Brit J. Williams
Abstract
Sharing the experiences of the first statewide adoption of a computerized election process.
- Allen, A. Peach state poll (Jan. 23, 2004), Carl Vincent Institute of Government; www.cviog.uga.edu/peachpoll/2004-01.html.Google Scholar
- Bellis, M. The history of voting machines (Nov. 2000); inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa111300b.htm.Google Scholar
- FEC Voting Standards; www.fec.gov/pages/vssfinal/vss.html.Google Scholar
- FIPS 180-2 Standard; csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips180-2/fips180-2.pdf.Google Scholar
- Georgia Election Code and Rules of the State Election Board, 2003 Edition.Google Scholar
- Riggall, C. Press release, Georgia Office of the Secretary of State (Dec. 2000); www.sos.state.ga.us/pressrel/pr001228.htm.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Implementing voting systems: the Georgia method
Recommendations
Relative Efficiency of Voting Systems
Most comparisons of voting systems have focused on the outcomes of the elections and on the propensity of the systems to elect Condorcet winners. In this analysis, the emphasis is on the voters and the effectiveness of sincere voting on their part. The ...
Frugal bribery in voting
Bribery in elections is an important problem in computational social choice theory. We introduce and study two important special cases of the classical $Bribery problem, namely, Frugal-bribery and Frugal-$bribery where the briber is frugal in nature. By ...
Implementing a new Computer Science Curriculum for middle school in Israel
FIE '12: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE)As part of a national strategic plan recently established by the Ministry of Education in Israel to strengthen science and technology education, an innovative Computer Science (CS) curriculum for middle school was developed. One main goal of the new ...
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