SB 542 audit of voting machines

02/01/2019
SB 542 VOTE:YES
In Committee

Status (overview) of bill:https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Measures/Overview/SB542
Committee assigned to bill: https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Committees/SRULES/Overview

See TrackTheirVote here


This bill requires Secretary of State audits on voting machines and samples uncompiled source code for accuracy.

Limited Government
Nationally, manipulation of voting machines is a source of voter fraud. Preventative measures secures our voting results. Requires auditor to report results of examination only to Secretary of State, State Chief Information Officer and Legislative Fiscal Officer. Directs Secretary of State to require vendor of voting machine or vote tally system to correct deficiencies that auditor finds during audit and to reject or revoke approval of voting machine or vote tally system if vendor refuses or is unable to correct deficiencies. Requires contract for purchase or procurement of voting machine or vote tally system to permit Secretary of State’s audit.

Please help spread this information:

Comments

  1. In our “Vote by mail” system there is little cause to believe that the counting machines produce significant errors. Lane county’s machines are not connected to any outside system.
    The primary source of errors in our system is ineligible voters.
    Examples:
    1. College students receiving one ballot at their parent’s home address in one county, and registering to vote using their dormitory address in another county. I know of no way to detect that both ballots have been submitted;
    2: Divorcees or widowers completing their “Ex”s ballot with their own;
    3: Non-citizens with ODLs registering.
    We need an audit of eligibility.

    (I work each election opening ballots for the Lane County Elections office)
    Seems like a government expenditure with little promise of any payoff

    • Good points Leigh.
      I thought when students registered in a new county, they had to indicate on their form which county they are from, and if they are registered. Then, the county they are now registering in contacts the other county and cancels the registration in the county they are from. Oh wait, if they don’t indicate on the form what county they are from, they can be registered in two counties, and receive two ballots. Am I missing something, or is that the present accuracy of the system we have? Thanks.

      • Thanks, B J.
        Your “If they don’t” sentence illustrates the potential problem.
        I don’t know if there is uniformity between counties on the registration form format.
        The forms in Lane County specify “Lane County”..
        There are mass registration events and ballot completion/collection events at UO – and probably at our other universities too.

Leave a Reply