 |
Convened by the American Association for the
Advancement of Science
Main | Program | Participants/Synopses
| Final Report | Corrections to Report
| Press Release | Webcast
| AAAS Committee Statement
Errata Statement
Issued January 2005
Mark S. Frankel, Making Each Vote Count: A Research Agenda
for Electronic Voting
(Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2004)
The description of the duties of the Election Assistance Committee (EAC) and
the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on page eight, beginning
with the first full paragraph, contains errors that are corrected below in italics.
The footnotes in the original publication are not included here.
PAGE 8
The current process of testing voting machines, certifying equipment, and
designing standards to meet Federal Voting Systems Standards (FVSS) are performed
by Independent Test Authorities (ITA), laboratories accredited by the National
Association of State Election Directors (NASED).*
A transition from the NASED accreditation program to a joint NIST/EAC
accreditation program is in the planning stage, but not yet implemented. Under
HAVA, NIST will eventually recommend to the EAC non-federal laboratories that
conform to international standards through its National Voluntary Laboratory
Accreditation program. Upon acceptance of the recommendations, the EAC will
accredit the laboratories to test and certify voting equipment. A report of
research findings and initial recommendations for new voluntary voting system
guidelines must be submitted to the EAC by the Technical Guidelines Development
Committee (TGDC) in April of 2005. These TGDC recommendations may address testing
and certification issues relevant to the laboratory accreditation program.
At the December 2003 Symposium on Building Trust and Confidence in Voting Systems
hosted by NIST, attendees from across the electoral spectrum agreed that improving
the voting process, especially in conjunction with the new voting technology,
depended upon an analysis of the entire voting system from beginning to end.
Congress appropriated a separate $500,000 for the NIST effort, but the funds
were depleted by December 2003. HAVA legislation does not, however, mandate
states to follow any guidelines, basic requirements, and technical standards
recommended by NIST for voting machines until January 1, 2006, even though federal
funds were available for states to replace their punchcard and lever machines
with the new electronic machines by the November 2004 election.
In addition to recommending laboratories to the EAC, NIST is specifically
mandated by HAVA "to ensure the usability and accuracy of voting products
and systems, including methods to improve access for individuals with disabilities
(including blindness) and individuals with limited proficiency in the English
language and to reduce voter error and the number of spoiled ballots in elections."
NIST has focused its efforts on assessing "the areas of human factors research
and human-machine interaction," with special attention to access for individuals
with disabilities or limited proficiency in the English language. It documented
its findings and recommendations in a report submitted to Congress in April
2004 on "Improving the Usability and Accessibility of Voting Systems and
Products." The report describes how research and best practices from the
human factors, human-machine and human- computer interaction, and usability
engineering disciplines can improve usability and accessibility of electronic
voting machines. The new machines, however, are not required to meet the specific
standards developed for the disabled until January 1, 2007. NIST will receive
$2.5 million specifically targeted for research in fiscal year 2005, even though
EAC commissioners requested $10 million from appropriators in July 2004.
* National Association of State Election Directors
(NASED), "General Overview for Getting a Voting System Qualified,"
http://www.nased.org/certification.htm
Allan C. Eustis, Project Leader of NIST Voting Systems Standards, is acknowledged
for his assistance in making these corrections.
|
|
