California Secretary of State Voting Systems Testing Summit November 28 & 29, 2005, Sacramento, California Remarks by Kim Alexander, President, California.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
I Think I Voted. E-voting vs. Democracy Prof. David L. Dill Department of Computer Science Stanford University
Advertisements

Post-Election Procedures 32 nd Annual Election Law Seminar County Election Officials.
Poll Workers vs Poll Observers Similarities and differences.
Post Election Audits: People – Time – Money Post Election Audit Summit Minneapolis, Minnesota October 25-27, 2007 Dean Logan, Chief Deputy Registrar-Recorder/County.
1 Mississippi Secretary of State’s Office Online Voter Registration Overview October 30, 2014.
2014 Colorado Election Survey Robert M. Stein Andrew Menger Rice University and Greg Vonnahme University of Missouri-Kansas City Prepared for presentation.
Voting Systems.  DS200 – new 2013  DS850 – new 2013  AutoMARK Voting Equipment.
A technical analysis of the VVSG 2007 Stefan Popoveniuc George Washington University The PunchScan Project.
Electronic Voting: Danger and Opportunity J. Alex Halderman Department of Computer Science Center for Information Technology Policy Princeton University.
VVPAT BY KRISTEN DUARTE & JESSICA HAWKINS. WHAT IS VVPAT? An add-on to electronic voting machines that allows voters to get a printed version of their.
Post-Election Procedures 26 th Annual Election Law Seminar For Cities, Schools, and Other Political Subdivisions.
By Varun Jain. Introduction  Florida 2000 election fiasco, drew conclusion that paper ballots couldn’t be counted  Computerized voting system, DRE (Direct.
1 J. Alex Halderman Security Failures in Electronic Voting Machines Ariel Feldman Alex Halderman Edward Felten Center for Information Technology Policy.
Election Observer Training 2008 Elections Certification & Training Program
Observation of e-enabled elections Jonathan Stonestreet Council of Europe Workshop Oslo, March 2010.
17-803/ ELECTRONIC VOTING FALL 2004 COPYRIGHT © 2004 MICHAEL I. SHAMOS / Electronic Voting Session 2: Paper Trails Michael I. Shamos,
August 6, 2007Electronic Voting Technology 2007 On Estimating the Size and Confidence of a Statistical Audit Javed A. Aslam College of Computer and Information.
Vote By Mail A County Perspective Dolores Gilmore, Elections Manager
Resources Needed for Post-Election Audits: People, Time, and Money Robert Kibrick, Legislative Analyst Verified Voting Foundation Gail Pellerin, County.
Voting System Qualification How it happens and why.
Objectives Analyze how the administration of elections in the United States helps make democracy work. Define the role of local precincts and polling places.
C Arlene Ash Can Statistics Help Improve US Elections? Arlene Ash, PhD Boston University School of Medicine AAAS February 15, 2009.
Voting Systems.  DS200  DS850  AutoMARK Voting Equipment.
Chapter 7: The Electoral Process Section 2
Audit Purpose of Audit Quality assurance procedure Check accuracy of machine tally of ballots Ballots for a contest are sampled, manually verified, and.
Civics Core 100, Goal 4 Goal 4: The learner will explore active roles as a citizen at the local, state, and national levels of government.
Secretary of State Voting System Security Standards Juanita Woods Secretary of State Elections Division HAVA Information Security.
Voter Experience with Alternative Voting Systems in the 2008 Colorado Presidential Election Robert M. Stein Rice University Testimony Prepared for the.
Audit Trail
Georgia Electronic Voting System Testing and Security Voting Systems Testing Summit November 29, 2005.
Electronic Voting: The 2004 Election and Beyond Prof. David L. Dill Department of Computer Science Stanford University
DOST and RA 9369 or the Automated Election Law. Background on RA9369  Authorizes the Comelec to implement an end to end nationwide automated election.
Bylaws Change Proposal Bylaws Proposal To give non-certified licensed athletic trainer associate members the right to vote in association matters.
THE ELECTORAL CYCLE Charles Lasham Centre for Parliamentary Studies Seminar 9 th – 13 th July 2012.
VVSG: Usability, Accessibility, Privacy 1 VVSG, Part 1, Chapter 3 Usability, Accessibility, and Privacy December 6, 2007 Dr. Sharon Laskowski
Panel One Why Audit? Mary Batcher Ernst & Young and Chair of ASA Working Group on Elections.
How and what to observe in e-enabled elections Presentation by Mats Lindberg, Election Adviser, Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)
TWO DAYS OF ELECTIONS July 9, 2009 Asheville, N.C.
Intelligence Reform: The Process Begins National Association for Public Health Statistics and Information Systems June 7, 2005.
Canvassing, Reporting and Preserving Results 27 th Annual Election Law Seminar Ashley Fischer.
WHY THE vvpat has failed
Electronic Voting: Danger and Opportunity
VVPAT Building Confidence in U.S. Elections. WHAT IS VVPAT ? Voter-verifiable paper audit trail Requires the voting system to print a paper ballot containing.
Election Reform The Open Voting Consortium. Elections are important Voting is how we ultimately control.our government Many elections are decided by just.
VOTING TECHNOLOGY AND STATE POLICY 2016 By Katy Owens Hubler Democracy Research, LLC Consultant for the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL)
PREPARATIONS FOR VOTING: IN QUEST OF INTEGRITY AND PUBLIC CONFIDENCE by Roy G. Saltman Consultant on Election Policy and Technology
Goal 4- Political Parties. Qualifying to Vote Voting is an important right of American citizenship, without it citizens cannot choose who will run their.
Elections - The ultimate time constrained project Marie Gregoire, PMP 1.
Post-Election Duties. Material Return to Hennepin County August 10 th – 11 th November 9 th – 10th.
By: Sudeep Jain Director General, Election Commission of India 10 March 2016.
10.1 Who Can Vote? Civics and Economics.
Ronald L. Rivest MIT NASEM Future of Voting Meeting June 12, 2017
EVoting 23 October 2006.
Candidate Certification & Ballot Drawing 2016 Primary
Canvassing, Reporting and Preserving Results
Election Audit?? What in the world?.
Conducting Council Elections
Percentage of Partially Electronic* Death Records Filed
The States How many states are in the United States?
Supplementary Data Tables, Trends in Overall Health Care Market
Election Security Best Practices
Texas Secretary of State Elections Division
Canvassing, Reporting and Preserving Results
Preparing Your Ballots
Election Security Best Practices
Chapter 7: The Electoral Process Section 2
Chapter 7: The Electoral Process Section 2
Chapter 7: The Electoral Process Section 2
Presidential Electoral College Map
Chapter 7: The Electoral Process Section 2
Presentation transcript:

California Secretary of State Voting Systems Testing Summit November 28 & 29, 2005, Sacramento, California Remarks by Kim Alexander, President, California Voter Foundation Session 6: Security/Paper Trails/Accountability For What Purpose Should AVVPATs Be Used?

The Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail serves two purposes: 1) To give a voter confidence that his or her own ballot was accurately recorded by an electronic voting machine; 2) To give election officials a meaningful audit trail they can use to verify the accuracy of software vote counts.

Why we need to publicly audit the results: Increased computerization of the voting and vote- counting process has reduced transparency in elections. A manual count of a subset of ballots or VVPATs provides the public with a reasonable degree of confidence that the final software vote count is accurate. If the paper audit trail that the voter verified is not used to verify the overall election results, then it will be possible for the paper record to reflect one set of votes while the electronic record reflects a different set of votes without ever being detected.

Two reforms are needed: 1) Require that a voter-verified paper audit trail accompany every electronic ballot; 2) Require that a public audit of the software vote count be conducted prior to certifying the election results. Use of the VVPAT should not be limited to recounts, or to cases where the margin is close. Public audits of software vote counts must be a routine step in the certification process, because… Public audits provide voters with an opportunity to see for themselves that software vote counts are accurate and reliable. Pre-and post election testing, and other security measures such as parallel monitoring are good, but not good enough, because these methods deny ordinary voters the ability to have the same level of confidence in the process that inspectors enjoy.

Features needed for meaningful public auditing: 1) Require a statistically significant sample size for the manual count – currently, the sample size varies in states from 1 – 10 percent. 2) Select the precincts to be counted at random and make the selection process itself open to public observation. 3) Prepare the procedures for conducting the public audit and make them available to the public prior to the election. 4) Set the date for the public audit well enough in advance to provide ample time to publicize it (at least one week). 5) Publicize the date, time and location of the public audit on the election agency’s web site and through a media advisory.

Status of VVPAT and public software vote count audits in the states: 25 states have enacted voter-verified paper audit trail requirements. 11 states enacted laws this year that require or strengthen public auditing of election results: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Washington and West Virginia. (One state, Kentucky, has a pre-existing manual count law.)