SiliconValley.com have a roundtable discussion going on about e-voting between some very well informed participants. Sample:


If one set out to design systems to prevent checks and balances, it
would be hard to outdo current paperless e-voting machines. Electronic
voting in its current form is equivalent to handing over the counting of
votes to private groups who count the ballots behind closed doors -- and
then destroy them before anyone else can do a recount. -- David Dill,
Verified Voting

What about all those who are being encouraged to vote an absentee/mail
ballot? They place their faith in the U.S. Postal Service, which handles
their mail ballot by computerized processes. If they are delivered to
the Elections Department, for decades, those ballots have been tabulated
through computers (not networked). Yet, that voter has no idea whether
his/her ballot has been counted in every contest because of the
anonymity of the voter and secrecy of the ballot. -- Mischelle Townsend,
Riverside County registrar of voters

I am not against technology. I drive a car, get on airplanes and ride
elevators. However, if the code in any of these was as bad as Diebold's
software, I wouldn't. -- Avi Rubin, computer science professor

One of my company's customers makes electronic slot machines, and hires
us as one part of the independent verification process. The
manufacturer, the casinos, and the state regulators all take the
verification of software for these machines very seriously -- much more
seriously than most election officials seem to take the verification of
DRE software. -- Jim Horning, reader

The question begs asking: how did all of these experts find such serious
flaws that passed the scrutiny of the testers who approved the systems?
As it turns out, it's not entirely the fault of the testers. The
standards by which they are asked to rate and judge voting systems are
highly flawed themselves and are severely outdated. -- Kim Zetter, Wired
News

At this point in time in the election cycle, there is no constructive
value in perpetuating the debate. Election officials are conducting the
election with the tools that they have. To continue discrediting these
tools serves only to actively undermine the legitimacy of the election
before a vote has been counted. To deride and malign election officials
who are working tirelessly with the tools they have to conduct a
transparent, fair and accurate election to the best of their ability in
November serves no positive goal. It is a fair question to ask the
motive of those who do either.
-- Scott Konopasek, San Bernardino County registrar of voters