Vote Blue in the News

Sunday, August 12, 2007

Ventura County STAR

Op-Ed

Electronic voting systems must be secure

By Sue Broidy and Helen Conly

Ventura County voting rights activists are concerned about the tepid response of local election officials to the recent ruling by Secretary of State Debra Bowen, which calls for sweeping security measures to assure the validity of votes cast in Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties and across the state.  The secretary of state said, “Our very existence as a democracy is dependent on our having voting systems that are secure, reliable and accurate.”

The American public, and particularly new young voters, must be confident that their vote will be recorded and counted accurately and that the voting system is beyond reproach.

Public vigilance key

The public must stay vigilant while the secretary of state and computer scientists continue to test the integrity of voting systems until we can definitively answer the question:  Are electronic voting systems secure, transparent and reliable?  The media have been quick to respond to this challenge.  For example, in the Aug. 7 Los Angeles Times, Richard L. Hansen, professor of election law at Loyola Law School, praised Bowen for doing the right thing while we debate the best way to cast and count votes, and referred to the Florida debacle of six years ago.

Yet, Ventura County Registrar Phil Schmit publicly downplayed the computer scientists’ findings as being conducted “under laboratory conditions” and, therefore, questioned their validity.  The University of California, Santa Barbara computer scientists, who have answered all Sequoia criticisms on the UCSB computer science Web site, said the machines were analyzed at different levels from the point of view of an attacker and, while conceding that any electronic system cannot be 100 percent invulnerable, they found seven areas of immediate concern.

For example, no source code was needed to establish the vulnerability of the Sequoia machines to overwriting firmware and the boot loader, and the machine’s function could be changed from test to election mode, distorting results on Election Day.  Also, the audit trail could be maliciously modified.

While we realize Ventura County has security measures to physically protect the voting machines, we hope it will be reviewing some of its security measures in light of these findings.

Not politically motivated

Additionally, Schmit criticized Bowen’s timing of the review, saying it was political.  Yet, the law is clear that any changes to election systems must be announced six months before an election.  March 15, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a law moving the presidential primary to Feb. 5 and, by default, made Aug. 3 the last day for changes to be established.  Subsequently, the review has taken five months to prepare because the vendors, Sequoia and Diebold, were very slow in providing the necessary information for the tests.

Vote Blue notes that in the November General Election Ventura County had a three-week delay in the final report of votes because of the extensive work involved in verifying electronic votes in several close races and having to count more than 26,000 absentee ballots dropped off at polling stations on Election Day throughout the county.

Ventura County election officials and workers do a laudable job serving the public interest, answering questions and assisting voter and voting rights groups.  But, it is clear that cautious and appropriate oversight is needed of all electronic systems provided to our counties by software vendors who have a huge vested interest in promoting their products.

Matt Bishop is the University of California computer scientist and co-principal of the study that tested the three electronic voting systems.  He has stated that the study results should be used as a constructive exercise for election officials and software vendors.  Vote Blue activists wholeheartedly agree and reiterate that the purpose of Bowen’s study is to reassure California voters as to the security and secrecy of their vote and to have immediate shortcomings rectified in time for the next election.

The history of our franchise in this democracy has evolved from colonial times when the Founding Fathers granted the right to vote only to adult white males (and some widows) who owned property.  We went on to fight the Civil War to refashion the U. S. Constitution to fulfill the freedoms of African-Americans.  It was more than a century later that Congress passed the Voting Rights Act in 1965, and the grip of the disenfranchising Southern states was finally b broken.  History shows us that our voting rights must be reaffirmed and strengthened whenever there is the possibility of threat to these basic democratic rights.

Serious doubts

Professor bishop says that the fundamental question is not yet answered as to which system is more accurate, verifiable and transparent in a scientific comparison of a paper-ballot method or the electronic e-voting.  But, many experts feel that the latest study results make the voting machines unacceptable.  Avi Rubin, professor of computer science at John Hopkins University and author of “Brave New Ballot:  The Battle to Safeguard Democracy in the Age of Electronic Voting,” states, “The source code team reports for the California top to bottom review of Diebold, Hart and Sequoia’s voting systems should mark the end of the use of these voting machines in public elections.”

Vote Blue supports Bowen

The secretary of state’s report raises many questions regarding the physical security and technology of the electronic machines themselves, which have been examined and found vulnerable.  The vendors for Sequoia machines (used in Ventura County) and Diebold *used in Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties) now have 30 days to answer to the secretary of state’s rulings, and must have a modification plan in place within 45 days, to rectify the shortcomings in software security, at their own expense.

Vote Blue supports Bowen in her bid to make our voting systems tamper-proof and incorruptible.  There must be better ways of achieving integrity in our voting systems and all other methods should be reviewed.

We are fortunate to have a vigilant secretary of state who is applying herself to the problems until we can satisfactorily answer the questions:  Are our electronic voting systems secure, transparent and reliable?  “Trust, but verify.”  Ronald Reagan’s oft-quoted saying captures it all.

In the meantime, Vote Blue continues, in the name of democracy, to try to persuade a skeptical public that every vote counts and that every vote will be counted.

--Sue Broidy, of Ojai, is chairwoman of Vote Blue Committee—Central Coast.  Helen Conly, of Ventura, is treasurer.  Vote Blue Committee—Central Coast is a political action committee, based in Ventura.  Its purpose is to engage and register Democratic voters, to create a database with local voter information, to deliver materials to educate voters, to develop media tools for organizing, to provide leadership training for local activists, and to engage the community about progressive issues.  Its Web site is www.votebluecommittee.net