E-voting machines under fire in Tarrant

By AMAN BATHEJA - Star-Telegram staff writer - Sun, Aug. 12, 2007
Electronic voting machines are under fire around the country because of security concerns, and the growing outcry may lead to changes in the machines used in Tarrant County.

The California secretary of state recently banned the use of several voting machines, including the types used here. The machines cannot be used in California in next year's elections unless extra security measures are put in place.

The move followed a report highlighting work by University of California researchers who hacked into three widely used electronic voting machines. The report found vulnerabilities in all the machines, including Hart InterCivic's eSlate and eScan systems used in Tarrant County.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., chairwoman of the Senate Rules and Administration Committee, plans a hearing in September on the report. She and other Democrats in Congress are trying to pass a bill requiring all voting machines in the country to be outfitted with a voter-verifiable paper backup.

"I was very surprised to read how easily these machines could be hacked into and election results distorted," Feinstein said in a statement.

Disputed findings

Tarrant County Elections Administrator Steve Raborn said the study was done under unrealistic circumstances.

"Right now, I don't have any undue concerns," he said.

Among the study's findings, researchers found a way to trick Hart's electronic voting machine to generate the same vote multiple times.

On the eScan machines, which digitally scan paper ballots and count the votes, researchers bypassed some of the machine's defenses and predicted that, given more time, they could have altered the vote tally.

Some of the methods researchers used to infiltrate the machines were "low-tech and required tools that could be found in a typical office," according to the report.

Hart InterCivic has disputed the study, calling a test in which researchers had unfettered access unrealistic.

Raborn agreed, noting the researchers didn't factor in the security procedures counties have put in place, including locks and numbered seals on the machines.

Security concerns

For all the focus on paper trails, some remain skeptical about whether they will make electronic voting machines more secure.

A report released last month by the New York University School of Law and the University of California at Berkeley School of Law said paper trails give only an illusion of security. Many states that employ them aren't doing enough to ensure that the tallies from the electronic machines match the paper results, the report said.

"It's obvious and easy to imagine how you can go about compromising a machine and make it appear on the paper trail that it wasn't compromised," said Jerry Lobdill, a Fort Worth Democratic activist whose research on the issue was published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology and was cited in the report. "It's just a technical nightmare, really."

On the trail

Many voting rights activists hope the renewed attention on voting machines will lead to Texas adding paper-trail systems to its electronic voting machines.

Considering the options

A paper backup would consist of a cash register-style printer in a sealed case attached to each machine. Voters could check their ballots against receipts. The paper trail could then be consulted in the event of a recount.

Stumbling blocks

The major obstacle to the move has been the Texas secretary of state's office, which is required to approve all election equipment in Texas but has refused to validate any paper-trail systems.

Former Secretary of State Roger Williams has said all the systems on the market are susceptible to compromising the secrecy of voters' ballots. Scott Haywood, a spokesman for the secretary of state, could not say how Williams' recent replacement, Phil Wilson, would act on the issue.

Legal wrangling

The Tarrant County Democratic Party and four local voters filed a federal lawsuit last year in Tarrant County against the secretary of state, claiming that the electronic voting machines used in the county are unconstitutional and violate federal law without a paper trail.

In December, both sides agreed to put the suit on hold until June to see whether the Legislature would pass a bill requiring paper trails. None of several such bills filed became law. Art Brender, chairman of the Tarrant County Democratic Party, said he is pursuing the case. Another federal suit was filed by the Texas Democratic Party.

Looking ahead

Thirty states require voter-verifiable paper records. Several members of Congress have said they want to require paper trails on all voting machines nationwide by 2008. Most have since agreed that a 2010 deadline is more feasible.

Whether any voting machine legislation will make it to President Bush's desk this year is unclear.

Read more

State to pay schools' legal fees - DISD, others in funding lawsuit awarded $4.2 million

By TERRENCE STUTZ - The Dallas Morning News - Friday, June 22, 2007

AUSTIN – Dallas and hundreds of other school districts that successfully challenged Texas' school finance system scored a follow-up victory Thursday when an appeals court awarded them $4.2 million in legal fees.

The 3rd Texas Court of Appeals overruled objections by state attorneys and ordered the state to pay the school districts' attorney fees.

In a unanimous decision, the appellate court said its decision was based in part on the failure of the state to file a timely appeal after a state judge awarded fees to the school districts.

"We hold that the award of attorneys' fees to each of the school districts was equitable and just, in light of the fact that the districts were required to pursue extensive and costly litigation in order to remedy a school finance problem with statewide implications,"

the three-judge panel said in its opinion.

"The record reflects that the districts made significant contributions in what turned out to be a highly complex lawsuit that required large amounts of statistical and demographic data."

The lawsuit culminated in a decision by the Texas Supreme Court in November 2005 that ordered the Legislature to fix the state's unconstitutional property tax system to finance public schools.

Six months later in a special session, state lawmakers approved a school funding system that was less dependent on property taxes. The legislation reduced local school property taxes by a third and replaced the revenue with higher taxes on businesses and smokers.
While the school districts won on the property tax argument, they lost on another argument that the state was not providing adequate funding to educate their students. The high court ruled for the state on the latter issue, but did caution that current funding levels for schools are barely adequate.

Because it was a split decision, the attorney general's office later argued that the school districts were not entitled to recovery of legal fees in the case.

But the appellate court justices said state attorneys made their argument too late and should have raised the point when the case was originally appealed to the Supreme Court. Because of that failure, the state waived its right to contest a lower-court decision from state District Judge John Dietz awarding the fees, according to the ruling.

Dallas lawyer George Bramblett, who represented one group of school districts, said the $4.2 million award would go back to the school districts, which have already paid their lawyers. "It is a reasonable amount considering that it covers legal work done over six years," Mr. Bramblett said. "We clearly had a right to recover fees because we won the case."

A spokesman for the attorney general's office said no decision has been made on whether to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.
Read more