RichmondLiberty.org

by Robert Russo

Many posters and readers of this site follow the epidemic of voting machine problems that have plagued this country since before the 2000 election. I am not one of them, but having seen HBO’s "Hacking Democracy" and other links posted by Leonard Harris last month, I wanted to include this subject which is among the most relevant of our time, and give at least one new opinion.
In a nutshell, the voting process on Election Day is consistent with that of a democracy but to tally those votes with enough speed to post projections and results globally requires somebody’s counting machine, and that hardware is manufactured by private businesses. The software inside is a vulnerability because in the field of programming "the smartest guy wins"; they are engaged in a contest with the hacker sitting at home to reach the next level of instruction, because the information (no matter how encoded) is free. It can be shared with others and even distributed to the public.
While this proverbial fly is open there is a campaign of safeguards, but that campaign is directed toward the general public. The process of how votes are counted is supposed to be a secret, which the company maintains by being approved through undisclosed committees, while electoral staff and registrars consider the very subject an unwritten taboo (the documentary shows employees dumping records, discouraging citizens from reading them, and judicial authorities refusing to file against this calling it unnecessary).* Basically they are letting the hackers in and keeping everyone who reads or demands paperwork out.
These businesses, like Diebold corporation which is one of the biggest suppliers of voting machines, are not public servants driven by civic responsibility but by dollars, and serve only the empire of themselves. They decide which software is used, and even which type of voting machines are selected for a given precinct. Technical issues can be disputed, but what struck me in this film and on their website is the arrogance and self-devotedness of the Diebold representatives. This reveals the underlying problem: capitalism taking over a civic responsibility.
An employee is going to speak whatever words defend his company most faithfully because it’s his livelihood at stake (no commitment to democracy or truth is worth having if one’s employer goes out of business). And this defensive posture is mimicked by government employees. An election is the crunch time of their entire work cycle, looking forward to the down time they will have once it’s over. Volunteers working just that one day take pride in their contribution to democracy and don’t want to be heckled afterwards by an ungrateful nation. So much effort and pressure goes into an election that once it’s decided there is no point in disputing it for the sake of public morale. As Congressman J. D. Hayworth of Arizona said, "The problem we confront with this debate is that it serves to plant the insidious seeds of doubt in the electoral process.".** Congressman Roy Blunt of Missouri adds "I don’t know that we help the process by casting doubt on what all of those people that work at elections all over America do."*** So the problem is appearance; as long as Americans think everything is fine they can vote with confidence (or at least think they’re voting). Whistleblowing is an attack on democracy itself.
It’s hard to be critical of capitalism. Candidates are either "for" or "against" an institution to get the votes that come automatically with that position, anything in between is considered flip-flopping. We Libertarians are big fans of capitalism and "the empire of one", but it doesn't say in the Constitution we have to be capitalist in everything we do. Corruption spreads when everyone is just looking out for themselves, and private companies can deny freedom more swiftly than any government. Capitalism and individualism are tools, to be used objectively. Likewise we help preserve democracy by investigating these claims even though we ultimately don’t want democracy and majority rule.
It amazes me that at this day and age we can’t do simple math without hurting ourselves. Before electronic voting the system was trusted, it was nobody’s business. In 2004 Diebold voting machines were banned by the state of California in four counties saying "we will not tolerate deceitful tactics.".**** I watched "Hacking Democracy" on YouTube. The Diebold response can be seen at http://www.diebold.com/dieboldes/pdf/pr_hbo.pdf.

*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-az3g0jgNqM&mode=related&search=
**http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3BtLxH5ACk&mode=related&search=
***http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUVfovXfw4o&NR
****http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPFUNYtvg5M&mode=related&search=

Question of the Week: Should the licensing of commercial voting machines be suspended and replaced with government-made and run machines, or is that untrustworthy as well? How can we put this task into the hands of the voters themselves? Please send your opinions to henrico@richmondliberty.org.

If you have topics of interest to Libertarians please let us know. We welcome your input.