http://www.columbusdispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2007/12/14/vote.html
All counties should use paper ballots counted at a
central location, secretary of state says
Friday, December 14,
2007 3:45 PM
By Mark Niquette
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
The report
*
Evaluation & Validation of Election-Related Equipment, Standards &
Testing report (pdf)
All of the voting systems used in Ohio have “critical
security failures” that make them vulnerable to tampering and should be
replaced with paper ballots counted at a central location, Secretary of State
Jennifer Brunner concluded after a top-to-bottom review of the systems.
The findings, released this morning, apply both to the
electronic touch-screen machines used in 57 of Ohio’s 88 counties as well as
the systems using paper ballots counted in precincts.
The $1.9 million study found risks ranging from minor to
severe and concluded that while higher levels of sophistication were needed in
some cases to compromise vote results, “fairly simple techniques” sometimes
could be used.
For example, it’s possible to use a magnet and a personal
digital assistant to tamper with some machines, Brunner said.
“The results underscore the need for a fundamental change in
the structure of Ohio’s election system to ensure ballot and voting system
security while still making voting convenient and accessible to all Ohio
voters,” Brunner said.
Brunner made a series of recommendations to Gov. Ted
Strickland and the legislature for improving the security of the voting systems
but stopped short of decertifying any machines.
She did, however, recommend that touch-screen and
optical-scan systems that tabulate votes at the precinct level should be eliminated,
and that the state should move away from touch-screens to optical-scan systems.
Brunner also proposes changing the current system of having
voters go to precincts and instead create centrally located voting centers
containing multiple precincts. She also wants to extend voting to up to 15 days
before an election.
She said she’d like to have that done by next fall’s
election.
But Brunner also acknowledges that funding sources are
limited and that although security experts may consider her recommendations
less than optimum, they would improve the security of the systems as currently
configured.
Brunner said she would like to see a bipartisan panel
created including representatives of Gov. Ted Strickland, legislative leaders,
her office, and county election officials to craft legislation she would like
to have passed by mid-April.
House Speaker Jon Husted, R-Kettering, attended a press
conference Brunner held this morning as a way to show there will be a
bipartisan approach to reviewing and taking any action on the study.
But Husted said he has not had time to review the findings
yet and wants to consult with county election officials before reaching any
conclusions.
Neither Brunner nor Husted would put a price tag on the
proposed changes, but Brunner said the state could find the funding if it
considers the changes a priority. Husted also said the $1 billion rainy day
fund could be an option.
It may be too late to make major changes immediately with
the March 4 primaries looming, but Brunner said she would like to have counties
with touch-screen systems offer a paper ballot to voters who want one in the
primary.
She made it clear she thinks state voting needs to be
overhauled before the eyes of the world once again are expected to be on Ohio
for the fall presidential election.
“In an era of computer-based voting systems, voters have a
right to expect that their voting system is at least as secure as the systems
they use for banking and communication,” she said.
Brunner made a separate recommendation for Cuyahoga County,
the state’s largest, saying funding is available to replace the touch-screens
used there with optical-scan units for the March primary at a cost of up to
$2.5 million.
Her office has administrative oversight over the county’s
elections, but Brunner said she would prefer to let the board of election
members she appointed there make the decision.
Cuyahoga and 46 other counties including Fairfield and
Licking use touch-screens made by Premier Election Solutions, formerly Diebold
Election Systems.
Premier issued a statement saying many of the risks
identified in Brunner’s report had already been identified, and that the
company’s new systems now being certified address those issues.
“We should also not lose sight of the very real improvements
in voting accuracy that have been achieved with the deployment of modern touch
screen systems, or that, in every jurisdiction where touch-screen voting has
been implemented, voters have overwhelmingly expressed their satisfaction with
their voting experience,” the company said.
Brunner ordered the thorough review of all voting systems
used in Ohio this fall to address any voter concerns about the security and
reliability of the machines.
Ohio uses systems from three vendors: Premier Election
Solutions; Election Systems and Software; and Hart InterCivic.
The review focused both on the “hackability” of the units,
as well as what security procedures are in place to restrict unauthorized
access to them. A team of 12 county election officials also reviewed the
findings.
The researchers didn’t address the issue of probability of
hacking the systems, leaving that to the determination of state and local
officials, Brunner said.
But the researchers concluded that because the “lack of
technical measures in voting system design,” the security of the systems “is
provided purely by the integrity and honesty of election officials,” the report
said.
“It’s a testament to our state’s boards of elections
officials that elections on the new (federally) mandated voting systems have
gone as smoothly as they have in light of these findings,” Brunner said.
Researchers who studied how the voting systems were set up
at polling places for elections found risks such as the use of materials like
memory storage and printer paper that had not been certified by the voting
system manufacturers; a lack of standardized equipment testing; and that
revisions to voting system software for all systems and counties were not
documented or tracked, the review said.
The recommendations:
* Eliminating
points of entry creating unnecessary voting system risk by moving to central
counting of ballots at boards of elections or other locations.
* Eliminating use
of direct recording electronic and precinct-based optical scan voting machines
that tabulate votes at polling locations.
* Utilizing the
AutoMark voting machine for voters with disabilities. This machine uses a
touch-screen that produces a paper ballot that can be scanned.
* Requiring all
ballots be optical scan ballots for central tabulation and effective voter
verification.
* Maintaining “no fault” absentee voting
while establishing early (15 days prior to the election) and Election Day Vote
Centers (of the size of 5 to 10 precincts), eliminating voting at individual
precincts or polling places of less than five precincts.
* Requiring all special elections (issues
only) held in August 2008 to be voted by mail (no in-person voting, except at
the board of elections, for issue-only elections held in August 2008).
Ohio has spent more than $100 million in federal Help
America Vote Act funds since 2004 to replace all of its punch cards and other,
older voting systems in the wake of the controversy over the 2000 presidential
election in Florida.
But some activists had continued to argue that the machines
can be hacked or aren't reliable, and reports from tests in other states have
raised concerns about the vulnerabilities of certain voting systems.
California and other states also have problems with some of
the same voting systems used in Ohio but have caused controversy by moving
immediately to decertify and replace those units.
The Ohio Controlling Board waived competitive bidding in
September to spend federal grant money for Columbus-based MicroSolved Inc.,
SysTest Labs of Denver and a consortium of academic subcontractors to do the
testing. Battelle in Columbus managed the project.
©2008, The Columbus Dispatch