Printer-friendly version
By Miriam Raftery
Some hackable voting machines used in 2016 presidential election were banned in California after investigative reports by Miriam Raftery, now ECM’s editor
November 24, 2016 (San Diego) – After election security experts urged presidential candidates to seek recounts in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan due to anomalies that could indicate hacking by Russia or someone else, Green Party candidate Jill Stein launched a fundraising page for recounts in those three states. She has raised over $4 million – enough to fully fund a recount in Wisconsin—and is well on the way toward attaining the estimated $6-7 million for recounts in all three states including filing fees, attorney costs and funding recount observers.
The concerns are valid. Here’s why. First, Russian operatives already have hacked an election—in the Ukraine. The wrong winner was prevented from taking office only because Ukrainian officials discovered the vote-stealing software, says J. Alex Halderman, professor of computer science at the University of Michigan whose election technology class regularly tests –and succeeds in hacking into—voting machines used in the U.S.
If a foreign government or other hacker wanted to rig our election, they would most likely identify states expected to have close margins, then insert malware into voting machines that shifts votes to the hacker’s preferred candidate. The program would erase itself after the election. But on machines with paper trails, an audit or full recount of the papers can expose changed votes.
About 70% of U.S. voters cast votes on machines with paper trails, according to Halderman. Each state sets recount rules; some such as Florida don’t allow candidates to request Homeland Security has indicated dthat the 2016 U.S. presidential election has already had hacks or attempted hacks of voter registration systems in at least 20 states. There were also hacks into the Democratic National Committee and the e-mail account of John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman. Federal agencies have stated they believe the Russian government was behind those cyber-attacks.
U.S. elections have been hacked in the past. I won a national journalism prize for exposing vulnerabilities of electronic voting machines in an article titled “Monkey Business” in San Diego CityBeat. That coverage led to my interview with a whistleblower inside the Diebold voting machine company who shared details on how hacking was done in aGeorgia gubernatorial race. I shared details with California’s Secretary of State,who promptly decertified those Diebold paperless voting machines. My coverage also led to a shareholder lawsuit against Diebold and resignation of its CEO, who had promised to “deliver” the presidential election to George W. Bush.
In 2004, the Green Party’s Cobb/LaMarche presidential campaign demanded a recount in Ohio. Because of their efforts, an election administrator went to jail. The actions also exposed the profound problems with DRE machines, which helped launch an election integrity movement. That also helped provoke California’s review of our voting system, which culminated in the abolition of DRE machines.
The Green Party Platform calls for "publicly-owned, open source voting equipment” that would be deployed across the nation to “ensure high national standards, performance, transparency and accountability; use verifiable paper ballots; and institute mandatory automatic random precinct recounts to ensure a high level of accuracy in election results."
A statement issued by Stein on her recount effort reads, “After a divisive and painful presidential race, reported hacks into voter and party databases and individual email accounts were causing many to wonder if our election results are reliable. These concerns need to be investigated before the 2016 presidential election is certified.”
It would take a flip in all three states and a shift of about 50,000votes for Hillary Clinton to gain more electoral votes than Donald Trump. But there are anomalies; at least one county reportedly had thousands more presidential votes tallied than total votes cast.
Stein has until Monday to raise enough funds for a full recount—which really means a hand count--of votes in Michigan and until Wedneday in Pennsylvania.
Stein , who received less than 2% in each state, says the recounts aren’t about helping Clinton, but rather assuring the integrity of the voting system and confidence in the outcome in states with razor-thin margins.
“These recounts are part of an election integrity movement to attempt to shine a light on just how untrustworthy the U.S. election system is,” she concludes.
Additional sources:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/jill-stein-recount-effort-231829
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/23/politics/election-hack-hillary-clinton-donald-trump/index.html
http://fortune.com/2016/10/01/hackers-targeted-election-systems/
Recent comments