• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Democracy Chronicles

Towards better democracy everywhere.

  • AMERICAN DEMOCRACY
  • WORLD DEMOCRACY
  • POLITICAL ART
  • more
    • election technology
    • money politics
    • political dissidents
    • THIRD PARTY
      • third party central
      • green party
      • justice party
      • libertarian party
    • voting methods
  • DC INFO
    • author central
    • about
    • advertise with DC
    • contact
    • privacy policy
Home | American Democracy Originals | Georgia to Use Vote-Counting Machines that Lack Audit Trail

Georgia to Use Vote-Counting Machines that Lack Audit Trail

June 12, 2017 by Adrian Tawfik Leave a Comment

FacebookLinkedInPinTweet

Vote-Counting Machines

The questionable vote counting machines will be used after a bizarre decision that puts vote safety at risk. Richard Winger of Ballot Access News revealed in a quick post that the “Georgia state trial court refused to enjoin the use of Georgia’s vote-counting machines in the June 20 special U.S. House election”. The trial, known as Curling v Kemp, Fulton County 2017cv-290630, had just finished two days prior. The vote-counting machines were being challenged in a court case that could have implications nationwide. An article by Kristina Torres in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution had the original scoop:

Voters in Georgia’s 6th Congressional District will continue to cast ballots on electronic machines after a Fulton County judge dismissed a lawsuit trying to force the use of paper ballots.

Superior Court Judge Kimberly Esmond Adams’ ruling late Friday night came after an eight-hour hearing earlier this week over the suit’s insistence that Georgia’s reliance on voting machines was endangering the vote. The machines, it said, are too old, unreliable and vulnerable to malicious cyber attacks without a forensic review to verify they had not been compromised.

Another recent article on Ballot Access News had more:

On June 7, a Georgia state trial court heard oral arguments and witnesses in a case that challenges the state’s vote-counting machines. Here is a description of the testimony of witnesses on both sides, written by Garland Favorito, who was at the hearing. The machines have no audit trail.

From Garland Favorito who was at the hearing and his description of the testimony:

Many of the “Who’s Who” in Georgia elections and their attorneys gathered in the Fulton County Superior courtroom of Judge Kimberly Esmond Adams to determine the fate of Georgia’s unverifiable voting equipment. Elections Directors (ED) from the state and the counties of Fulton, Cobb and Dekalb were present for most or all of the hearing. Meryl King, Executive Director of the Kennesaw State University Center for Election Systems was the state’s expert.

Attorneys for the three counties, the Secretary of State and the Attorney General’s office all simultaneously defended the state and counties. Their primary legal arguments appear to be sovereign immunity and untimeliness of a GA6 election change. A decision is expected Friday. Plaintiffs called two high powered expert witnesses Dr. Ed Felten and Dr. Rich Demillo. Felton was Professor of Computer Science at Princeton University, Chief Technologist for the Federal Trade Commission and Deputy U.S. Chief Technology Officer for the President of the United States. Dr. Richard Demillo was the first Chief Technology Officer of Hewlett Packard, Dean of Computing at Georgia Tech and current Director of its Center for 21st Century Universities.

Also, for more on voting machines in general see this Miles O’Brien interview from the PBS Newshour:

“Secure Internet voting is a bit like the phrase ‘safe cigarettes,’” Ronald Rivest, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is shown saying at a panel talk on the subject. But of course, from clunky polling machines to the famous butterfly ballot of the 2000 presidential election, internet voting isn’t the only ballot technology that’s been fraught with problems. Accurate, secure voting has been a challenge throughout history.

For historical perspective, Miles spoke with political historian and curator William L. Bird from the Smithsonian Museum of American History, who provided a glimpse of various American voting systems through time and the problems they’ve encountered.

FacebookLinkedInPinTweet

Filed Under: American Democracy Originals Tagged With: American State Elections, Voting Machines, Voting Technology

Some highlighted Democracy Chronicles topics

Africa American Corruption American Local Elections American State Elections Asia Capitalism and Big Business Celebrity Politics China Democracy Charity Democracy Protests Democrats Dictatorships Education Election History Election Methods Election Security Election Transparency Europe Internet and Democracy Journalism and Free Speech Middle East Minority Voting Rights Money Politics New York City and State Elections Political Artwork Political Dissidents Political Lobbying Redistricting Republicans Russia Socialism and Labor Social Media and Democracy South America Spying and Privacy Supreme Court Third Party Voter Access Voter ID Voter Registration Voter Suppression Voter Turnout Voting Technology Women Voting Rights Worldwide Worldwide Corruption

About Adrian Tawfik

Democracy Chronicles has been run by Founder and Editor-in-Chief Adrian Tawfik since 2011. He received a B.A. from New School University and is based in New York City where he built DC from the ground up. See Adrian's Opinion Column for a sampling of Adrian's personal views and browse his hundreds of original political memes. Also take a look at the rest of our international team of authors.

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

democracy chronicles newsletter

democracy around the web

  • Federal court issues TRO against DOJ for election-related activities
    Source: Election Law Blog Published on: 9 hours ago
  • State of Alaska Explains Why DOJ’s New Demand to Segregate Ballots is Nonsensical and Unworkable
    Source: Election Law Blog Published on: 12 hours ago
  • The Confusion Over the Candidate with the Same Last Name…in Nevada…with a Sneaky Republican-Backed Voter-Confusing (?) Ad Featuring AOC That I’m Sure DOJ Will Investigate (Ha!)
    Source: Election Law Blog Published on: 12 hours ago
  • In DOJ’s Alaska Lawsuit, a Bait and Switch: Before It Wanted to Delay Certification; Now It Wants to Segregate Ballots, a Remedy That Will Offer No Relevant Evidence About Any Voter Confusion
    Source: Election Law Blog Published on: 12 hours ago
  • Michael Rosin: “18 U.S.C. § 611 Does NOT Authorize the United States to Order the Sequestration of Mail In Ballots from Alleged Non-Citizens”
    Source: Election Law Blog Published on: 14 hours ago