 |
|
Just a short note, as I have a midterm shortly. So I voted yesterday at the Registrar's office. People were piling in. They were using the Diebold system, which is I think a first for Alameda county. The Registrar swore they weren't networked, nor is the server that aggregates the votes. However, if a vote process gets messed up, they don't print out people's choices, either at the moment you submit the vote onscreen, or later, when tallying up everything. Considering the issues with Diebold, and other voting systems, I think this is a problem. Also, Diebold has not been open about their system code and architecture, and this needs to be a requirement for any system we approve for computerized voting. See Frank's round-up of links on these issues.
1. Go vote today at the polls if you haven't voted over the last month at the Registrar or absentee. Look up your polling place here.
2. Write/call the state elections commission to express your concerns, if you have them, over the computerized voting procedures and Diebold. Ask them to require open code review, and the printing of a copy of all votes taken.
Also, check out this market analysis of the election. (thanks, Gawker.)
Brown: Governor Gray Davis out (as of Oct 6: top line)
Blue: Yes on recall (second from top)
Black: No on recall (third from top)
Purple: Governor Gray Davis in (fourth from top)
Red: Recall cancelled (bottom)
Also, see this on predicting the election.
I just voted on a Diebold machine... and felt dirty. Not only that, I noticed that the gubenatorial candidates were not randomized on the electronic systems... they were in ALPHABETICAL ORDER!!! I suppose that, since only 10% of CA uses electronic voting systems, this isn't a particularly big deal... but, if all the machines in Alameda county are Diebold systems, that means a large percentage of the population will vote on them.
Posted by: joe on October 7, 2003 08:41 AMHere's live election updates starting at 8pm:
http://vote2003.ss.ca.gov/