Blogged by John Gideon, VotersUnite.Org

The country's largest supplier of voting machines, ES&S, is at it again. BRAD BLOG readers will remember last year's extraordinary string of ES&S failures and meltdowns week after week during the primary elections and then general election across the country. Last year the excuse for late delivery of materials and other related failures in scores of states and counties was that everyone wanted materials all at the same time and ES&S was just too busy. So what's their excuse this time?

According to John Washburn's excellent blog Washburn's World, election officials in Clark and Taylor Counties in Wisconsin are still awaiting delivery of Personal Electronic Ballots (PEB), memory cards, and paper ballots, and they have an election in just 12 days; April 3...

Today is one of those days when I wish I could act like the US Senate and just claim the absence of a quorum and put on “Pachelbel’s Canon” or some concerto by Mozart or Bach. There is a lot to talk about; but not a lot to say about; any one thing.

I did find out from Steven Harsman, Montgomery Co. Ohio Board of Elections, that they inspected a total of 256 voting machines but the test done for screen calibration was done on 124 machines and they found that 56 of those machines needed recalibration.

Also today CA SOS Bowen issued a press release and a draft of a plan to review every voting system used in the state. If the present draft is finalized as it is now it is going to be hard for DRE machines to pass the review and maintain certification.

In Cuyahoga Co. Ohio a second Board of Elections member has resigned leaving only two recalcitrant members who are refusing to leave their jobs. Meanwhile in the county there is another investigation into misdeeds within the county elections office. This time investigators are gathering evidence that will show someone entered the county voting system prior to election day and printed absentee and early voting results illegally.

Those stories, and many more, linked below...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

As a result of complaints from voters the Diebold DREs used in Montgomery Co. Ohio have been tested. Voters complained that votes flipped on the screens. Testing of the machines that were used by the complaining voters has proven that 56 of the number tested failed the test and did, in fact, flip votes. The blame has been put on possible mis-handling of the machines by the shipping company that delivered the machines to the poll sites. Diebold claims that no votes were lost and that every vote was counted accurately. Of course, the accurate count claim does not mean that the choices of the people were counted; just that the selection made by the machine was accurately chosen. What is interesting about the media reports of the testing is that the local Dayton Daily News reports that 125 machines were tested resulting in a 45% failure rate while the Associated Press reports that 258 machines were tested which results in a 19% failure rate. Which number was true? I’ve got calls in but the Montgomery Co. Board of Elections has ignored my query so far....

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

Some HR-811 proponents state that while DREs may be bad we have them now and we need to fix what we have.

My problem with this thinking is that we are talking about elections; not a line of computers. Think about those things you know about for a minute. If your University purchased a specialized computer that failed as much as DREs do; would your University keep it and try to fix it for the future or would you send it back and go somewhere else? If you used an online legal library that was missing references; would you keep using that library or pay the money to change to another one? I know that when I was doing nuclear refueling on Naval ships if I had a tool that failed constantly, use of that tool would be stopped immediately and something else would be designed for use.

The big issue is that the special computer would never have gone on the market; the reference library would never have gone online; and the tool would never have been sold to the Navy. Industry does not work that way. Why is it that our elections are not as important as our work?

Why is it that it's alright to allow a technology that has constantly failed to continue to be used? And why is it that we can continue to use it while trying to fix the problems? How many votes are to be lost, flipped, or not counted while we continue to allow the use of the machines that are responsible for the loss, flipping and not counting?

Links to today's notable news reports on elections follow below...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

In an article on BRAD BLOG, Ellen Theisen of VotersUnite.Org challenges...

Links to that article, and many more, follow below...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

In the words of Dale Carrico in his blog “Amore Mundi” on the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies website:

That item, and many more, linked below...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

In an article in OpEdNews Teresa Hommel calls voters to action and asks that HR-811 be amended to correct problems. She identifies a couple problems with the worst being:

That seems pretty clear and is just one more reason that HR-811 must be amended.

Links to many more such stories follow...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

As related by Brad Friedman in today’s Huffington Post:

That story, and many others today, linked below...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

Today we have a lot of fun stuff that was covered by the media (or not). The two election workers from Cuyahoga Co. Ohio who rigged the recount were each sentenced to 18 months in prison and the judge stated that he felt they were not telling the whole story and that they were covering for someone.

In Georgia the media failed to report that a complaint to the State Board of Elections brought by concerned citizens has now been referred to the Attorney General for investigation and action. The complaint is that the state illegally used Diebold software in elections that was never qualified by NASED for use (a state law requires this). The complaint is against Diebold and state elections officials.

In Sarasota Co. Florida a letter from ES&S to the state and county has come to light. Interestingly this letter was not included in discovery from the state or county but was found on the website of the North Carolina Coalition For Verified Voting. Joyce McCloy of that group has been trying to get people to read and pay attention to this letter for months. Finally someone has and this could be the answer that everyone has been looking for.

And finally the disabilities community and advocacy groups are beginning to speak out against DRE voting systems!

Those stories, and many others, all linked below...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

In written testimony presented to the Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government, Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives; Ellen Theisen concludes in part:

That story, and many others are linked below...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

There are many good provisions in the new election reform bill (HR 811 introduced by Congressman Rush Holt D-NJ), called the “Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007.” There is significant momentum in the U.S. House to pass the bill as written; and it is on a "fast-track."

BUT, the bill allows the continued use of electronic "ballots" (invisible data on a computer) as the ballots of record. Democracy demands that voters can know the selections on their own ballots. This means --- regardless of whether ballots are counted by optical scanner, by hand, or by some other method --- all ballots must initially be cast on paper and only paper – no electronic ballots, which keep the ballot secret from the voter.

The members must hear from us - NOW - that the bill urgently needs an amendment to ban electronic ballots. We are not seeking to "kill" the bill, but to gain support for an amendment banning electronic ballots and the use of Direct Record Electronic (DRE) voting machines, which create them.

We believe we have a chance! Here's what you can do: Go to LINKand take action...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

A recent report from the Wisconsin State Elections Board says, “The three major vendors (Diebold Election Systems, Elections Systems and Software and Sequoia Voting Systems) have minor upgrades that would improve the administration of elections for local election officials.” The report goes on to say, “The new federal certification process developed by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (US EAC) is in place, but no voting systems are currently under review. The SEB staff believes that these changes should be evaluated by a contract reviewer to avoid the delays attendant with the federal certification process.” In other words, the vendors say changes need to be made but the EAC and the federal certification process cannot be relied upon in the state’s opinion so they will, instead, turn to a contractor to review the equipment. History tells us that as bad as the ITA process is; contractors have been much worse....

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

Johns Hopkins University Professor Avi Rubin reports the following in his blog about his recent congressional testimony; “Finally, I was asked if I thought that a DRE with a paper trail was an adequate voting system. I replied that when I first studied the Diebold DRE in 2003, I felt that a Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) provided enough assurance. But, I continued, after four years of studying the issue, I now believe that a DRE with a VVPAT is not a reasonable voting system. The only system that I know of that achieves software independence as defined by NIST, is economically viable and readily available is paper ballots with ballot marking machines for accessibility and precinct optical scanners for counting - coupled with random audits. That is how we should be conducting elections in the US, in my opinion.”...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

From the just released GAO report "ELECTIONS: All Levels of Government Are Needed to Address Electronic Voting System Challenges": "Election officials, computer security experts, citizen advocacy groups, and others have raised significant concerns about the security and reliability of electronic voting systems, citing vague or incomplete standards, weak security controls, system design flaws, incorrect system configuration, poor security management, and inadequate security testing, among other issues. These security and reliability concerns are legitimate and thus merit the combined and focused attention of federal, state, and local authorities responsible for election administration."...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

The Vindicator (Youngstown, Ohio) reports that ES&S is showing Lawrence Co., Pennsylvania, just why signing a contract with the company is like signing a contract with the devil. Some of the ES&S iVotronic machines used in Lawrence Co. in the 2006 election were found to have been improperly programmed, according to the article. ES&S had agreed to reprogram and recertify all of the county's machines at no cost to the county (probably under pressure from county officials). However, the recent cold snap in that area caused some frozen pipes which resulted in a leak in the storage area. Upon inspection the county found about 20 of their 275 machines had evidence of water spots on their cases. The county asked ES&S to inspect those 20 machines. Instead ES&S is insisting on inspecting and recalibrating all 275 machines and they want $298,028 to do the job. So, no more free reprogramming and the county pays over $1,000 per machine for an inspection that is probably not needed. ...