we HAVE to use paper ballots during the next election.

I'm sure glad I was still able to use a paper ballot.

Thorgrim · 01-01-2007, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by AVengeance

Time to set off some EMPs, so we HAVE to use paper ballots during the next election.

I'm sure glad I was still able to use a paper ballot.

I think it was 2004 they found a bunch of paper ballots in an old closet, and let's not remember when socialists became popular, it became popular to throw their ballots into the local river

Diamond Cross · 01-01-2007, 02:58 PM

When did that happen?

Secondly, there will be problems with any voting procedures and equipment, and none are safe from tinkering.

AVengeance · 01-04-2007, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

I think it was 2004 they found a bunch of paper ballots in an old closet, and let's not remember when socialists became popular, it became popular to throw their ballots into the local river

That's my point. The votes were FOUND. Electrons dissipate, and there's no evidence of the person's vote. No one will EVER know the crime. At least with the things you mentioned, something could be done. Maybe too late to affect THAT election, but not to late to make improvements for the future. With no hard copy, your may as well pull up to a drive-thru window and vote like ordering a big mac and a coke, and then drive away, hoping they got it right.

DosEquis · 01-04-2007, 12:31 PM

I Am In Yur Boothz ..stealing All Your Votez

Thorgrim · 01-04-2007, 01:03 PM

Originally Posted by AVengeance

That's my point. The votes were FOUND. Electrons dissipate, and there's no evidence of the person's vote. No one will EVER know the crime. At least with the things you mentioned, something could be done. Maybe too late to affect THAT election, but not to late to make improvements for the future. With no hard copy, your may as well pull up to a drive-thru window and vote like ordering a big mac and a coke, and then drive away, hoping they got it right.

I meant to say...after the election was over