Research proves electronic voting machines unreliable

The Diebold source code was leaked again, showing even more evidence of why electronic voting is not a reliable voting system.
The source code was first leaked in 2003 while Bev Harris, a critic of Diebold, was conducting research using Google’s search engine.
Researchers at Princeton University and John Hopkins University were hired to conduct an analysis of the voting software and found that it would be easy to program a counterfeit voting card to work with the machines and then use it to cast multiple votes right inside the voting booth.
“With electronic machines, you can commit wholesale fraud with a single alteration of software,” Avi Rabin, a computer-science professor at Johns Hopkins told Rolling Stone magazine. “There are a million little tricks when you build software that allow you to do whatever you want. If you know the precinct demographics, the machine can be programmed to recognize its precinct and strategically flip votes in elections that are several years in the future. No one will ever know it happened.”
This is something that every person in this country should be outraged at. Elections, in a country based on democracy, should never have a chance to be stolen. With Diebold voting machines, elections in this country are very vulnerable.
When I vote, I want to know that my vote counts. I am not confident that this country can effectively conduct elections using electronic voting machines. After all, in 2003 the source code was leaked from a Google search.
“In a study released on Sept. 13, computer scientists at Princeton University created vote-stealing software that can be injected into a Diebold machine in as little as a minute, obscuring all evidence of its presence,” Robert Kennedy, Jr., the author of “Was the 2004 Election Stolen,” told Rolling Stone. “They also created a virus that can ‘infect’ other units in a voting system, committing ‘widespread fraud’ from a single machine. Within 60 seconds, a lone hacker can own an election.”
Even many absentee ballots, which many out-of-state students at Guilford are using to vote, are recorded using these electronic voting machines.
The most disturbing part of the Diebold voting machines is that they leave behind no paper ballot; there is no way to go back and check for voting fraud.
“Every board of election has staff members with the technological ability to fix an election,” Ion Sancho, an election supervisor in Leon County, Florida, told Rolling Stone. “Even one corrupt staffer can throw an election. Without paper records, it could happen under my nose and there is no way I’d ever find out about it. With a few key people in the right places, it would be possible to throw a presidential election.”
Many people, including Robert Kennedy Jr. and myself, believe that the only way we can gain back a secure voting system is to return to paper ballots. While election fraud and miscounts have occurred throughout history, at least with paper ballots, we have a paper trail that allow us the chance to go back and check votes.
“You do not have to believe in conspiracy theories to fear for the integrity of our electoral system: The right to vote is simply too important – and too hard won – to be surrendered without a fight,” Kennedy said. “It is time for Americans to reclaim our democracy from private interests.