Apparently, Vote Tampering Is Only Acceptable If It's Done By Americans
from the Hugo-Chavez-To-Win-2008-election dept
Typically, when we write about voting machines, the stories have a predictable, though depressing, plot. A machine will be shown to have some sort of vulnerability that allows it to be hacked, while the company that produced it (usually Diebold, though not always) will try to prevent them from being made safer. Yet while politicians ignore these very real threats, they won't pass on an opportunity to scaremonger about a foreign conspiracy to subvert American democracy. So politicians are up in arms about voting machines made by Sequoia Voting Systems, whose major shareholders are Venezuelan. They fear that there may be built-in vulnerabilities that would allow Hugo Chavez to throw an American election should he please. One alderman from Chicago claims it's more than just a theoretical possibility, claiming that, "We've stumbled on what we think could be an international conspiracy to subvert the electoral process in the United States." This all sounds like an incredible stretch, and very similar to the fears about Lenovo products being used by the federal government. What's strange is that the uproar is an implicit admission that voting machines possibly could be tampered with in some way, so as to give inaccurate results. If they're willing to believe in a far-fetched conspiracy such as this one, why aren't they concerned about the actual cases demonstrating problems with voting machines?