• DocumentCode
    3460865
  • Title

    The battle of accountable voting systems

  • Author

    Dill, D.L.

  • Author_Institution
    Dept. of Stanford Comput. Sci., CA, USA
  • fYear
    2004
  • fDate
    23-25 June 2004
  • Firstpage
    105
  • Abstract
    Summary form only given. Touch-screen voting machines store records of cast votes in internal memory where the voter cannot check them. Because of our system of secret ballots, once the voter leaves the polls there is no way anyone can determine whether the vote captured was what the voter intended. Why should voters trust these machines? In December 2003, I drafted a resolution on electronic voting stating that every voting system should have a voter verifiable audit trail, which is a permanent record of the vote that can be checked for accuracy by the voter, and which is saved for a recount if it is required. After many rewrites, I posted the page in January 2004 with endorsements from many prominent computer scientists. At that point, I became embroiled in a surprisingly fierce (and time consuming) battle that continues today. We still do not have an answer for why we should trust electronic voting machines, but a lot of evidence has emerged for why we should not. I discuss the basic principles and issues in electronic voting.
  • Keywords
    government data processing; accountable voting systems; electronic voting system; secret ballots; touch-screen voting machines; Computer science; Electronic voting; Military computing;
  • fLanguage
    English
  • Publisher
    ieee
  • Conference_Titel
    Formal Methods and Models for Co-Design, 2004. MEMOCODE '04. Proceedings. Second ACM and IEEE International Conference on
  • Conference_Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
  • Print_ISBN
    0-7803-8509-8
  • Type

    conf

  • DOI
    10.1109/MEMCOD.2004.1459826
  • Filename
    1459826