Is Ohio's "Gold Standard" for Elections Just a Myth?
Ohio's chief election officer, the Secretary of State (SOS), has proclaimed that Ohio sets the gold standard for the nation when it comes to running elections and cites "safeguards" or reasons why voters can have trust in the election system. These safeguards (located on the SOS website) are analyzed in detail below and show that they do not guarantee that our elections are secure.
​
1. Voting Equipment is Certified
Voting machines have been declared part of “critical infrastructure” by the Federal government, and as such, one would think that they would undergo rigorous testing on par with banking systems or military systems. But no. Surprisingly, they are tested to meet extremely weak standards. All voting machines used in Ohio undergo Federal certification by an independent testing laboratory that has been accredited by the Election Assistance Commission (EAC).
"Certification" however, does not necessarily mean that the system is safe and secure. In fact, the EAC Certificate of Conformance that grants certification contains the following disclaimer: “EAC certification is not a determination that the system is ready for use in an election or is it a warranty of the voting system or its components”.
Simply put, Federal certification means nothing when it comes to securing our elections. All it means is
​
-
​The machines are tested to meet outdated standards also known as "voluntary guidelines," that are 20 years old.
-
The machines are not tested to see if they have telecommunication capabilities such as wireless modems that would allow them to connect to the internet.
-
A fraction of the software source code (1%) is tested for known malicious code.
-
Machines that were Federally certified in other states have been found to be riddled with software vulnerabilities. ​
-
The State is responsible for making sure the system is secure but refuses to provide proof the machines don't have wireless modems
2. Logic and Accuracy Testing
Prior to each election, a "Logic and Accuracy" test is performed on the voting machines to show the public that they are functioning properly. However, as the Volkswagen "diesel gate" scandal showed, voting machines can potentially be programmed to perform accurately during test and then programmed to manipulate votes on election day.
A real-world example of this type of computer manipulation can be found in the 2010’s era of Volkswagen Diesel Gate cheating scandal. The automaker realized they could not meet the current EPA standards for emissions pollutants, so as a workaround (cheat), Volkswagen allowed the engine computer manufacturer to design the software to provide an acceptable emissions test result when a technician plugged into the testing port to run an emissions test. For a time, this allowed the non-compliant Volkswagens to pass inspections but eventually they were caught. In April 2017, a US federal judge ordered Volkswagen to pay a $2.8 billion criminal fine for rigging diesel-powered vehicles to cheat on government emissions tests.
We don’t have proof that the Logic and Accuracy test for voting machines in Ohio is being used in this manner, but since the source code is kept secret, no one can prove that it doesn’t. For this reason, passing the L&A test does not necessarily mean that the machine is trustworthy.
3. Voting machines are not connected to the Internet
Voting machines that are connected to the public internet are susceptible to being hacked by malicious actors who can insert malware to manipulate the outcomes of elections. By Ohio law, voting machines are prohibited from being connected to the internet.
While all voting machine manufacturers clearly state that their machines are not connected to the internet, the dominant vendors in the country and Ohio (ES&S and Dominion) have delivered machines with wireless modems, and ES&S advertises wireless modems as an add-on option to their machines. Wireless modems allow connectivity to the internet via cellular (mobile phone) networks and although this connection is typically made using an encrypted virtual private network (VPN), it is nonetheless connected to the internet, and encrypted networks can be hacked. Amazingly, the two Federal testing laboratories that certify the machines do not test for wireless modems or if machines can be connected to the internet.
Since the Federal government does not test for wireless modems or the ability of a machine to connect to the internet, Ohio is supposed to perform the test. CCVO made a public information request to the Secretary of State’s (SOS) office for documented proof that this test was done but have not received proof after five months of inquiry. Given this lack of transparency by the SOS office, the presumption is that Ohio’s machines probably contain wireless modems and thus can be easily connected to the internet.
It’s interesting that electronic pollbooks have now been widely adopted for use in all 88 counties in Ohio and they contain a mobile hotspot that connects the epollbooks to the internet via a mobile cellular network and can serve as a gateway for voting machines (if they also contain a wireless modem) to be connected as well. If the voting machines can be shown to be connected to the internet, it means that they can be centrally controlled.
4. Audits Ensure Accuracy / Voter List Maintenance
The claim that the audit results for the 2020 Presidential election was 99.98% accurate, does not necessarily mean that the election was 99.98% accurate. For the election results to be accurate, the following would have to be valid and true:
​
-
The Ohio voter rolls would have to be 100% accurate to start with.
-
All ballots entered would have to be proven as legitimate.
-
All voters who voted would have to be proven as legitimate voters.
As an example, when a cashier closes out their drawer, it doesn't matter if the count is 100% accurate if it is found that a portion of the bills were found to be counterfeit.
Voter rolls are a critical part of the voting system. To begin with, the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 requires election rolls to be accurate. On top of that, The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) has published guidelines regarding allowable ballot errors.
A recent article that appeared in America Thinker’s website titled "Ohio Volunteers Uncover Massive Irregularities in Voter Database," stated the following:
“Since 2021, volunteer investigators in Ohio acquired and analyzed publicly available voter data for all 88 counties. Since then, they have found hundreds of thousands of records in their state’s voter rolls with irregular data for which they couldn’t identify consistent explanations, no matter who they asked. The day after certification in 2022, the Ohio statewide voter roll database showed that Ohio had been certified despite 713,296 apparent voting violations. Federal law governing elections specifies that the error rate in Ohio’s 2022 election allowed a mere 34 errors."
The list of the Ohio 2022 election apparent 713,296 voting violations include just a few of these examples:
​
-
59,025 people were registered to vote before they were born
-
4,143 were older than the oldest person in the U.S. at the time or were too young to legally register.
-
253,486 were registered on January 1st prior to 2017 when the offices would not allow for registration online
-
58,209 resided in an apartment or mobile home lot with no unit or lot number to ensure proper delivery of mail.
Regarding the correct audit tool or method, most counties in Ohio only audit 5% of the total ballots in what is referred to as a percentage-based audit. The small percentage audited coupled with a small percentage of improper voting would result in a less than 1% chance of finding a potential error. Limiting Audit (RLA), which was designed to be used for paper hand-counting systems not for use with full electronic voting systems.
