Lenz Blog

Trustworthy Voting

Please read Freedom To Tinker: Computer Scientists' Campaign for Trustworthy E-Voting.

I have a few comments.

1. I am not a computer scientist, but as everyone who has taken even a small bite at crypto knows, there can be no trustworthy system that is built on obscurity. The recent trend to move into open source software in Japanese and German government is in part motivated by the desire to eliminate black boxes and promote freedom of information. I think that voting procedure is an area of government where independent checks and open audits are indispensable.

2. Glenn Reynolds has this right: Voting machines should be tossed out altogether. Use paper ballots.

3. As a compromise, you could leave the unreliable voting machines as a sort of exit poll without legal force, especially if you have already invested tax dollars in buying them. Do all voting without any machines, but have people push a button on a machine when they leave. That way, you get the best of both worlds: Instant preliminary results and reliable voting procedure.

4. Your campaign seems to be timely considering these allegations. See also this post.

Update 15.2.2003:

There is a slashdot discussion of this campaign.

Freedom to tinker answers to my post above.

I agree largely with that answer. The ideal machine Felten describes would be better than a simple paper ballot, and it would be similar to the compromise I described as my comment number 3. But a paper ballot would be much better than a black box machine.

Kim Weatherall also thinks that plain paper ballots are a good idea.

And there is some important support from Jack Balkin for the campaign against blackbox voting machines. I agree with Balkin's analysis of the equality issues: Voting procedures need to be equal as well as open.

Posted by Karl-Friedrich Lenz at February 14, 2003 08:38 PM | TrackBack