tested

The secret ballot has been an article of faith in U.S. elections. That’s being tested in Georgia

Security researchers say rapid advances in artificial intelligence are making it more critical to address a flaw in Georgia’s voting equipment that can allow voters to be matched to their ballots after they have been cast.

The system’s vulnerability has been drawing increased attention, with election security advocates criticizing state election officials for failing to fix it before the November elections. Georgia election officials say they have taken steps to address the potential harm, but some advocates say the state is not going far enough.

The vulnerability does not allow votes to be changed or cast doubt on election results, but it could let someone see how others voted. That is important because ballot secrecy is a fundamental right under the state constitution, and violations could create an opening for legal challenges.

The development comes in an election season of uncertainty, as President Trump threatens to interfere with the midterms, and he has long demanded that states turn over voter rolls. Georgia has been a particular focus, as Trump continues to deny he lost the state in 2020 to Joe Biden. Earlier this year, the FBI seized ballots cast in that election from a Fulton County election hub.

While the flaw in Georgia has been known for a few years, the widespread adoption of AI tools and the blistering pace of its sophistication have election security experts raising alarms.

This is “a bit of a wake-up call because it illustrates how much more easily vulnerabilities can be exploited now that AI can do all of the technical work for you,” said J. Alex Halderman, a voting technology specialist at the University of Michigan who was part of the team that exposed the flaw.

Other jurisdictions across the country use the same voting equipment made by Liberty Vote, which was known as Dominion Voting Systems before the company was sold. But many have applied a software update to fix the flaw, and some other states do not allow the public release of records that are needed to exploit it, said Mark Lindeman, policy and strategy director at Verified Voting, a nonpartisan group focused on election technology.

Georgia, a presidential battleground with one of the nation’s most closely watched U.S. Senate races this year, is the only place where the system is used statewide. Lindeman said that, combined with an open records law that has allowed access to key documents, creates a “perfect storm.”

“It’s really embarrassing that this is still a possibility,” Lindeman said.

How does voting work in Georgia?

Georgia voters make their selections on touchscreen voting machines that print paper ballots voters insert into scanners to tally the votes.

Such cast-vote records detail the votes from each ballot. Those records and electronic ballot images created by the scanners are randomized. But the software flaw allows them to be put back in the order they were cast, according to a report by researchers who discovered it in 2022.

Along with other publicly available data, that information could be used to match voters to their ballots, the researchers wrote.

Max Springer, a Princeton University researcher who was not involved in the original research and studies AI, said he gave a publicly available AI assistant that research. He said it was able to reverse the shuffling of electronic ballot records from Georgia’s May primary and then tell him what other records it would need to match names to ballots.

He then gave the AI assistant the early voting list for the counties he examined and the cast-vote record file, which could be obtained through a public records request. It was able to create “buckets of ballots and potential voters,” he wrote in a blog post. In many instances, that made it possible to match voters to their ballots.

In cases where ambiguity remained, he wrote, he got the public audit log for the ballot scanners and precinct check-in records and was able to match most ballots to specific voters.

“AI coding tools are essentially supercharging laymen people to exploit vulnerabilities,” Springer said in an interview.

Why does ballot secrecy matter?

Georgia’s Constitution says elections “shall be by secret ballot,” and state law requires voting machines to “permit voting in absolute secrecy so that no person can see or know any other elector’s votes.”

A lack of ballot secrecy can make it easier to buy or sell votes and increase the danger of coercion to vote a certain way by family members, political organizations, employers or government officials. It also is information that could be invaluable to political campaigns.

Gabriel Sterling, special projects manager in the secretary of state’s office, pushed back on the concerns. He said it would be easier to use mail ballots if vote-buying or coercion was the goal and that it probably would be cheaper for campaigns to just increase outreach to voters who fit a certain profile than try to identify voters this way.

State Election Board member Salleigh Grubbs proposed a rule during the board’s August meeting that would have required the secretary of state’s office to apply the software update recommended by the manufacturer by Tuesday.

“Each [voter] has one vote, and no one is entitled to know how it was cast,” Grubbs said. “That privacy protects more than the individual voter. It protects the integrity of the entire election.”

In a letter to the election board, an agency lawyer argued that the update has not been certified by the secretary of state, the implementation would take months, and the Legislature has not provided necessary funding. The board rejected Grubbs’ proposal. Some members said they did not believe they had the authority to order the secretary of state to act and they raised concerns about the short timeline before the November midterms.

Board member Sara Tindall Ghazal, who voted against the proposal, said it is “intensely frustrating” that the software update has not been applied. But she pointed out that it is a felony to reveal how someone voted, which should serve as a deterrent.

“I hate the fact that it’s even physically possible, but there are very, very severe penalties if somebody were to actually do this,” she said.

What’s being done?

The secretary of state’s office sent guidance to county election officials instructing them to refer open records requests for certain records to the secretary of state’s office. It will release them with the problematic information blacked out and decline to release other information and documents.

Sterling said the office is working with a vendor to scramble the original order of ballot images and cast-vote records before they are made public. Halderman said that precaution would be necessary to keep someone from reconstructing the order.

While some other jurisdictions have applied the software update that reportedly fixes the problem, some have done what Georgia is now trying to do by restricting public access to the records needed to exploit the flaw.

Marilyn Marks is executive director of the Coalition for Good Governance, which advocates for election transparency and security and raised the alarm about the vulnerability. She argued that withholding documents is not the solution and that steps need to be taken to ensure ballots cannot be traced to voters in the first place.

“When Georgia’s election records contain identifiers that can be used to trace ballots to voters, the only legal and acceptable answer is to stop recording that information — not restrict public access to sensitive unlawful information to insiders and commercial vendors,” she said.

With time growing short before the elections, Marks said a workable interim solution would be to collect ballots in locked boxes at precincts and then shuffle and scan them at a central tabulating center.

Brumback writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Democrats are promising a big agenda. Their unity is already being tested

Beginning on Day One, House Democrats plan to “hold the crooks accountable.”

That’s the promise House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries has made, previewing an ambitious agenda with oversight of President Trump’s administration and legislation to address the high costs of living, if Democrats seize majority control from Republicans in the midterm elections.

But first, the Democratic leaders have to ensure they can keep their own politically diverse — and sometimes rebellious — big-tent caucus in line, which was tested this week. Two go-their-own-way Democrats bucked the party on a routine procedural vote, angering colleagues and raising a red flag about potential party divisions to come.

“His greatest challenge will be governing,” Ashley Etienne, a former top aide to Nancy Pelosi during her historic tenure as House speaker, said of Jeffries.

The House majority is expected to be decided by a handful of seats in a shrinking number of competitive districts, potentially creating a similar political dynamic to the past four years under GOP control, a chaotic new era in Congress.

In the House, the size of the majority matters. When the majority is slim, any single lawmaker can become a kingmaker, determining whether a party’s agenda sinks or soars. House Speaker Mike Johnson is tested by his narrow majority almost daily, and his predecessor, Kevin McCarthy, was the first in history to be booted from office, ousted by a small number of opponents from his own side.

Jeffries, who is poised to become the House speaker if his party wins power and would be the first Democrat to wield the gavel since Pelosi, faces a party at a crossroads. It has a new generation of candidates, some far-left from the Democratic Socialists of America, and they are eager for change.

The Democratic leadership team responded swiftly to the slight from the two centrist lawmakers this week over the thwarted procedural vote, sending a message that they will not tolerate the kind of disruptions that have often left Republicans in disarray.

But the damage was done.

“It was disappointing,” said seasoned Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, the top Democrat on the Rules Committee. ”It makes us look as bad as them.”

A routine procedural vote becomes anything but

The procedural rule vote, which sets the terms for debate, was long a non-issue in the House. The party in power voted for it, the minority party voted against. But conservative Republicans have routinely bucked their own GOP majority on the votes, tanking the agenda.

As the tally Tuesday was teetering, it appeared Johnson once again had a revolt on his hands. Then two Democrats, retiring Rep. Jared Golden of Maine and outsider Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington, voted with the Republicans, salvaging the outcome and the week’s agenda.

Golden was working to ensure passage of his bill on the lobster industry. Gluesenkamp, often an ally as a fellow Blue Dog Democrat in a Trump-won congressional district, had joined.

Democrats were livid. Some were eager for a reprimand. Others expressed the angst coming from voters who want the party to stick together to fight Trump. The Pelosi-ism, “Unity is our strength,” was revived.

“The challenge is, that if you don’t have the numbers, all of a sudden a few people can be very decisive,” said Rep. John Larson, D-Conn., a former party leader who recently lost his own primary bid for reelection.

“You can never ask people to vote against their own interest,” he said. ”But you also have to emphasize the camaraderie and concept of working together as a team.”

A cautious Democratic leader faces new challenges

Jeffries is known as a careful leader and, as he says himself, chooses calm over chaos at a time when many Democrats prefer a quicker, attention-grabbing reaction.

The New York Democrat is singularly focused on winning back control of the House. In office since 2013, Jeffries is confronting the party’s quickly changing climate, as he works to hold together what is arguably the most diverse party caucus in U.S. history.

“We’re fighting to make healthcare affordable for every single American,” he said earlier in the week. “And we certainly will fight to hold the crooks accountable who have unleashed unprecedented corruption on the American people.”

Two weeks ago, Jeffries ran into trouble with progressives after having accepted a meeting with Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, an outside adviser to the White House.

The two New Yorkers had known each other and worked together on legislation during the first Trump administration. White House chief of staff Susie Wiles had suggested Kushner reach out. But liberals questioned why Jeffries would even meet with those close to Trump.

“He asked for a meeting, and I took it,” Jeffries said in a defiant video the next day.

The Democrats have established five working groups to tackle affordability issues — in housing, healthcare, child care, groceries and gas and utilities. The top Democrats on the Oversight and Judiciary committees are preparing to root out corruption.

Jeffries also sketched out the pillars of a Democratic legislative agenda for the coming year: repealing Republican Medicaid cuts, restoring expanded tax credits under the Affordable Care Act, repealing Trump’s tariffs and ending the Iran war.

“These are issues that we know unite Democrats,” Jeffries said. “But I don’t want to get out ahead of the caucus, because there are a whole host of things that need to be worked on.”

Mascaro writes for the Associated Press.

Source link