Certification of voting machines

Michigan AG charges 16 people in fake electors scheme: 4 essential reads on how the Electoral College works

Retrieved on: 
Thursday, July 20, 2023
Review, Conversation, Legislation, American University, University, Nut, Senate, Failure, College, Incumbency advantage for appointed U.S. senators, Politics, House of Representatives, LaGrange College, Holy Cross, Trump, Michigan Republican Party, Electoral Count Act, Electoral college, District, National archives, Certification, Office of the Federal Register, Congress, Federal Register, Representative, 2017 United States Electoral College vote count, Felony, Time, Certification of voting machines, Confusion, List, Louisiana House of Representatives, Election, House, Book, Private investigator, Tutoring, Drug, Management, Car dealership, Janitor

The Michigan attorney general on July 18, 2023, charged 16 people with felonies for participating in a 2020 fake electors scheme to interfere with the Electoral College and overturn their state’s presidential election results.

Key Points: 
  • The Michigan attorney general on July 18, 2023, charged 16 people with felonies for participating in a 2020 fake electors scheme to interfere with the Electoral College and overturn their state’s presidential election results.
  • But versions of the alleged crimes, reportedly set up by Trump’s presidential campaign, also occurred in six other battleground states.
  • The Conversation has covered the nuts and bolts of the Electoral College and the intricacies it involves.

1. All 50 states and Washington, D.C., get electors

    • “The winner of the popular vote in each state gets a certain number of electoral votes, and the candidate who collects at least 270 wins the presidency,” he explained.
    • The number of electoral votes each state gets is partly determined by their total populations.
    • In addition, each state gets two electors to correspond with the U.S. senators they have and one elector for each of their representatives in the U.S. House of Representatives.
    • The same is true for the District of Columbia, which is also guaranteed at least three electoral votes,” Tures wrote.

2. The electors’ role is essential to U.S. presidential elections

    • The presidential election process in the U.S. is intricate and involves a lot of people – and time.
    • As Amy Dacey, who directs an academic research center on politics at American University, wrote, certifying presidential elections in the U.S. is a four-month process.
    • This is how it works: Every four years, Americans vote on the first Tuesday in November to elect a president.
    • At that point, Electoral College electors’ duties are finished until the next presidential election.
    • Read more:
      Who formally declares the winner of the US presidential election?

3. Congress certifies votes from the Electoral College

    • The presidential election certification process itself concludes during a joint session of Congress in January, when members meet to tally the Electoral College votes.
    • “The Electoral Count Act of 1887 requires Congress to convene and review – rather than simply rubber-stamp – Electoral College results,” he wrote.
    • “To overturn an election result, Congress would have to disqualify enough electoral votes to deprive one candidate of the 270 votes needed to win.
    • Read more:
      Why Trump's Senate supporters can't overturn Electoral College results they don't like – here's how the law actually works

4. Recent legislation should prevent future attempts to overturn the presidential election

U.S. EAC Voting System Standards Fail to Protect Systems In Penetration Security Tests

Retrieved on: 
Thursday, November 1, 2018
Election technology, Politics and technology, Security engineering, Politics, Voluntary Voting System Guidelines, Electronic voting, Penetration test, Computer security, Voting machine, Certification of voting machines, Independent Testing Authority

The firm found that its team of penetration testers was able to reverse engineer voting media and replace software in voting systems with a program that emulates it, but recompiled with malicious logic, instructs it to record malicious votesdespite the systems having passed EAC voting system standards.

Key Points: 
  • The firm found that its team of penetration testers was able to reverse engineer voting media and replace software in voting systems with a program that emulates it, but recompiled with malicious logic, instructs it to record malicious votesdespite the systems having passed EAC voting system standards.
  • Coalfire found additional vulnerabilities across end-to-end voting process and infrastructure and a lack of cybersecurity rigor in the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) 1.1 standard issued by the EAC.
  • Coalfire's analysis was derived from expert security assessments and penetration testing against voting networks and systems across 10 states.
  • The report explains specificsecurity vulnerabilities found in voting machines and in the electronic voting infrastructure overall, describing where the VVSG 1.1 framework falls short and where the penetration tests failed in voting systems.