Voting System Qualification How it happens and why.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
2002 Voting Systems Accessibility Standards David Baquis, U.S. Access Board Elections Accessibility Conference Friday, February 20, 2004 Trenton, New.
Advertisements

Making every vote count. United States Election Assistance Commission The Technology of Voting Voters in Long-Term Care Facilities October 10, 2008.
Voting System in the November 4, 2008 General Election Produced by the Iowa State Association of County Auditors.
2012 CIRCUIT COURT CLERK’S ASSOCIATION FALL MEETING BALLOT SPECIFICATIONS BALLOT ERRORS Dale R. Simmons, Co-General Counsel Indiana Election Division.
TGDC Meeting, July 2011 Review of VVSG 1.1 Nelson Hastings, Ph.D. Technical Project Leader for Voting Standards, ITL
© Copyright 2009 TEM Consulting, LP - All Rights Reserved Presentation To Travis County, TX - May 27, 2009Rev 1 – 05/22/09 - HSB US Voting System Conformity.
Electronic Poll Book Statutory Overview and VSTOP December 18, 2013 Brad King Co-Director, Indiana Election Division 2014 Election Administrators Conference.
TGDC Meeting, July 2011 Overview of July TGDC Meeting Belinda L. Collins, Ph.D. Senior Advisor, Voting Standards, ITL
Absentee Ballot Central Count General Introduction Step by step procedure Forms Tool Kit Dale Simmons, Co-General Counsel: (317) or (800)
Election Assistance Commission United States VVSG Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC) NIST July 20, 2015 Gaithersburg,
States control most of election law and procedure Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted (R) Nationwide: 500,000+ office holders of over 90,000 positions!
Election Administration. Ensuring legitimacy of the government Legitimacy: acceptance of the right of public officials to hold office and to promulgate.
TGDC Meeting, Jan 2011 VVSG 2.0 and Beyond: Usability and Accessibility Issues, Gaps, and Performance Tests Sharon Laskowski, PhD National Institute of.
Presentation of ES&S John Groh, Senior Vice President of Government Relations October 15, 2007.
Demystifying the Independent Test Authority (ITA)
Chapter 7: The Electoral Process Section 2
Voting Systems. “The truth isn’t always popular, but it’s still the truth.” Groan-worthy quote from some lame character in some lame Hallmark Channel.
NIST HAVA-Related Work: Status and Plans June 16, 2005 National Institute of Standards and Technology
Making every vote count. United States Election Assistance Commission HAVA 101 TGDC Meeting December 9-10, 2009.
Digital Democracy: A look at Voting Machines Presented by Justin Dugger April 2003.
Secretary of State Voting System Security Standards Juanita Woods Secretary of State Elections Division HAVA Information Security.
Laboratory Accreditation as a Component of the Help America Vote Act Mary H. Saunders Chief, Standards Services Division.
Accreditation for Voting Equipment Testing Laboratories Gordon Gillerman Standard Services Division Chief
Annual Training for County Election Officials NC State Board of Elections August 14, 2012.
Usability and Accessibility Working Group Report Sharon Laskowski, PhD National Institute of Standards and Technology TGDC Meeting,
1 The Promise of Equality in Voting Still Not a Reality for Americans with Disabilities Granite State Independent Living “Tools for Living Life on Your.
Georgia Electronic Voting System Testing and Security Voting Systems Testing Summit November 29, 2005.
Briefing for NIST Acting Director James Turner regarding visit from EAC Commissioners March 26, 2008 For internal use only 1.
DOST and RA 9369 or the Automated Election Law. Background on RA9369  Authorizes the Comelec to implement an end to end nationwide automated election.
NIST Voting Program Activities Update February 21, 2007 Mark Skall Chief, Software Diagnostics and Conformance Testing Division.
The Electoral Process Chapter 7.
New Hampshire’s Approach to the State Plan for the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) Disabilities Access and Voting Systems Task Force.
Senate Bill 223 Public Confidence in Elections. Current Law State Board certifies and decertifies voting equipment. Decertification could be a four year.
Panel One Why Audit? Mary Batcher Ernst & Young and Chair of ASA Working Group on Elections.
Voting System Grant Program. Help America Vote Act  Provides funding to help accomplish the various requirements of the Act.
Making every vote count. United States Election Assistance Commission EAC Voting System Certification TGDC Meeting December 9-10, 2009.
Idaho Procedures M100 OPTICAL SCAN PRECINCT TABULATOR.
1 The Evolution of Voting Systems Paul DeGregorio Vice Chairman Donetta Davidson Commissioner The U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
NC Voting Systems How do S.L and HAVA impact the voting system in your county and what duties must you quickly perform?
TGDC Meeting, December 2011 Overview of December TGDC Meeting Belinda L. Collins, Ph.D. Senior Advisor, Voting Standards
NIST Voting Program Barbara Guttman 12/6/07
TGDC Meeting, July 2011 Voluntary Voting System Guidelines Roadmap Nelson Hastings, Ph.D. Technical Project Leader for Voting Standards, ITL
NIST Voting Program Activities Update January 4, 2007 Mark Skall Chief, Software Diagnostics and Conformance Testing Division.
WHAT CONSTITUTES A VOTE? Annual Training for County Election Officials
1 DECEMBER 9-10, 2009 Gaithersburg, Maryland TECHNICAL GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Commissioner Donetta Davidson.
VVPAT Building Confidence in U.S. Elections. WHAT IS VVPAT ? Voter-verifiable paper audit trail Requires the voting system to print a paper ballot containing.
© Copyright 2002 TEM Consulting, LP - All Rights Reserved Presentation To GTRI Voting Technology WorkshopRev – 05/31/02 - HSB GTRI Future of Voting Technology.
The VVSG Version 1.1 Overview Matthew Masterson Election Assistance Commission
Election Reform The Open Voting Consortium. Elections are important Voting is how we ultimately control.our government Many elections are decided by just.
Creating Accessibility, Usability and Privacy Requirements for the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) Whitney Quesenbery TGDC Member Chair, Subcommittee.
12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting The VVSG Version 1.1 Overview John P. Wack National Institute of Standards and Technology
Election Assistance Commission 1 Technical Guidelines Development Committee Meeting Post-HAVA Voting System Requirements – Federal Perspective February.
Briefing for the EAC Public Meeting Boston, Massachusetts April 26, 2005 Dr. Hratch Semerjian, Acting Director National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Election Assistance Commission 1 TGDC Meeting High Level VVSG Requirements: What do they look like? February, 09, United States.
TGDC Meeting, Jan 2011 VVSG 2.0 and Beyond: Usability and Accessibility Issues, Gaps, and Performance Tests Sharon Laskowski, PhD National Institute of.
The VVSG 2005 Revision Overview EAC Standards Board Meeting February 26-27, 2009 John P. Wack NIST Voting Program National Institute.
Part 3: Nominations.
Canvassing, Reporting and Preserving Results
Texas Secretary of State Elections Division
Demystifying the Independent Test Authority (ITA)
Texas Secretary of State Elections Division
Canvassing, Reporting and Preserving Results
Demystifying the Independent Test Authority (ITA)
Demystifying the Independent Test Authority (ITA)
Election Security Best Practices
Chapter 7: The Electoral Process Section 2
Chapter 7: The Electoral Process Section 2
Chapter 7: The Electoral Process Section 2
Obtaining a New Voting System
Chapter 7: The Electoral Process Section 2
Presentation transcript:

Voting System Qualification How it happens and why

2 Life gets rich Many computerized voting systems –Computerized voting machines –Punch cards –Optical scan systems –Radical new concept: optical scan central count

3 Growing Reservations Voting system failures create tension –Big corporations run from the field –Election results are in doubt –Election officials become wary –Computer experts weigh in

4 Experts weigh in Effective Use of Computing Technology in Vote Tallying Report by –National Bureau of Standards –Office of Federal Elections

5 Computing Technology Basic cause of computer-related election problems was the lack of appropriate technical skills at the state and local level to develop or implement sophisticated Standards against which voting system hardware and software could be tested.

6 Congress responds In 1984, Congress appropriated funds for the Federal Election Commission to develop voluntary national standards for computer- based voting systems.

7 Voting System Standards 1990 Performance and Test Standards for Punchcard, Marksense and Direct Recording Electronic Voting Systems issued by the FEC in January 1990.

8 Voting System Standards 2002 These Standards are currently in effect. Included in HAVA as the basic voting systems guidelines for the new EAC They are in effect until they are revised or replaced by the EAC

9 How do we know? At first there was no formal process to show compliance with the VSS In 1994 National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) began a program to test voting systems and certify compliance Testing laboratories pass rigorous review to become qualified Independent Test Authorities approved by NASED

10 NASED Voting Systems Board Oversees the Qualification process Works with the ITAs to assure compliance with the test standards Technical committee of 3 people who are both computer engineers and election experts reviews all ITA reports

11 After the ITA finishes testing 1.NASED Technical Review Committee evaluates the report. 2.Comments and questions by the Committee to the ITA. 3.ITA revises the report, if necessary.

12 After testing 4.The review and revision process continues until the report satisfactorily completes the review process. 5.NASED issues a Qualification Number only after the review and revision process is completed. 6.ITA issues Final Report.

13 State Certification Process Varies from state to state Some states have no formal process Others have more rigorous standards

14 Transition Soon EAC nearly ready to take over the process for approving and monitoring test laboratories Working with the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST) Developing a process to contract with technical review board members & add others

15 January 2006 The HAVA voting system standards take effect – Section 301.

16 Voting System Defined HAVA defines voting system as The total combination of mechanical, electromechanical, or electronic equipment (including the software, firmware, and documentation required to program, control, and support the equipment) that is used-

17 Voting system = everything Used –to define ballots; –to cast and count votes; –to report or display election results; and –to maintain and produce any audit trail information

18 Voting system includes the practices and documentation used-- to identify system components and versions to test the system during its development and maintenance;

19 Voting system includes to maintain records of system errors, defects; to determine specific system changes to be made after initial qualification ; to make available any materials to the voter (such as notices, instructions, forms, or paper ballots)

20 HAVA & 2002 VSS Similar definitions of voting system Voting systems are tested as a whole, not in parts or components HAVA is federal law 2002 VSS required by Iowa law

21 HAVA Sec. 301 Voting System Standards Each voting system used in an election for Federal office shall meet the following requirements –permit the voter to verify (in a private and independent manner) the votes selected by the voter on the ballot before the ballot is cast and counted;

22 HAVA VSS, continued provide the voter with the opportunity … to change the ballot or correct any error before the ballot is cast and counted (including the opportunity receive a replacement ballot if necessary)

23 HAVA VSS, continued Correct overvotes before ballot is cast and counted –Notify the voter that she has overvoted –Effect of overvoting –Opportunity to correct

24 HAVA VSS, continued Counties using –paper ballots, –punch cards –Central count voting systems including Absentee Vote by mail Voter education program to meet the error correction requirements

25 Privacy & Confidentiality The voting system shall ensure that any notification required under this paragraph preserves the –privacy of the voter and the –confidentiality of the ballot.

26 Audit Capacity Voting system must produce permanent paper record with a manual audit capacity Voter must be able to correct votes before the permanent paper record is produced Official record for any recount

27 Voting systems must be accessible For persons with disabilities –Nonvisual ballots –Privacy and independence One DRE or other accessible voting system in each polling place

28 New Standards EAC currently working on new Voluntary Voting System Standards (VVSG) Development by TGDC, NIST, public comment To be issued soon Effective date probably 2 years after adoption

29 Will my system be obsolete? VVSG is a voluntary standard State legislatures will determine whether to adopt the new VVSG and when they will apply

30 Summary

31 Questions