Remember earlier this month when the feds wouldn't decertify existing e-voting machines because that would be too costly? Well, thanks to John for pointing us to a report that notes that the too costly part was actually using the machines in the first place. Utah's elections officials (the same folks who forced an elections official out of his job for daring to conduct independent security tests of Diebold machines that later turned up a huge security hole) are now claiming they had no idea how expensive it would be to operate an election using e-voting machines. No wonder they were so pissed off at the elections official who tested the machines. As you may recall, Diebold then charged them to examine the reset the machines following the test. It's not just the cost of the machines that was the problem, but they required a lot more training, more poll-workers and additional costs for storage and maintenance of the machines. As that last article notes, elections shouldn't necessarily be cheap, but it's ridiculous to claim that we need to keep the faulty machines because it would be too expensive to get rid of them, when it looks like it's pretty damn expensive to keep them as well.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- ACLU Calls For Ban On Nonlethal Weapons In Schools After Tased Student Ends Up In Coma
- Lightning Strikes Twice: Wannabe Murderer Butt-Dials His Almost-Victim
- Companies Developing Crowd Analysis Programs To Detect 'Abnormalities' In Behavior And Match Faces Against Giant Databases
- Facebook Needs To Learn It Can't Teach Tolerance By Acting As An Overzealous Censor
- Microsoft To Encrypt Data Center Links; Says NSA Hacking Would Be Unconstitutional