Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Election left in limbo

Published: Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Updated: Wednesday, March 3, 2010 00:03

Election

ORACLE PHOTO/JANET FROST

A computer glitch during the voting process in the Student Government elections has left officials wondering how to carry out the race.

The CEO of the business sponsoring USF Student Government (SG)'s online election ballots says the company takes "full responsibility" for the glitch that caused the invalidation of the 2010 presidential voting results.

Michael Tuteur, CEO of VoteNet Solutions, said Tuesday night that a problem on the company's end allowed some students who have majors in two different colleges to log on through Blackboard and vote twice, though he's not certain what technically caused the glitch.

The error sparked an internal investigation by SG on Monday, with officials trying to figure out discrepancies, and the results of the presidential portion, which were announced Friday in the Marshall Student Center (MSC), were thrown out, said SG Adviser Gary Manka.


Now, the University will review a full report from VoteNet today that will show how many students voted more than once, Kevin Banks, USF dean of students, said on Tuesday night. 

The total number of votes tallied in the election was 4,235. Manka, who signed off on the results, said no other portions of the ballot — senate seats or amendments — were affected.

Instead of doing a new election involving all the presidential candidates like the Election Rules Commission (ERC) proposed Tuesday, USF is going to disqualify the duplicate votes and recertify the election based on who participated, Banks said.

Supervisor of the ERC Michael LeBlanc informed candidates Monday night that there would be a new election after spring break and all of them would be allowed to participate.

However, Banks said he spoke to LeBlanc and advised him to call it off until VoteNet's report comes.

If the report comes back and shows a large discrepancy, the ERC will go ahead with a new election involving all candidates, Banks said.

However, if there were only a small amount of discrepancies — small enough that it didn't change the results — the ERC could proceed with a runoff after spring break between presidential candidates Andrew Cohen and Cesar Hernandez, who finished in the top two spots and were supposed to have a runoff this week.

"At this point, we worked so hard and we really just are hoping and waiting to see what will happen," Hernandez said Tuesday. "This is big. An entire month of January campaigning and it comes down to the tally of votes."


But there's another scenario that could pit Hernandez in a runoff against opponent Christopher Leddy. If USF disqualifies the duplicate votes and Leddy — who only came in third behind Cohen by 15 votes — moves into second, he could face Hernandez in a runoff after spring break.

"It's just refreshing to know that democracy is at work here and that they're not going to let the double votes ruin the election," Leddy said. "We are in limbo right now, but its'sokay. Everything is up in the air right now."


VoteNet's software, known as eBallot, has been in service for 10 years. It's been used through Blackboard before and has never had an issue with double voting or fraud, Tuteur said. But he said sometimes through customization for each client, mistakes happen.

"It wasn't a massive glitch, but it may have something to do with trying to use our regular voting software and adding customizations on top or, in this case, trying to integrate student information," he said.

LeBlanc also said he heard that the same problem occurred in the 2009 student body election, and SG's Advising and Training Office (SGATO) made several requests to ensure this would not happen again.

Michael van Hoek, supervisor of the ERC in 2009, said Tuesday night that there was not double voting last year. He said the software had a safeguard that recognized student IDs and prevented any student from voting twice.

LeBlanc said he received a couple of complaints early in the election from students this year that double voting occurred, but it wasn't clear what people meant in their complaint.

On Friday, he received multiple complaints from people saying they could vote twice, and he informed Manka.

"Essentially, (SG) relied on a company that promised us services that they did not provide," LeBlanc said in a statement.


VoteNet Solutions has offices around the country, including Washington, D.C., and Kansas City, and it has clients like the Major League Soccer team Seattle Sounders and the University of California at Berkeley.

Tuteur said the company has served more than 17 million voters in 10 years and had about 23,000 balloting events. He said the maximum number of difficulties per year is around two or three.

"Sometimes issues come from client data. Sometimes it comes from who is able to vote," he said. "Unfortunately, when we do customizations for (each client) there are potential problems. We're sometimes at the mercy of the universities because of voting reports coming in at the last minute.

"The blame is on us. The University didn't do anything wrong from what we can tell. We're trying to get into the technical bottom of it to see what happened."


USF tested the software with the company Feb. 21 to help work out kinks with IP addresses at off-campus locations. VoteNet finished processing the IP addresses Feb. 22.


LeBlanc said at the time that students were not allowed to vote more than once, but he was concerned candidates could hold gatherings off campus and have students come and vote — a problem past elections have had as well.


On campus, students were allowed to vote at these locations: Andros, Argos and Juniper-Poplar housing complexes, Cooper Hall, the Library Commons, College of Engineering, College of Business, College of Nursing, College of Public Health Lab, MSC and Greek Village.


Additional reporting by Diedra Rodriguez

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

7 comments

Anonymous
Sat Mar 6 2010 17:17
Nice article Kerry and Diedra! Interesting detail, and balanced. The company has had “more than 17 million voters in 10 years and had about 23,000 balloting events,” with very few problems. That’s pretty good. I consider this a learning event. USF is a pioneer in Internet voting.

I am writing a book advocating the use of Internet voting in all US elections. Readers of The Oracle might be interested in reading some of my draft chapters.

Two chapters discuss the security issues and the history of Internet voting in the US. It can be done with all the security of an online purchase or electronic banking. One chapter is entitled "The Original Intentions of the Framers for US Presidential Elections."

I also discuss the outrageous costs of running for president. Obama spent about $740,000,000 in 2008. Of course, this gives an unfair advantage to the superrich who can make big contributions.

Most importantly, I show how a system of presidential elections based on Internet voting can neutralize the power of Big Money, and make the president and vice-president directly dependent upon the people who elected them.

Its not a book, yet. But all my chapter drafts are online for free reading or downloading at: http://ssrn.com/author=1053589

Your readers are welcome to read any of this, and comment on it to me, or in their other writing.

Yours Truly,

William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.
Political Scientist, author, speaker, CEO for
The Internet Voting Research and Education Fund
A CA Nonprofit Foundation
Email: InternetVoting@gmail.com

Anonymous
Fri Mar 5 2010 05:32
This failed election demonstrates the vulnerabilities of online voting. When any set of digital data (ballots, voter databases, tabulated results, etc) can be corrupted, either intentionally or unintentionally, election integrity itself is at unacceptable risk. And because ballots are nothing more than electrical charges stored on some media, There is no valid way to audit and recount with confidence. While we all use the internet for communication – even shopping and banking – elections are different and online elections are far from ready for prime time.

Florida Voters Foundation works strictly in the public interest – never corporate or political interest. Contact us if you’d like to know more.

-Dan McCrea, President
Florida Voters Foundation
Securing Fair & Accurate Elections
305-984-2900 info@floridavoters.org
www.floridavoters.org

Anonymous
Wed Mar 3 2010 20:49
Why exactly is voting limited to certain locations on campus? I noticed when I tried to vote on my own laptop, it said "restricted IP address" or something along those lines.
Ronnie
Wed Mar 3 2010 20:33
All of this for a useless position. How much money has been wasted so far. Student Government is a joke and this really proves it !!
Matt
Wed Mar 3 2010 14:45
and how would you change it Anonymous? I have been helping to campaign for one candidate, and there are people who are actually proud not to vote. Some of the blame lies with the students also...
Anonymous
Wed Mar 3 2010 09:41
Any Student who voted twice should be brought up on ethics charges and disciplined. Secondly, this whole election has been a disgrace. The quality of the Candidates is absolutely HORRIBLE. This is not an election its a popularity contest and a waste of time. Just look at the voter turn out...and thats with doulbe voting!!! COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY!
dave
Wed Mar 3 2010 01:30
At least they are going to get a report showing how many students voted more than once. I'd even be in favor of seeing which candidate got the majority of the double votes, just in case one of them found the exploit and then conveniently forgot about it.






log out