E-Voting – Elections may be impacted!

28 October 2008 Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog Blog
Authors: Peter Vogel

It seems like just yesterday that the 2000 election concluded with the US Supreme Court deciding the election because of hanging chads! So given the number of early complaints it seems that the 2008 election may also be decided in the courts....maybe not because of hanging chads, but some electronic voting glitch.

Were things better before E-voting?

Some voters wish for the old lever machines or paper ballots, but unfortunately most people don’t understand that the lever machines led to unreliable vote totals. Lever machines were simple in that each voter pulled a lever for their candidate and a wheel in the back of the machine added one more number to the candidate’s totals. However, if someone wanted to change an outcome, the wheels could be increased to help one candidate, and as long as the person changing the votes also reduced another candidate’s count no one would know. Or even paper ballots are not perfect since an enterprising person could replace ballots to change the outcome. As a matter of fact there are some elections that require voters to use pencils to complete paper ballots...how unreliable is a pencil vote?

E-Voting Systems are Pretty Reliable

In 1986, before there were any computer election system laws in Texas, I represented 6 candidates for City Council in Dallas who were concerned about the use of Dallas County’s computer election system since the only other county in the country using that particular system was Cook County, Illinois. So Dallas County agreed to a re-count mechanism to validate the count rather than deal with an injunction. The next year 1987, I worked with the Texas Legislature to create a computer election law which included a certification process by the Texas Secretary of State. For the next 13 years I was an Examiner for the Texas Secretary of State of computer election systems. During that I time Texas developed a very strict set of rules for certification and as a result it seems to me that the validation process of computer election systems in Texas means that the results of the 2008 election should be reliable. Primarily because in Texas there is a testing process before and after each election to validate the counting process, but what cannot be quantified in any election are individuals who may figure ways to change the election vote. However, that’s endemic to the election process and cannot be totally eliminated. As a matter of fact, every election requires human integrity to protect the actual votes, whether for President of the US or high school.
 

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Authors

Related Services

Insights