EAC - Voluntary Voting System Guidelines

Name : | Rebecca Mercuri
Organization : | Notable Software, Inc.
Post Date : | 9/30/2005
Section Comments
Section : | ...
Page no. : |
Line no.: |
Comment : | The draft version of the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) under consideration for adoption by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) fails to achieve the necessary goals of insuring reliability, auditability, and transparency for election equipment. These were the salient aspects of the Florida 2000 Presidential election, and the subsequent Florida 2002 Gubernatorial primary, that led to the formation of the EAC and the construction of the VVSG under the auspices of the Federal Help America Vote Act (HAVA). Voters wanted then, and still want to know now, whether their ballots are being cast as intended, counted as cast, and available for an indisputable and independent recount. This VVSG does not provide the citizenry, the election officials, nor the courts, with the capability of determining that such assurances are now in place. Rather, the authors of this new set of guidelines, by their own admission, chose to instead “address the critical topics of accessibility, usability, and security” but have failed to accomplish these goals as well. In light of the fact that there is no time for the EAC and its sub-committees to provide the massive overhaul that this document would require, my recommendation is that it be issued only as a draft, along with a detailed list of the areas that must be further addressed, and an admonishment to its potential adopters that the proposed “National Certification” process does not provide sufficient assurances of accuracy, integrity, reliability, usability, accessibility, security and transparency for the equipment and systems used to conduct democratic elections. The attached discussion itemizes some of the most egregious issues with the VVSG and sheds light on the problematic construction of the document itself.
Attach file : | VVSGComment.doc