[IP] He Pushed the Hot Button of Touch-Screen Voting
___
Dave Farber +1 412 726 9889
..... Forwarded Message .......
From: Barry Ritholtz <ritholtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Dave Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 12:01:06 -0400
Subj: He Pushed the Hot Button of Touch-Screen Voting
Hey Dave,
For IP: Interesting take on how the California Sec'y of State has
impacted the entire e-voting debate . . .
Barry L. Ritholtz
Market Strategist
Maxim Group
britholtz@xxxxxxxxxxxx
(212) 895-3614
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Big Picture: A blog of capital markets, geopolitics, with a dash
of film!
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/
WASHINGTON | June 15, 2004
June 15, 2004
He Pushed the Hot Button of Touch-Screen Voting
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/15/politics/15vote.html
By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
Kevin Shelley is a big and voluble Irish politician, the son of a
former San Francisco mayor, and not the sort you would figure for the
heretofore semi-obscure job of California secretary of state. But Mr.
Shelley, who was elected to the post in November 2002 after a career as
a state legislator, has adapted the job to suit his style, taking the
arcane matter of voting machines and turning it into a hobbyhorse that
some predict he could ride to the governor's office.
Mr. Shelley, a Democrat, has gained national notice for his skepticism
toward touch-screen voting and his insistence that voters be able to
look at a paper record inside the voting booth to verify their ballots.
He says such paper trails are crucial if government wants voters to
have confidence that their ballots are being counted correctly.
As a result, he has ordered that after July 1, 2005, no county in
California can buy a touch-screen system without a paper record that is
verifiable by the voter, and as of July 2006, all touch-screen systems
here must be equipped with paper trails, regardless of when they were
bought. Until the machines have that capability, he wants people who do
not trust them to have the option of voting by a traditional paper
ballot.
Then, on April 30, he banned the use of certain touch screens in 4
counties and decertified them in 10 other counties until additional
security measures could be put in place.
"Someone said to me, 'The problem with Kevin Shelley is, he's an
activist,' " Mr. Shelley recalled in an interview earlier this month
in his office here overlooking the black-and-gold dome of City Hall in
San Francisco. "I plead guilty. But, oh my God, never has it been more
important to be an activist."
His directive has national implications because 40 percent of all
touch-screen voting machines in use are in California. If vendors start
making equipment to the specifications of the huge California market,
that market is likely to dictate what is available to the rest of the
country.
But Mr. Shelley's advocacy of paper trails has set off a fierce and
emotional reaction among local election officials in California and
elsewhere and has brought the purchase of such systems to a near
standstill. Nearly one third of voters nationwide this November will
vote on touch screens.
Local officials say that despite demonstrations from computer experts
that hackers can break into the machines, there is no evidence that
anyone has done so. Moreover, voters may expect an actual, individual
receipt after they vote; what happens instead is that a paper record,
visible to the voter, is created in the machine. Officials have also
expressed concern about paper jams.
Mr. Shelley's insistence on paper trails has prompted officials in four
California counties to sue him. The clash is being repeated in other
states and courtrooms and has even roiled the venerable League of Women
Voters, where advocates of paper trails tried to overthrow the league's
establishment, which has been against them. They settled yesterday on a
compromise resolution to support "secure, accurate, recountable and
accessible" systems, all code words for paper trails.
Conny B. McCormack, the respected registrar of Los Angeles County, the
biggest voting jurisdiction in the country, has emerged as one of Mr.
Shelley's chief critics. Ms. McCormack said that Mr. Shelley had
confounded local officials by handing down directives that require a
technology that does not yet exist. Rather than inspire voter
confidence, she said, Mr. Shelley has undermined it.
(Manufacturers have said that if the technology were required, they
could supply it, but not in time for the November elections.)
"He put out a report on April 20 saying that touch screens were 100
percent accurate," Ms. McCormack said. "And then two days later he
decertified them." She said such actions had "destabilized the entire
election process in California and potentially nationwide."
In random testing during the March 2 California primary, Mr. Shelley's
office found that the machines "recorded the votes as cast with 100
percent accuracy."
In an effort to prod the industry, Mr. Shelley yesterday issued
standards for the manufacturers in developing paper trails, the first
in the country. They include requirements that voters who are disabled
be able to vote and verify their vote without assistance, that voters
be able to verify their votes before casting them and that the paper
records be printed in both English and the voter's preferred language.
"I'm insisting, quite unapologetically, on the need to have these
appropriate security measures in place to protect the voters, which is
my principal charge," Mr. Shelley said.
Mr. Shelley, 48, grew up in politics, the son of Jack Shelley, a former
mayor of San Francisco. His father also served in Congress and the
California Legislature, where, he was one of two lawmakers to vote
against the internment of Japanese-Americans in World War II.
"My dad's vote seems like a no-brainer now," Mr. Shelley said. "But at
the time, it spoke to who he was and what he believed in, and he passed
that on to me." (Jack Shelley died of lung cancer in 1974, when his son
was 18.)
Mr. Shelley began his career as a legislative director in Washington
for Representative Phil Burton, a liberal icon in California. He was
elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and then the State
Assembly, where he served for the allowable limit of three two-year
terms and became majority leader.
He said he ran for secretary of state because he wanted to counteract
the decline in voting, though he has used the office to highlight other
issues, like domestic partner rights and corporate responsibility. Mr.
Shelley did not deny an interest in the governor's office someday but
said his goal for now was "to make policy and set precedent; it has
nothing to do with my future."
Eric Jaye, a political consultant here and longtime associate of Mr.
Shelley, said he had transformed what was essentially an
administrative post "into a bully pulpit."
Several recent analyses have bolstered Mr. Shelley's view that touch
screens need more security. These include a recommendation by the
chairman of the federal Election Assistance Commission that every
voting jurisdiction that uses touch screens enhance their security,
with either paper trails or other methods, by November.
A joint report issued yesterday by the Kennedy School of Government at
Harvard and the National Science Foundation endorsed touch screens with
paper trails as the most effective voting system.
Still, many officials who run elections believe the push for paper
trails is more window-dressing than a necessary expense.
San Bernardino County, which is among those suing Mr. Shelley, plans to
ignore his directive to provide separate paper ballots for those
uncomfortable with touch screens. "It would be an expression of a lack
of confidence in the machines," for which the county just spent $14
million, said David Wert, a spokesman for the county supervisors.
In May, the supervisors noted that Mr. Shelley had certified the
county's system before the March 2 primary and that "absolutely nothing
has occurred since that certification to call the system's performance
or reliability into question."
To those who say he is only fanning fears, Mr. Shelley laughs.
"If a machine breaks down in San Diego, and it breaks down in Georgia,
and they break down in Maryland, and they break down in Alameda and we
have high schools where they can hack into the systems, the
deficiencies are in the machines," he said.
"Look," he added, "I believe these machines have a very, very firm
place in our future, but I also believe that in responding to the chaos
in Florida in 2000 these machines were rushed out before all the kinks
were worked out."
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/