The First Federally Certified Voting System

InternetVoting writes "The Election Assistance Commission has announced the first ever federally certified voting system. While the Election Management System (EMS) 4.0 by MicroVote General Corporation has successfully completed 17 months of testing, many questions still remain about the United States' voting system Testing and Certification program. Many systems are still being tested to obsolete standards, the current standards are set to become obsolete soon and cost estimates for future certifications are skyrocketing. The future of improved innovating voting systems does not look bright."

They slso sold un-certified gear - and got busted

[BiggerIsBetter]

Good for them, but it's worth noting that they've previously been fined [insideindi...siness.com] for violating election laws by selling uncertified equipment to the State of Indiana.

Re:They slso sold un-certified gear - and got bust

[JimMarch(equalccw)]

And California:

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4985 [bradblog.com]

Do we trust federal certification?

[Butterforge]

That would be like the beef industry certifying its own standards. Or for an analogy that I understand better - video game publishers rating their own games.

The problem is the system

[Geoffrey.landis]

But the real problem with voting is the One Vote, Plurality wins counting system, which drives out third parties and means that in a multi-contestant election, the winner almost never gets a majority. This is known to be a bad system. It may indeed be true that all voting systems may have problems, but one vote, plurality wins has very bad [technologyreview.com] problems.

There are much better counting systems-- approval voting [boulder.co.us] is simple and easy, for example, and much much better. Range voting [rangevoting.org] also has a lot to say for it-- mathematically it's similar to approval, but hey, if you can rate your local restaurant on a scale of 1 to 5, you can learn to rate politicians the same way.