Officials Can’t Say How NV Stops Abuse Of Online Voting System

Nevada has used the “Effective Absentee System for Elections” (EASE) system to allow military and overseas voters to vote electronically for roughly the past decade. Since the 2020 election, the state has opened the EASE system to voters who are disabled or live on an Indian reservation, allowing them to vote online. But when asked how officials ensure the system is only used by eligible voters, the office of Nevada Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar could only point to each voter’s word.

Nevada’s EASE system is “an online application that seamlessly integrates voter registration and electronic ballot delivery and marking.” EASE is described as “the first entirely online application, from registration to requesting a ballot to ballot delivery to a ballot marking system using a digital/electronic signature,” according to the secretary of state’s website.

Voters who are registered with EASE can use an electronic image that is already on file with the county or state to “mark a digital image of their ballot and return their ballot submission electronically, negating the requirement of printing and signing the ballot before returning it,” according to the secretary of state’s website. Gabriel Di Chiara, the secretary of state’s chief deputy, said the program “is entirely secure,” according to Nevada Current.

But it appears the system has no safeguards in place — aside from an honor system — to ensure that EASE users are actually eligible for the system. So how does the state ensure that only eligible voters can use a system where no one ever has to see the voter vote or obtain the voter’s signature?

The Federalist inquired with the secretary of state’s office about how Nevada election officials verify that a person is eligible to use the EASE system aside from a prospective voter’s simply attesting to his eligibility.

The office first directed The Federalist to the state’s EASE web page, which does not explain how the state verifies a voter’s eligibility. Upon further inquiry, the secretary of state’s office told The Federalist: “If you are eligible to use this system based upon the list above, EASE will guide you through the following steps to register (or confirm registration status) and provide you with your actual absentee ballot to mark and return.”

The first “step” is “affirm[ing] and declar[ing] your eligibility.” The next is verifying identity.

The Federalist then asked if the state has any way to “ensure that someone is being truthful” about either his disability status or tribal status aside from simply affirming and declaring such status.

“How does the state affirm that an individual actually meets one of the criteria to use EASE?” The Federalist once again inquired.

The secretary of state’s office pointed The Federalist to a state statute declaring that any person who “willfully gives a false answer” when applying to register to vote is guilty of a felony and subject to punishment.

A different individual from the secretary of state’s office directed The Federalist to the online EASE Demonstration and said that to register for EASE, “the user will need to first affirm and declare under penalty of perjury that the affirmation and declaration is correct.”

In simpler terms, the state is using the honor system.

A user must enter his date of birth; Nevada’s driver’s license or identification number; the last four digits of his Social Security number; and his email address, according to the EASE Demonstration. But the secretary of state’s office could not answer whether an individual, who perhaps does not live on a reservation but claims he does, would be flagged in the system if he had an address outside of the reservation.

The EASE Demonstration posted to the secretary of state’s website states the aforementioned information “will be matched against existing information to confirm your identity and determine if you are registered to vote or if you need to register to vote.” But verifying identity is not the same as verifying eligibility for a specific voting program.

The Federalist further inquired if there was anything in the state’s system that would catch an ineligible person who wrongly registered for EASE. The secretary of state’s office did not respond to multiple follow-up inquiries at the time of publication.

Internet ballot marking and return have numerous insecurities and vulnerabilities, according to a UC Berkeley working group of security experts who met for more than a year to examine internet voting. The group acknowledged that “at internet scale, it would be effectively impossible to stop widespread fraud without strong digital credentials.”

“The complications for verifying voter identities over the internet could undercut any convenience and accessibility justifications for internet ballot return,” the group said.

The American Association for the Advancement of Science declared online voting to be “simply not secure,” citing vulnerabilities to cybersecurity attacks and “voter authentication.”

For more election news and updates, visit electionbriefing.com.

Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist. Brianna graduated from Fordham University with a degree in International Political Economy. Her work has been featured on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business and RealClearPolitics. Follow Brianna on X: @briannalyman2