I might be dumb, but why would you need to wait for 10 pm to "start" counting the votes that were cast in the morning.

In Taiwan all the votes are hand counted, and they have about a 60-70% turnout, and a final count is done within 6 hours and reported about 10 pm (polls close earlier since they actually have elections on days people do not work-crazy).

Taking too long to count can lead to mischief, especially counts taking place in early morning hours when supervision might be lax.

I mean, if 100,000 votes are cast over a 10 hr period, thats 10,000 votes per hour on average.
One person can count and recount 360 votes per hour. Meaning you need 30 people to count the votes of 100,000 people in 10 hrs (10,000 per hr, just as fast as the unknown number of optical scanners- I assume more than 1? ). If they start counting from 10 AM they can finish by 10 pm with lunch and dinner and bathroom breaks included. If 10 million people vote in CA, you just need 3000 counters, this number seems not excessive and even low (1 counter per 3000 voters) .

I know this is simplified, but I think they can do a better job in getting the votes counted. 6 AM is not acceptable. But then maybe we really have become just another Banana Republic. We can not even count votes in a timely fashion. No wonder the jobs have moved overseas.

I have suspicions that GOP-leaning county registrars may be scheming to deliberately delay the vote results in retaliation for SoS Bowen's decisions about not accepting the technology of these crooked e-vote companies to make it look like Bowen's competency is shaky.

Waaaaah! Whaadda you want, McVotes or real votes? This isn't fast food. ACCURACY is DEMOCRACY. Accept no substitutes. Once again, Brad nails it. I don't care if it takes 17 DAYS to count the votes, as long as they actually count the votes correctly and transparently.

Regards,

Dan

Brad and all three above me get it.
I'm with Ewa though, these complainers in San Diego, Riverside, and whoever else is run by R's are going to drag their feet.
They need these machines to cheat!, otherwise they would be calling for open and fair counting practices like everyone else.

The more of these assholes being against open counting, the more I lean that way, they're fuking cheating

Are they counting the votes with scanners at the county or precinct level or did I miss something there?

Don't forget to visit your favorite local network station's public file.

That's actually a better place to put your complaints. Then it becomes part of their history.

And who knows maybe we'll finally get an FCC chairman, one of these years, that will put the original mission statement back up on FCC.GOV

With Maptitiude, your politician can redistrict at his whim to garner all of the votes he needs to win :snark:

Link

The great EI movement guru W.C. Fields once said something that seems appropriate theze daze:

Ah yes ... reminds me of the time I was forced to live on food and water for three days.

(Paraphrased by Dredd). Oh my, McElection officials have the patience of a psychotic in a temper tantrum.

If you lunatics in election officialdom, who are obviously throwing an official temper tantrum at momma Bowen, want a clue then try instant peace for a change.
Your want for instant self-gratification at the expense of the people is disgusting.

So funny...and yet so sad. The mainstream media are such a bunch of chumps.

Floridiot #7

Have no fear, the LA "Times they are a changin" reality. The LA Times declared EI activists the victors in the movement.

But:

All things election are in tatters, machines rule the election world, electioneers throw a tantrum if humans have to count the ballots to check up on the machines, major races have been stolen in quite recent memory, and the LA Times calls that victory?

Perhaps they should set their sights a bit higher?

This Amurcon election fiasco has been going on for forty years, the government has known about it all along, and one person "certifies" the machines.

Currently we don't know about the actual results, so as social medicinal pablum we have faith in the results.

The election scene is religious in nature based on faith, not scientific and therefore based on actual hand counts of ballots kept pure with a solid chain of custody.

The LA Times must have been sarcastic?

(Dredd Sedd). I guess we should not worry and just be Hoppy, cause one day they say one thing and the next day they say another.

Flippus Floppus Maximus in "Amurkan elekshuns".

The more closely we watch the election process the more difficult it is for them to consistently cheat. This is a new phenomenon and it's frustrating to them.

In time this will lead to open transparent elections and a better Democracy. Brad and some other election accuracy activists should then receive Medals of Honor!

Go get 'em Brad!

ewastud:

Althougth the voting industry has more apparent ties to the Republican party, election integrity is really a non-partisan issue. (Both Democrats and Republicans are often eager to game the structure, and there are pro-integrity Republicans like Gov. Gregory in Florida.)

Honestly, it's rather silly to have this whole 'Wednesday Morning' thing when AFAIK election results typically take longer than that to be certified anyway, and the news media is all to willing to use exit polling to call states before the polls close.

There is plenty of time. If it takes a week for a transparent, reliable, repeatable process, then let it take a week. The conventions are a long way out.

Oh my God, human verification of our sacred voice in democracy! What's the world coming to?

Snark lives.

NateTG #12

"Gov. Gregory in Florida" ??? Did you mean Gov Crist?

Enjoyed the remainder of your post.

Ah, well, the media advances its own agenda --- faster, faster, faster. You'd think they were all raised in front of the TV. Oh, they were.

What are they going to think when there's a hand count. Should happen in every election, both sides of the race. Are the people of Orange County going to believe the tallies?

Voting fraud is the story they are looking for, but out and out voting incompetence (probably enabling fraud), was the story in NH, and these media nitwits don't know how to cover it due their own incompetence.

Thanks, Brad, for the tireless work.

We (Canada) had 15 million to count in 2006 and had the results within four hours. All paper ballots, hand counted. It is doable sooner if "they" WANT it to be...but those in favour of DRE's may not want you to see it that way, just as they made it look like hanging chads were the problem in Florida in 2000 so "they" could promote DRE's.
Eg."Because we're moving from touch screen to paper ballots it is going to delay the process. We're estimating that we'll have most of the ballots counted by 6 a.m.," Rosas said.

Counting the vote

I actually volunteered to work at a poll and was assigned the role of Inspector. I completed my training Tuesday night and will be happy to answer any questions about the process we are using in Orange County California.

BRAD. --- BOTTOM LINE --- I FUCKING ADORE YOU!! YOU ARE ONE PERSON THAT'S 'ON IT'.. and AIN'T AFRIAD TO SAY IT!!! KEEP ROCK'N DA BLOG DOOD!

Hey, check out this GREAT post on the Wonderful John Gideon's Daily Voting News, originally from the Election Defense Alliance.

http://www.democracyforn...shire.com/node/view/5408
Sure would like to see that go viral!

It's good to see at least one state is getting a handle on things and throwing the electronic bumms out.

PFT #1: We wait until after the polls close until we start counting the day's votes. Logistically and security-wise, this makes sense. I can see all kinds of problems with running ballots from precints to county elections offices throughout the day.

I have no problem with waiting a bit longer to find out elections results. As a matter of fact, I would prefer to wait A LOT longer, rather than to allow speed to trump accuracy.

I'm with Brad on this one. Waiting for elections results is simply not a problem. Some MSM news sources are presenting it as one. I suppose it gets people riled up, buying more newspapers, staying tuned in longer, WHAT EVER ... Look at the good side. This allows more opportunity to fill in advertising spaces, which means more money flowing around in our economy.

As a parallel point, look where insisting on going to war immediately in Iraq in order to save our asses from some WMD bogeyman got us! Stop, think, consider, discuss. Elections are not triage events, in which rapid deployment of resources is required in order to get the job done. Elections should be more like a planned operation, with successful results being the goal, not situations based on "who can get the votes counted and out into the press the fastest."

That's just my two bits.

One problem here is that renegades in the California election system, headed by SoS Debra Bowen, are stabbing her in the back after the fact.

She gave them all ample time for input during her intensive study which found the system to be in dire straights.

They did not participate in a convincing way, waiting instead to whine and throw ill advised temper tantrums after the decision had been made to beef up the system.

I strongly suspect that they collaborated with those in diebold, ES&S, and other vendors in a clandestine operation conspiring against the one they should have been faithful to, their own SoS and the people of their own state.

But in Rovian clandestine and traitorous acts, it appears that they did the Judas Iscariot routine instead.

Dredd #23, those are interesting and strong accusations, and I don't doubt the possibility that they could be true.

Where can I go to find out the supporting evidence for the following statements you made:
"She gave them all ample time for input ..."
"They did not participate in a convincing way ..."

Then, I would like to read your reasoning behind your strong suspicions that CA public elections officials collaborated with electronic voting machine companies, a collaboration that you characterize as being clandestine and conspiratorial.

DREDD said,

One problem here is that renegades in the California election system, headed by SoS Debra Bowen, are stabbing her in the back after the fact.

I strongly suspect that they collaborated with those in diebold, ES&S, and other vendors in a clandestine operation conspiring against the one they should have been faithful to, their own SoS and the people of their own state.

Absolutely they blew the time off, as to cause trouble with timing later on. They'll fully expect to fast-track and swear in via overnight airline their boy (or girl)

Notice that nothing happens about election integrity for months and months before an election and then when the election happens and it's worse, because it's because they were unprepared.

So all this silent time in between non-voting should be time to solve the problem. Yet ... The so-called leaders PISS the time away.

There HAS to be an EMERGENCY before change occurs.

That's why we need to create an emergency before 2008!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There's your refined truth.

(Think of me what you want, I care less, my life sucks because of these fuckers)

Linda, you've had some good input, but give me a break.

You have intuition. USE IT. You know exactly what were talking about even if we can't describe it perfectly.

They WASTE time before elections, doing NOTHING to prepare.

They should brainstorm their ASS'S off.

peace linda.

If it ain't the Rogue ROV's stabbing Debra Bowen in the back, then it is ABSOLUTELY the fascist corporate media.

Take your pick.

I heard NOTHING from the fascist corporate media about electronic vote tabulation devices.

Although I might be slightly mad at those ROV's, I HATE the fascist corporate media.

They could easily make this an national security emergency. But they suck their thumbs like the corporate fascist affiliates that they are.

I have heard nothing but spin, fear, uncertainty, and doubt from them.

Where them = corporate fascist media quoting the thumb sucking rogue ROV's and other pieces of dung.

Sheesh! Who does that Bowen woman think she is, anyway? The way she acts you'd think she was the Secretary of State or something!

and where electronic vote tabulation devices = electronic vote tabulation device failures and the in depth reasons why.

PERIOD.

I am not angry at anyone in this thread.
I am not attacking anyone in this thread.

I am angry though. Because OUR constitutional right to vote is gone!

I advocate no violence.

Brad - Here's what really happens when counting is done by hand: mass satisfaction, not mayhem.

I recently witnessed the vote counting in the Potrero recall election, in which all planners who voted for Blackwater were recalled.

The count was done entirely by hand. Candidates on both sides were present, along with media and representatives of citizens’ watchdog and election integrity groups. One activist was allowed to videotape the proceeding, standing a couple of feet behind the ballot counters with the camera actually zoomed in on each ballot—a first in San Diego history. (Remember, this is the city where our former registrar, Mikel Haas, actually had a Black Box Voting advocate ARRESTED for daring to try and observe the vote count in a mayoral race.)

The special election was a vote-by-mail election, with the exception of a ballot box left on election day at the general store – a concession to fire victims whose ballots were delayed arriving due to the Harris wildfire.) Opponents of Blackwater were diligent in getting out their supporters and even checking with the ROV days before the election to see whose ballots had been returned as undeliverable, then making efforts to track down as many of those voters as possible. ROV staff was cooperative in this effort. Granted, this was a small town with only a few hundred voters. But when results showed that the pro-Blackwater planners had been recalled by a 2 to 1 margin with 60% turnout, nobody questioned the results – not even those ousted from their positions.

It took until midnight to tally most of the ballots by hand. A final ballot box (which arrived escorted by armed Sheriff’s deputies and ROV employees) containing the last 8 ballots was not unsealed until morning, nor was a final reconciliation done until then on the rest. So what happened?

There was no rioting. No panic.

The recalled planners began yawning around 10 pm and ultimately left before results were known.

The newly elected planning board chair remained and gave a press conference before the official projection was made, as the projection didn’t come early enough for the evening news or the late night news. The media hordes left and went to bed, too. The public didn’t storm the gates of the ROV, and residents in the sleepy hamlet of Potrero were content to await results until the next day.

Come morning, peace reigned. Residents of Potrero and election activists praised the Registrar for allowing hand-counting of the votes and in general, people felt confident of the outcome. There were no challenges to the outcome filed with the ROV. No lawsuits. No angry mobs, and the majority of voters were pleased to learn the outcome.

That said, there were procedures that election reform activists hope to see corrected for future elections, such as making sure mailed in ballots are not opened or removed from envelopes until witnesses are present, and to have witnesses observe chain of custody from the time ballots arrive in the mail. Despite concerns about new ROV Debra Seiler, a former Diebold sales representative, in the Potrero election done entirely without any voting machines or electronic counting equipment whatsoever, democracy prevailed.

The Presidential Primary in California will unfortunately include a lot of votes still counted on electronic voting machines. Too bad counting won’t be done by hand statewide in front of witnesses on all sides, starting with hand-counting at each polling place. I am confident that the vast majority of voters would far rather see their votes counted accurately than fast.

Sounds like a terrible situation. Better stock up the bomb shelter, Brad.

FACT: If you are against open voting, or against paper trails, you're a CHEATER (or you support cheating because your side can't win any other way.) That's the truth. There's no other explanation. No rationalization, no excuse justifies such a position. ANYONE who opposes open voting or paper trails is suspect.

When I was a young man, I used to stay up late and wait deep into the night for Walter Cronkite to finally call an election winner. It took a long time because there weren't any goddamn computers that could be hacked. But, you know what? We managed to survive such a horror --- the staying up late, the waiting, the hoping, the wondering. Can this generation handle that? Or are they just a bunch of pussies?

Miriam Rafferty, #32, In San Diego County, under the administration of Registrar of Voters Debra Seiler, former Diebold sales representative, you had a hand-counted, paper ballot election that was successful, where "democracy prevailed"? How to you suppose this happened, given the way Debra Seiler has been portrayed on Bradblog?

Dredd #23, I eagerly await your response, not because I am trying to snare you, but because (to be trite) knowledge is power.

Phil #25/26/27/28/30/31, I admire your passion. But passion combined with logic, facts, and knowledge makes far better activism. I am a firm believer in intuition, and rely on it frequently. But you can't take intuition to the bank, or to the courthouse. Thank goodness you can't be put into jail on the basis of someone else's intuition. Intuition might be the starting point of an investigation, but it's never the ending point.

Brad, I saw your red and blue flashing snark alarm at the top of the page but was confused at the danger and fear you document in the text. Certainly this is not a drill. I'm leaving work now and running out to snach up food and ammo at my local militia supply store.

Jesus! The local store is out of canned goods, batteries and water already! This is going to be a rough one! I think I have enough gas to get into Oregon to ask for emergency aid... but will the rioting minions let me back over the border? The looting is going to be bad....

Linda@35 In the categories, just below the above article, click on Debra Bowen. read.
Then you might get to where Dredd, Phil and the rest of us are on this particular subject

Linda #24

6/6/06 Bowen wins, 10/18/06 Bowen publishes Voters Bill of Rights, 1/5/07 Bowen gives notice that things are going to be straightened out in California elections, and the opposition to that shows thru in McPherson and his cronies.

1/8/07 Bowen names Finley, a voting advocate lawyer, to the SoS team, a lawyer who is not a woos, 2/18/07 Bowen gets resistance, however 2/26/07 Bowen is not intimidated and allows hack tests, 3/23/07 Bowen announces full steam ahead "Top to Bottom Review" of all evoting machinery.

That was the time for everyone to give constructive input to assist in the repair of the California system. 3/26/07 Instead a rebellion foments centered at CACEO. They could have given her a good faith effort at support, but instead they immediately, without any attempt to begin to partner with her, whined, moaned, and went negative.

4/1/07 Heavies start to show up , and wannabe light weights begin to sink. 4/7/07 Some in the California press do what the electioneers should have done, they support the effort.

4/10/07 Bowen shows she means business for the people. 5/9/07 Details of the degree of the cleanup of California elections begin to emerge. 6/6/07 Some evoting machine vendors (balkers) appear to give up the whine and get with the program.

6/28/07 But those who doubt the vendors are not yet convinced of their sincerity.

7/10/07 Vendor source code discrepancies begin to show up, and 7/25/07 That rebellion led by the vendor cronies whine some more saying they are ignoring Bowen.

7/26/07 Bowen is not intimidated, and tightens the screws.

7/27/07 Bombshell, now we find out why the vendor cronies inside the election system in California were scared, the system is unsafe at any speed in any precinct.

7/29/07 Bombshell the next, plus Weir shows his insubordinate hand and the insubordinates threat to ignore Bowen again.

7/30/07 Bowen having nothing to hide holds public hearings, and her professional workgroup makes the path to improvements known.

Debra remains open about it.

7/31/07 The machines fail scrutiny, so 7/31/07 The insubordinates parrot their handlers' scripts.

But 7/31/07 The evidence and more evidence and more evidence leads to paper ballots in California, SO 8/10/07 the anti-Bowen whining gets loud enough for many more to hear.

Those paper ballots are where we are with this MAYHEM thread.

Ask for more if you need it.

Hey Linda, try reading just some of the history here at bb. As I am sure, many of the questions you've raised have been confronted and discussed right here much earlier. Seriously, hope it helps! Just start with san diego.

One of california's biggest heists ever.

With all these f*cking foundations around, how come there is NO voting rights foundation???????

Thanks, Dredd #40. I'm going to work up something to send to a couple of reporters at the SFChron. And to Woolsey, Feinstein, and Boxer.

How long did it take to count the ballots before the optical scanners were invented? How did California count elections in 1942?

Ancient #43 I think there is a voting rights foundation around...what's the name of that new one Thor Hearn founded ?

Brad, I agree one hundred percent with you. Keep up the good work! But, eliminate the use of Jesus name as a vulgarity. I'm a bit offended by this unwise choice of language.

Floriodiot #46,
well yeah, butt.

Say, this is not even the whole mess. Besides numerous other irregularities that will gum up the works,there will be a whole bunch of libertarians who want to vote for republican Ron Paul. As a disaffected republican turned libertarian who thinks there may be hope in Ron Paul, I tried to switch my party online last December. A few days before the deadline I still had not received my sample ballot to confirm the change of party. Went to the Post Office to get the postcard to change my party three days before the deadline to do so. Still have yet to receive my sample ballot. Having been a pollworker during the 2004 nightmare presidential elections, I know I can still vote "provisionally". But the running joke among the pollworkers is that those votes are not counted unless there is a tie. Takes time to confirm the legitimacy of a provisional voter. It's only a token courtesy to allow everyone to vote who wants to vote. If people have been shuffled around at the last minute, they should make sure the polling official checks all sections of the roster. My husband has yet to receive his absentee ballot.

Dredd @#40,

Did you happen to check out the recommendations in the conclusion of the report by the Post-Election Audit Standards Working Group?

They recommended that the SOS form another Working Group to study and standardize the Chain of Custody.

Do you, or does anybody know the status of that recommendation? I've called the SOS's office but keep getting put to a voicemail and haven't received a call back.

"California voters are unlikely to know the results of Tuesday's presidential primary election until the next morning" ...after the secret counters are finished filling out their numbers!

InstantRunoffVoting #50

Most exquisite point! Without chain of custody (of the real and valid kind) nothing, not even paper ballots, will bring true elections.

Black box voting is all over that aspect of electioneering.

I do know Bowen issued a missive that condemned the practices of san diego county, which was allowing "sleep overs", i.e. breaking the chain of custody of the machines themselves by letting them "out of sight and out of mind" prior to an election.

In other words, the "chain of custody" is just another way of saying everything is accounted for that could have an effect on the outcome.

Ballots must be kept under lock and key, and so must any "memory cards" or other electronic things that can be tampered with. And they must be kept from remote access as a proper part of chain of custody.

The practices currently are so shamefully inadequate it boggles the mind.

California is tackling it from the SoS down, but there are many pockets of resistance within the California system.

After all, ex-vendor officials and operatives for some reason end up working as election officials all too often - once they "leave" a vendor's employ (but not the vendor's influence).

#47 Eduardo said on 1/31/2008 @ 8:28 pm PT...

QUOTE: Brad, I agree one hundred percent with you. Keep up the good work! But, eliminate the use of Jesus name as a vulgarity. I'm a bit offended by this unwise choice of language. END QUOTE

LOL. I say continue the use of Jesus fucking christ. It's sassy and certainly gets the point across. I like it and we're all adults here, or at least I thought that was the case.

And I must add: I read "God Bless" [sic] and god this and god that on many so-called "progressive" sites from time-to-time in people's comments. And let me tell you I'm turned off by all that god shit but I don't write posts asking people to stop saying this god nonsense because I'm turned off by it. I just put up with it.

So Jesus fucking christ!

We recently had an election in Australia. 95% of the population voted 12,419,863 votes were counted at 8,235 separate polling locations.

As I recall about 75% of the vote had been counted before midnight.

Australia has the best and fairest voting system in the world. I learnt this from immigrants that have become citizens in my country.

Also see: www.aec.gov.au

MAHEM in the General election too?

Ann Coulter says she will vote for Clinton if McCain is the republican nominee.

I responded to the call by sending the following:

As we urged in that previous report: For god's sake, please, people, send blankets, water. and other emergency disaster supplies to the people of San Bernardino, and the other residents certain to be affected in these disaster areas, ASAP! 17 hours without instant election results?! Oh, the humanity...

Please contact NBC 11 here immediately if you have any additional tips to help them advance their invaluable coverage of this crucial story in advance of Election Day.

I think you should do what you do with all of the other important news and not say a thing. You are liable to cause a panic and who needs you anyway?

I just completed my pollworkers training for Tuesday's election in Sonoma County, CA, and I can tell you that it's a whole new ballgame with Debra Bowen running the SoS office. Ca's elections may not run perfectly smoothely, but they're at least in good hands now. I've got my one electronic machine used by my precinct at home now, and it's got locks all over it, with serial numbers, and all kinds of verification safeguards that require two signatures, at numerous steps along the way, both in opening and in closing the polls.

Peter from Australia said, "We recently had an election in Australia. 95% of the population voted"

That happens in countries where voting is required by law. Australia does a great job counting the actual votes, but I think mandatory voting with a preferential system is always going to favor the incumbent.

Linda, #57
Are you aware that the voting system used in Sonoma County, the "Mark a Vote" system, has never been federally certified nor was it included in Debra Bowen's top to bottom review? Go to her website and you will see DFM's Mark a Vote was certified for use in CA "before January 1, 2005." In Mark a Vote's case, it was WAY before January 1, 2005. http://www.sos.ca.gov/el...s/vs_certified_jan07.pdf

CA's elections may be in good hands now, but it is a mystery why Bowen declined to review the Mark a Vote system and still allows it to be used without either federal certification or her review.

Linda, #57

This issue of Mark a Vote arose in the lawsuit filed by the County of San Diego against Debra Bowen concerning "Post Election Manual Tally" (PEMT) requirements, reported by Brad in early January. (He provided a link to the complaint https://bradblog.com/Doc...mplaint_Bowen_121807.pdf

In a document entitled, "San Diego County's Reply Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Request for Declaratory Relief and Petition for Writ of Mandate," page 4, footnote 4, it says,

"Remarkably, the Mark a Vote system has never received federal qualification, was not part of the SOS's top-to-bottom review and does not comply with the Federal Help America Vote Act's ("HAVA") accessibility component."... " The SOS's website identifies Sonoma, Madera, and Lake as the only counties that use the Mark A Vote system." (http:www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting_systems/systemsinuse_110606.pdf)
"Sonoma, Madera and Lake each also use the Hart InterCivic system and are subject to the 10% PEMT requirements so it is unclear why these three counties would not also be subject to the same requirements as every other county that uses the Hart InterCivic system."

Confabulator #59, yes I am aware of what you wrote. The machines we are using are being presented as units for disabled voters to use if they choose to do so. By law, all federal elections must have disabled access machines available, so every precinct in our county has one.

For the record, this will be the third election in which we have used these machines. The first time, only one voter used either of the two machines available for the two precincts at my polling place, and that was only because the pollworkers begged a voter to use it right before closing, so they could at least try it out. The second time, not a single voter voted on either of the two machines available for the two precincts at my polling place. There is a good likelihood these two machines will not be used at all on Tuesday. IMHO, Bowen is probably not prioritizing our county as being one that requires immediate attention.

All I was saying is that things have really changed since we threw out McPherson in June 2006, thanks in part to Brad's efforts here at his site. Thank-you, Brad!

Linda #61, I apologize for being unclear. Yes, each precinct in Sonoma County will have two voting machines. One, to comply with HAVA requirements for disabled voters, is the Hart InterCivic system. That system has been federally certified and was reviewed in Debra Bowen's top-to-bottom review.

The system that everyone else uses, the Mark A Vote system, never received federal certification and was not a part of Bowen's top-to-bottom review.

Yes, things have changed. And good for you for working at the polls! I do, and I wish more would. Keep up the good work.

Confabulator #61, I'm confused. Each precinct in Sonoma County has one electronic voting machine, which they refer to as a DAU (disabled access unit.) What is the second voting machine you are referring to?

Linda # 63, You are correct. There will be one electronic voting machine in each precinct for the disabled. Everyone else will fill out an optical scan ballot. After the polls close, those optical scan ballots will be taken to the registrar's office to be counted on a Central Count Optical Scan system called "Mark A Vote", marketed by DFM Associates. This "Central Count Optical Scan" system, which will count almost all of Sonoma County's ballots, has not been federally certified nor was it included in Deborah Bowen's top-to-bottom review.

Other "Central Count Optical Scan" systems used in other counties, such as those of Diebold and ES&S, have received federal certification and were reviewed in Bowen's top-to-bottom review. She found flaws in those systems, decertified them, and then, after changes were made, conditionally recertified them to be used in the up coming primary election.

Because Mark A Vote not been federally certified nor reviewed in the top-to-bottom review, there is no way to know if the system has flaws such as those found in virtually every system reviewed by Bowen.

Thanks for the clarification, Confabulator. I'm going to restate that I think Bowen has probably prioritized trouble spots throughout the state, and has determined that Sonoma County is low on the list. If true, this would explain why she hasn't addressed the certification problem here. Also, I suspect that we may have a system in place to check for problems. This is really quite a well-run county with elections over all. The biggest problem we have is that not enough people are volunteering to work the polls. I encourage anyone who's reading this to consider doing this as your community service obligation. It's really not so bad. It's a long day, but you make friends and, if you like people, you definitely get your "people-fix." Unpleasant encounters are rare. Most voters are really appreciative of you taking off a day in your life to do this job.

I'm goingto write a letter to the PressDemocrat for possible printing asking why our counting machines are not certified.

Linda #65, I agree strongly: folks should work at the polls on election day. You'll learn a lot and will get a sense of the magnitude of the job and how hard everyone works. Registrars are among the hardest working folks around and are deeply committed to running good elections. And for that reason, may I suggest you talk to your Registrar of Voters, to give them a "heads up" before you write to the newspaper about Mark A Vote. Remember, this is not the fault of Sonoma County's election department, but it might come across that way if a letter gets printed first. (For the record, Mark A Vote is certified in California but that certification came long before the Top-to-Bottom review. It never received federal certification.)

If you talk to the Registrar, then write a letter, it lets you hear their side first.
Good luck!