Since we're getting closer to election time, and the Election Assistance Commission has just disbursed the final round of HAVA money to Texas and other states, let's take a look at where we are on issue.
First and foremost, let us state that, theoretically, money to protect elections should be no object to the alleged "cradle of democracy." In reality, of course, that's different, but it's not just today's GOP that is penurious.
The reality, at the Texas level, is that many voting machines still don't provide paper tickets of a voter's intent. Paperless voting machines are bad.
This is not just because hackers or Russkies can hack them, or that Diebold or other makers can. (More on all that in a minute.) It's that as many voting machines get to be 10 years old, or 15, or 20, they deteriorate. It's called entropy. And, they get more susceptible to random glitches.
Now, the "more on all that."
Can Russkies hack voting machines? Not likely. Per Texas Secretary of State Rolando Pablos and many other election officials across the country, voting machines are not connected to the Internet. Are vote totals hackable on websites? Yes, but they are pretty well protected, plus, there's paper backups.
As a newspaper editor, to get daily, or total, early voting numbers, as well as election night returns, I've looked at plenty a paper printout of ballot box totals. Is fraud possible? Yeah, but more likely from the county clerk's office, or the election officials' office in larger counties, than from Russia. Or from Diebold.
On to that.
Yes, a week or two ago, news was made of a pre-teen hacker breaking into mock voting websites. First, these were mock sites. Second, this person and others were given advance instructions on what to do. Third, any of them that hacked into individual voting machines? Again, those aren't connected to the Net. And a consortium of state election officials say the setup wasn't realistic.
ProPublica goes further in refudiating DEFCOM's claims. The kids were coached and had cheat sheets.
Per the Reality Winner story, the Intercept's initial report, some devices related to voter information allegedly have Bluetooth capability. But, again, that's voter information, not voting machines. Per that, in a Twitter thread, Aaron Maté notes The Intercept overhyped the whole story. I agree.
As far as paper ballots being the verschnizzle? Nope, not as long as politics in the U.S. is war by other means, in places that still have one-party government.
I suggest people google "Landslide Lyndon" and "George Parr, Duke of Duval County." Or "Mayor Daley's Chicago."
It's easier to vote either peons or tombstones illegally on paper ballots than on a website. Or on a paper list of overall votes.
No comments:
Post a Comment