Paper Trail E-Voting Success In Nevada Getting Attention
from the about-time... dept
Remember the primary in Nevada that used e-voting machines with a paper trail? The same ones that election officials elsewhere wanted to fail, but which worked quite well? In fact, there were very few problems reported, unlike in states like Florida and Maryland, where there are tons of problems being reported by those using electronic voting machines with no paper trail. Well, it appears that some state governments are deciding that, thanks to Nevada's success e-voting with a paper record is the way to go. While those against such machines kept claiming that the paper would cause problems for workers, that clearly wasn't the case in Nevada. So, now, the election officials are grasping at straws for reasons why a verifiable paper trail is no good, claiming that poll workers could check to see how people voted -- though, that's more of a design issue. A properly designed polling machine would not let workers view how someone just voted. Either way, it looks like the message is getting across that the combined e-voting and paper receipt is a better way to go. It's certainly far from perfect, but it's a step in the right direction. Update: Thanks to Ed Felten for pointing out that I misspoke in calling the paper trail "receipts," which would suggest they are taken by the voter. They are not. They remain in the machine behind a protective viewing window. I didn't mean to suggest otherwise, but I can understand how the use of the word "receipt" would imply that. The post has been edited accordingly.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
not a receipt
The distinction is important, for two reasons. First, a receipt would let you prove to a third party how you voted, which is bad because it opens the door to coercion and vote-buying. Second, a ballot can be used to recount the votes or to audit the electronic voting machine's performance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
not a receipt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Unethical Poll Workers
In San Benito County in California, we used punch card ballots. After voting, we put the ballots in an envelope and dropped them in the ballot box. If that was good enough for main ballots, why wouldn't it be sufficient for backup ballots?
P.S. It's good to see the legendary Ed Felten here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ed Felten
[ link to this | view in chronology ]