[T]he public has no way to independently verify that the machines are working properly. The public has been stripped of its ability to have independent, verifiable confidence that when a vote is made, it will be tabulated and recorded properly. Trade secret law means that we must trust the vendors when they say that their machines are free of error, bias, flaws, and security loopholes. Trade secret law effectively means that independent researchers who want to test voting machines and assure that they are operating properly cannot do so without the permission of the vendor—or risk being found to have misappropriated the trade secrets themselves.
Elon's David Levine on the misapplication of trade secret laws and the risk to the democratic process.
As someone who has been following the problems with electronic voting machines for almost a decade, I will say that a local FB meme I saw today (OMG machines changing Romney votez to Obama!) seems unlikely. UPDATE: Turns out the story had some basis in fact, but the local BOE says it was no big deal. I would tend to believe them, but that's not going to make everyone comfortable, and that's the point of this post and the many that precede it (follow links at "following," above) -- we need a verifiable system, not a Hey, Trust Us system.
Remember, it's WFMY, but they report "confirming" such a problem in Guilford County.
Posted by: Roch | Oct 24, 2012 at 01:59 PM
You should have put report in quotes, too, Roch.
Posted by: Patrick Eakes | Oct 24, 2012 at 02:15 PM
We have first hand voter testimony that supports the occurrences, and I believe we have election official testimony that support the occurences.
Why don't you just try calling them liars?
Posted by: bubba | Oct 24, 2012 at 06:53 PM
The voter didn't cast a ballot for people s/he wasn't intending to vote for. The voting machine reminds the voter whom they are casting his/her vote for. The voter REVIEWS the selections and then CONFIRMS before the ballot is cast.
Posted by: HRH | Oct 24, 2012 at 07:30 PM
The facts support a mea culpa...
Posted by: Spag | Oct 24, 2012 at 08:46 PM
Updated the post.
Bob, to be clear, I wasn't disagreeing with the quoted sources, I posted about what I was seeing on FB before I read the articles.
As I said in the update, I doubt this is vote-rigging, but yesterday's issue goes straight to the problem defined in the post and many previous posts -- we need a more transparent system.
Posted by: Ed Cone | Oct 25, 2012 at 10:48 AM
I voted for Romney and Ryan and it recorded Truman. Damn cheating Democrats,
Posted by: Tim | Oct 25, 2012 at 04:02 PM
It was a touch screen calibration issue. Nothing more. I've got a Windows based Pharos that I've had a while and still use for certain things. If the screen is not calibrated correctly, typing on it can produce some wierdness because touching a "g" might input its neighbor "t " above it. But it is apparent what such mis-touches result in and I just adjust my typing by 1/4" vertical until I can recalibrate.
Innocent, but maddening and is because of old technology. The iPad I am typing on right now never has calibration issues.
Posted by: David Hoggard | Oct 25, 2012 at 04:42 PM
...so why not recalibrate a week before folks are using...just sayin.
Posted by: Marshall E | Oct 27, 2012 at 07:51 PM
It's no big deal, Marshall.
After all, it's not like these voters were asked to produce a photo ID to vote, or something racist like that, is it?
Posted by: bubba | Oct 27, 2012 at 08:12 PM
Hmmm. Not just here apparently. It's funny how in both cases the vote defaults to Obama.
Posted by: Spag | Oct 31, 2012 at 11:32 AM
Plenty of concern among the Democrats, too.
Transparency is, or should be, a bipartisan/non-partisan issue.
Posted by: Ed Cone | Oct 31, 2012 at 12:38 PM