Tue Feb 02, 2010 at 01:15:00 PM EST
|
A ruling yesterday was issued in a lawsuit challenging computerized voting machines that do not produce a paper record:Mercer County Superior Court Judge Linda Feinberg held that New Jersey's 11,000 voting machines have to be re-evaluated by a qualified panel of experts within 120 days to determine whether they comply with NJ law requiring that they be accurate and reliable. Unlike the panel that currently evaluates voting machines, the new panel must have requisite knowledge of computers and computer security. Does anyone find it disturbing that the current panel which evaluates our voting machines doesn't need to have knowledge of computers and computer security already and we need the court to direct that?Judge Feinberg also ordered that all voting machines and vote tally transmitting systems be disconnected from the Internet immediately. Judge Feinberg also required that criminal background checks be performed on personnel who work with voting machines and all third-party vendors who examine or transport the machines. Currently, no such checks are in place. Judge Feinberg further required that a protocol be put in place for inspecting the voting machines to ensure that they have not been tampered with. Judge Feinberg found that the State of New Jersey should no longer leave voting machines unattended in polling places, to prevent tampering. Currently they are left unattended at polling places for up to two weeks before and up to two weeks after each election. But what the Judge did not require is that the state actually follow the 2005 statute that said all NJ voting machines needed to have a voter verified paper ballot. Here's what Congressman Holt said about the Court decision"If, as the court acknowledges, security vulnerabilities exist, then the court and the citizenry should want the possibility of audits capable of detecting and mistakes or misbehavior," Holt said. "The fundamental purpose of the lawsuit has been to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the vote tallies by requiring the use of paper ballots as the basis of those tallies. Until New Jersey implements a paper ballot voting system, we will have faith-based voting." Holt's release also noted that there won't be the ability to have an independent audit of the results from the re-evaluation. Assemblyman Gusciora, who was one of the plaintiffs in the case had this reaction to the ruling:"It defies common sense that this process takes place," said Gusciora. "The state should take note that this is an electronic age, and should retrofit Sequioa voting machines with a paper trail. At least in this decision there is a recognition that there could be security breaches." Until some of these elected officials start losing their seats in close, contested elections where they don't have the ability to get an accurate recount, we're going to continue seeing half measures that don't truly ensure every vote is counted. You can view the full ruling from the court here. |
| Jason Springer :: Vulnerabilities exist, but court fails to require paper ballot |
|
|
Featured Stories  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
