Diebold Unable to Sell e-Voting Unit

Amid criticism for its allegedly unreliable voting machines, Diebold Inc. said today that it has failed to sell its voting technology business, which manufactures voting booths used in elections across the country. Instead, the company has decided to allow the unit to operate more independently, giving it a separate board of directors that includes independent members and perhaps a new management structure. Diebold also slashed its revenue outlook $120 million for the year for the unit because of delays by several states in purchasing voting equipment and said that will cut the company's earnings by 27 cents per share for the year; the delays come from uncertainties over federal requirements, state reviews of the issue, and earlier 2008 primary dates, according to the company.

In a statement, Diebold claimed that it made the decision to reorganize the voting unit in part because of "the rapidly evolving political uncertainties and controversies surrounding state and jurisdiction purchases of electronic voting systems." However, the company did not rule out the possibility of later selling part or all of its ownership in the realigned unit. "While we plan to fully support this business for the foreseeable future, we feel a more independent structure should allow it to operate more effectively," said Thomas W. Swidarski, president and chief executive.

View: Full Story on SiliconValley.com

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Netscape Navigator 9.0 Beta 3

Next Story

UC-Berkeley Students Face Tougher Piracy Rules


Commenting is disabled on this article.

Agree with Octol. I think here is only one way to create fair electronic voting system. Each citizen must be given new unique code/password with every new vote. This code will be random and not linked in any way to voter details (voter can link this code to personal identity if he wants to keep voting record). Later using this code citizens can go on-line and check if vote matches that unique code. In this case voting will be anonymous and any cheating will be easily detected by citizens.

Exactly right. And in this situation, while it's likely still possible to cheat, it probably can't be done on any kind of effective scale. So you end up with a reasonably fair and accurate voting system.

The only thing I could add is that whatever system is ultimately decided upon, it needs to be universal to all jurisdictions, so that no matter where a voter moves to, his or her voting will be understandable and familiar – not like the horrible mish-mash of wildly different voting systems you see today.

It's funny how ATM machines don't make mistakes and leave a paper trail to boot. Make an eVoting machine that works like an ATM, and the problem would be more or less solved.

All you'd need would be a secure voting "credit" card that signed you in to the VTM (Voting Technology Machine), and would even allow you to go online later and double-check your votes to make sure you didn't get screwed.

If there was some sort of funny-business going on, and your vote didn't get tallied correctly, you'd have your paper receipt to prove how you voted. With that kind of redundancy, no one would dare try and alter enough votes to affect the outcome of an election: they'd get caught for sure.

man i cant honestly get behind any electronic voting method. to many peoples hands in it. would you read your votes to a man in a box who tallied your votes and counted your votes, and never let you see your own voting card?

well this is worse. your giving you vote to a handfull of guys, and still dont get to see your card.

the posibility of sinister acts behind the scenes is too risky. and then you have bogus laws that dont allowe anyone to see the code in these boxes.

I can't get behind anything electronic, it's all abused. I vote to go back to the analogue way of things, a pen and a piece of paper.