vn19

Ciber, the company testing SERVE says they'll be testing the "voting part" but not the "Internet part" of this Internet voting system and referred me to the Federal Election Commission's Office of Election Administration. The FEC tells me they're out of the voting system standards rule-making business and to talk to the Election Assistance Commission. The EAC tells me it won't exist until the U.S. Senate confirms its commissioners. The Democrats in the Senate say the Republicans are holding up the confirmations. The Republicans say the Democrats are holding up the confirmations. I finally hear from the FEC to the effect that yes, indeed, there are no official standards for testing Internet voting systems, so the participating SERVE states need to waive these testing standards by passing enabling legislation to that effect.

Then, when I check these enabling laws, I find that, far from explicitly waiving the requirement that the SERVE system comply with the Federal Voting Systems Standards (which, of course, make no provision for Internet voting), I find that, mostly, these bills turn over responsibility for checking the security and other necessary aspects of this Defense Department project to…the Defense Department. What's next? Do-it-yourself tax audits?

Washington State's SERVE Coordinator, Pam Floyd, responded to questions I sent her regarding the certification of the SERVE system in her state by referring me to provisions of that state's enabling legislation that say:

Election officials must rely upon the procedures established by the United States Department of Defense for the security, secrecy, and validation of votes cast electronically, but the secretary of state is responsible for verifying the accuracy, secrecy, independence, and security of cast ballots.

Washington State is hereby handing over the responsibility for establishing security of the SERVE system to the same people who are building and will be operating the SERVE system.

This is like giving responsibility for certifying their touchscreen voting systems to Diebold, the company that makes it. It's like giving a fox the responsibility for establishing security in a hen house.

Washington State is not alone in doing this. On December 8, 2003, Marcie Andino, executive director of the South Carolina State Election Commission, told me that her state was "relying on FVAP (Federal Voting Assistance Project [a Defense Department agency])'s testing," along with that of "the other parties they are bringing in, outside people."

She spoke vehemently about need for a remote Internet voting system to remedy the situation of the "thousands" of South Carolinians in the military who have been "disenfranchised" due to the extended "transit time" required to deliver and collect their paper absentee ballots. She said she was "comfortable with our partners and confident that it (SERVE) will be adequately tested." She referred to banking on line and stock trading on line as evidence that Internet voting could be safe and secure. "In time," she said, "it will be made available" to others, not just those in the military."

Like her counterpart in Washington State, Ms. Andino feels that the makers of SERVE are legitimately the people to provide assurance that it works.

A final note:

Right after Vladimir Putin's "United Russia" party scored a decisive-but-contested electoral victory last week, a Russian commentator recalled a pertinent remark by the former Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, "It's not important in Russia how people are voting; it's important who is counting the votes."