Skip to content
Subscribe

We Can't Trust Companies To Do The Right Thing, But We Will Trust Their Voting Machines

Published:

The VW case of tampering with the computing in their automobiles for emission tests once again highlights just how easy it is for a computer to "do" whatever it's programmed to do -- even if for nefarious reasons.

With a simple switch inserted into the program, the output is factual when circumstances are one way and are tainted when it's another way.

https://twitter.com/Breakingviews/status/646299939073560577/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

This is the fundamental claim that Dr. Beth Clarkson is making in the Kansas voting recount case. While Republicans were ahead, the votes were counted correctly, while Democrats (and independent Greg Orman) were ahead, it was almost like a switch was turned on to skew the results back to Republican.

So what's the fundamental difference? Both the U.S. and German governments have pounced on VW's software issues, launching full investigations, and assessing huge fines. What has happened in any of the cases involving likely voter tampering of machines?  Nothing.

Dr. Clarkson stated in her latest news letter that she now has both legal representation and a date for discovery -- so the case is moving through the wheels of justice slowly.

But this is a sad reality. We jump on statistical anomalies that alert us to potential food contamination in our food supply, we test our water supplies daily for the same reason, and we test cars to make sure they are upholding legal emission standards. So why on earth are we not testing voting machines, something that has a complete and irreparable impact on our republican form of government?

The unwillingness of state officials, including Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach (the chief election officer), to do anything is only making this worse.

And the problems will continue to get worse as America's voting machines continue to age -- with the oldest being about 15 years on average. These machines use outdated and unsupported operating systems, but they are still deemed "safe" for elections?

There has to be a balance between the quick delivery of election results on election night and the integrity of the vote itself. Because once human eyes are taken out of the equation, the fraud becomes greater and much harder to find.

For me, I'm alright with going to bed on election night not knowing the winner if it means that the system is more secure and our republic isn't being ruled by "cyber-criminals" the next day.

Photo Credit: Rob Crandall / Shutterstock.com

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

We Can't Trust Companies To Do The Right Thing, But We Will Trust Their Voting Machines

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us