Diebold May Exit Voting Business (Don't Let the Door Hit You on the Way Out)

[Lemur]

File this under good ideas. (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070305-diebold-may-leave-e-voting-business.html) Diebold is seriously weighing leaving the e-voting business. Considering their behavior, I heartily approve.


Considering that Diebold's ATM division accounts for 63 percent of the company's profit, Diebold needs to evaluate whether the negative publicity surrounding its e-voting machines is hurting the bulk of its business. If banks begin to doubt Diebold's commitment to reliability and security as a result of the voting machine controversies, then the business could take a revenue hit over the years from lost business. Luria believes that Diebold will decide to divest, saying that the probability of Diebold's holding on to it is "very low."

Diebold's poor e-voting reputation can't just be attributed to the poor performance of its hardware, however. Some of its executives have been accused of outright lying to government officials, leading to the company being investigated for criminal activity and the decertification of some machines in the state of California. Diebold was eventually sued by California's Attorney General for fraud. Instead of acknowledging the problems, Diebold appeared to stonewall at every opportunity, which contributed to the widespread distrust of the company.

[Fisherking]

That is just fine! Any machine that doesn't leave a paper trail is inviting fraud from the beginning.

If one didn't know better, one might think that some people were encouraging systems that were easily tampered with.

[Crazed Rabbit]

A return to voting solely at the polling station with paper ballots would do us all good.

CR

[KukriKhan]

As fond as I am of tech solutions, I admit preference for the old-style numbered "bedsheet" ballot I used in Michigan in the 70's.

X in the blocks, all names and text right there on the ballot. Sure, they were slower to count, but who does a quick result benefit? The media? Surely. The voters? Not so much, IMO.

[Fisherking]

As fond as I am of tech solutions, I admit preference for the old-style numbered "bedsheet" ballot I used in Michigan in the 70's.

X in the blocks, all names and text right there on the ballot. Sure, they were slower to count, but who does a quick result benefit? The media? Surely. The voters? Not so much, IMO.
In Washington State it lets Seattle know how many Democratic votes need to be made up to make up for those nasty Republicans in most other areas.

Bring out your Dead!:yes:

[Xiahou]

X in the blocks, all names and text right there on the ballot. Sure, they were slower to count, but who does a quick result benefit? The media? Surely. The voters? Not so much, IMO.
Slower and probably more inaccurate as well. Like I said before, with our old mechanical voting machines that had been around since the 1930's, I had zero confidence that my vote was being tallied correctly. At least with touch screen voting (mine arent diebold), I can clearly see who I've selected at a glance before confirming it. I also like the ease with which I can do write-ins. Would you feel more secure in your finances if we went back to the days when everything was kept/calculated on paper or is it more secure and more convenient now when it's electronic?

I'm all for making our voting machines, whatever they are, as secure as is sanely possible- but I have yet to see a credible accusation of fraud related to electronic machines, whereas there are plenty of credible accusations of voter fraud in regard to the dead voting, ineligible criminals voting, ect. Yes, make electronic voting as secure as we can- but maybe we should spend a little more time looking at cases of demonstrable fraud instead of "Man of the Year" type conspiracy theories. Why worry so much about what happens to my vote after I cast it, whenever any guy off the street could stroll in and cast my vote for me if I didn't show up?

As to the original article... I dont really care what Diebold does. :shrug: