The committee shall issue a report which shall include, but is not limited to, the following: (1) an evaluation of each form of voting system technology considered by the committee, including costs, usability, reliability, accessibility, ability to conduct random audits of election results, and security matters related to each, as well as any possible solutions to address any concerns raised; (2) consideration of best practices established by the United States Election Assistance Commission; and (3) an analysis as to which technology should be implemented in South Carolina. This analysis shall include costs to acquire and fully implement the recommended technology for a statewide uniform voting system. The analysis must include proposed milestones and success measures for implementation.
The report shall be submitted to the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee no later than January 30, 2016, after which the committee shall be dissolved.
The Committe held its first meeting on November 10, 2015. Click Here for the Nov. 10th Agenda.
League Member Duncan Buell, a USC professor in the Computer Science and Engineering Department, presented the following testimony at this meeting.
"An Audit of the South Carolina 2012 Republican Presidential Preference Primary of January 21, 2012 (Interim Report 2/24/2012)," a report and analysis.
The LWVSC has adopted a position paper on election technology and voting machines.
LWVSC has published a Letter to the Editor, Vote in the Presidential Primaries, in major newspapers in South Carolina.
The report from Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner can be found here.
The report to the Florida Secretary of State can be found here.
The report from California Secretary of State Debra Bowen can be found here. (Note that the California report does not address the iVotronic voting machine used in South Carolina, but that many of the issues raised in Ohio and in Florida are issues raised in California about other voting machines.)
The draft report written for the National Institute of Standards and Technology regarding "software independence" in voting machines. (Warning: this is a technical paper.)
Another draft report to NIST on software independence. (Warning: this is also a technical paper.)