BBV on CNN's NEXT

[ConsAreLiars]

This technophile oriented program spent several minutes interviewing David Dill and Kim Alexander of the California Voter Foundation both emphasized the need for a voter verified paper trail. Although the interviewer didn't seem that savvy, both experts emphasized the need to be able to audit the machine tallies by comparison to a voter verified paper record. Neither suggested that there could be any other approach to assuring the accuracy of elections.

This is a real plus, since the audience may be small (not as small as TechTV which also had some coverage) it includes a lot of folks interested in tech-society-politics issues.

[never cry wolf]

1. That's great to hear

thanks for letting us know!

[MuseRider]

2. I don't know if

I will be able to see this. Is it being presented well and taken seriously? If so we have gotten to a turning point. This will spark questions from others besides little ole us. Good news.

[tkmorris]

3. Dangit

I think I missed it, someone who saw it want to report what they said?

[madfloridian]

4. They emphasized lack of paper trail.

Definitely did not get technical, just emphasized getting a copy printed off at the time of voting.

David Dill also said to concentrate more on the ability to have a recount by a paper print off. They discussed that the code had not been found to be secure.

It was very short, very quickly done. Done well, just not long enough. Guess we are thankful for little bits of time.

[ConsAreLiars]

6. It will rerun at 2:00 AM ET, 11PM Pacific

The interviews began at the beginning of the second half-hour and the segment lasted maybe 8 minutes.

They both concentrated on the overall need to verify that the machines were functioning accurately. Dill emphasized security and mentioned Rubin. "The worst pitfall is that everything appears to go totally smoothly but we don't know that that the votes that come out of the machine match the votes going into the machine." Both alluded in general terms to the same issues that have been presented in discussions here, without getting mired in the fine details. Nothing about internal memos or "certification" issues, just the broad overview. No new news, except for the fact that 8 minutes on CNN were spent accurately describing the issues.

[gristy]

5. That is excellent!

both experts emphasized the need to be able to audit the machine tallies by comparison to a voter verified paper record. Neither suggested that there could be any other approach to assuring the accuracy of elections.

Glad Dill and Alexander stressed this! :)