This type of hack is contrasted against electronic voting systems, which due to the many documented security flaws and potential unknown flaws, requires only a few committed parties to change an election's results. The problem with electronic voting systems is the inherent lack of visibility of electronically recorded information.
The move to paper ballots is a good first step toward transparent elections. Vote counting that takes place inside a machine is not visible and therefore can never be an acceptable method of vote tabulation.
Many seasoned election protection advocates and computer security experts consider hand counting paper ballots at the precinct to be the best way to guarantee a transparent and secure election. Optical
scans, because of their vulnerability to fraudulent manipulation, should only be used as a check on the accuracy of the hand count. Admittedly hand counting could take a day or so. I for one do not mind waiting a little longer to get results that I am confident accurately reflect the intent of the voter.
I strongly recommend that all states conduct a feasibility study for hand counting the 2008 presidential election. Those of us who have participated in parallel elections and have counted paper ballots by hand consider it to be a very effective means for concerned citizens to participate in our democracy. It takes a small, critical mass of dedicated, resourceful election protection volunteers from all political parties to protect and restore the process that protects us.
1 | 2
