skip to main content
article
Free access

Implementing voting systems: the Georgia method

Published: 01 October 2004 Publication History

Abstract

Sharing the experiences of the first statewide adoption of a computerized election process.

References

[1]
Allen, A. Peach state poll (Jan. 23, 2004), Carl Vincent Institute of Government; www.cviog.uga.edu/peachpoll/2004-01.html.
[2]
Bellis, M. The history of voting machines (Nov. 2000); inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa111300b.htm.
[3]
FEC Voting Standards; www.fec.gov/pages/vssfinal/vss.html.
[4]
FIPS 180-2 Standard; csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips180-2/fips180-2.pdf.
[5]
Georgia Election Code and Rules of the State Election Board, 2003 Edition.
[6]
Riggall, C. Press release, Georgia Office of the Secretary of State (Dec. 2000); www.sos.state.ga.us/pressrel/pr001228.htm.

Cited By

View all
  • (2017)Remote electronic voting systems: an exploration of voters' perceptions and intention to useEuropean Journal of Information Systems10.1057/palgrave.ejis.300067216:2(106-120)Online publication date: 19-Dec-2017
  • (2016)Compliance management ontology – a shared conceptualization for research and practice in compliance managementInformation Systems Frontiers10.1007/s10796-016-9631-418:5(995-1020)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2016
  • (2012)A Systems Theory Approach to Electronic Voting ComplexityDigital Democracy10.4018/978-1-4666-1740-7.ch075(1500-1523)Online publication date: 2012
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Reviews

Barrett Hazeltine

In 2002, the state of Georgia adopted a uniform, statewide, direct-recording electronic voting system, and a center for assisting in the deployment of the system was established at Kennesaw State University. This paper is a description of the administrative, in contrast to the technological, work done by the center. The center did acceptance testing on the equipment, and also developed and maintained training programs for staff, provided technology support for counties and the central voting organizations, and served as the comprehensive call center on election day. Other functions performed were: ballot building, qualification testing against federal and state standards, and assurance that systems were correctly installed, functioning properly, and had not been compromised. Integrity testing-testing that a system has not been compromised-was done by using an electronic signature. Undervote, the number of ballots for which no vote was recorded for a particular office, is a generally used measure of the performance of a voting system. The new system described reduced the undervote percentage from 4.4 percent to less than one percent. This paper would be of interest to people installing similar systems in their own states. Since the focus is on meeting federal and state laws, generalization to other applications would probably not be fruitful. Online Computing Reviews Service

Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Communications of the ACM
Communications of the ACM  Volume 47, Issue 10
Voting systems
October 2004
95 pages
ISSN:0001-0782
EISSN:1557-7317
DOI:10.1145/1022594
Issue’s Table of Contents
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 October 2004
Published in CACM Volume 47, Issue 10

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Qualifiers

  • Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)129
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)24
Reflects downloads up to 12 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2017)Remote electronic voting systems: an exploration of voters' perceptions and intention to useEuropean Journal of Information Systems10.1057/palgrave.ejis.300067216:2(106-120)Online publication date: 19-Dec-2017
  • (2016)Compliance management ontology – a shared conceptualization for research and practice in compliance managementInformation Systems Frontiers10.1007/s10796-016-9631-418:5(995-1020)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2016
  • (2012)A Systems Theory Approach to Electronic Voting ComplexityDigital Democracy10.4018/978-1-4666-1740-7.ch075(1500-1523)Online publication date: 2012
  • (2012)A Systems Theory Approach to Electronic Voting ComplexityActive Citizen Participation in E-Government10.4018/978-1-4666-0116-1.ch007(128-151)Online publication date: 29-Feb-2012
  • (2011)Securing e-Government and e-Voting with an open cloud computing architectureGovernment Information Quarterly10.1016/j.giq.2010.05.01028:2(239-251)Online publication date: Apr-2011
  • (2010)Using re-voting to reduce the threat of coercion in electionsElectronic Government, an International Journal10.1504/EG.2010.0309267:2(168)Online publication date: 2010
  • (2009)Toward a system of checks and balances for electronic voting machines2009 Information Security Curriculum Development Conference10.1145/1940976.1941004(142-147)Online publication date: 25-Sep-2009
  • (2008)Ensuring the Enfranchisement of People With DisabilitiesJournal of Disability Policy Studies10.1177/104420730832599620:2(79-92)Online publication date: 7-Oct-2008
  • (2008)Development and application of a framework for evaluating multi‐mode voting risksInternet Research10.1108/1066224081084962118:1(121-135)Online publication date: Feb-2008
  • (2005)Election Auditing Is an End-to-End ProcedureScience10.1126/science.1109901308:5730(1873-1874)Online publication date: 24-Jun-2005

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Magazine Site

View this article on the magazine site (external)

Magazine Site

Login options

Full Access

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media