Who needs accurate vote counts anyway?

This is just appalling, and another nail in the coffin of American democracy:

A federal advisory panel on Monday rejected a recommendation that states use only voting machines that produced results that could be independently verified.

The panel drafting voting guidelines for the U.S. Election Assistance Commission voted 6-6 not to adopt a proposal that would have required electronic machines used by millions of voters to produce a paper record or other independent means of checking election results. Eight votes were needed to pass it.

The failed resolution, proposed by Ronald Rivest, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology computer scientist and panel member, closely mirrored a report released last week warning that paperless electronic voting machines are vulnerable to errors and fraud and cannot be made secure.

Some panel members who voted against the proposal said they support paper records but don't think the risk of widespread voting machine meltdowns is great enough to rush the requirement into place and overwhelm state election boards.

"They should be longer-range goals," said Britain Williams of the National Association of Election Directors. "You are talking about basically a reinstallation of the entire voting system hardware."

And....what's your point, Mr. Williams? The "entire voting system hardware", as you call it, doesn't work, and doesn't accurately count the votes. As an American, I don't give a shit about overwhelming state election boards. I have a right for my vote to be counted the way I cast it which outweighs the right of state election boards to have an easy time of it.