Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org and VoteTrustUSA.Org

The Election Assistance Commission has some explaining to do. The secrecy that pervades the EAC, which oversees testing and certification of voting systems, holds dire consequences for our electoral system. Both chambers of Congress need to work to dispel this culture of secrecy. / In the past year, concerns about the accuracy and integrity of computerized elections have entered the general consciousness and become accepted as serious. Issues that [were] addressed in the March 1, 2006, edition of the Spectator have since been written about in the national media, and the momentum has grown for legislative solutions to be found at the federal level. A new Congress is getting under way, and decisions will be made that will profoundly affect the way Americans cast and count their votes. While computerized voting has been touted as a way to make elections easier and the results more reliable, an increasing number of voters, poll workers, and election officials have concluded that the process in 2006 was more difficult—not easier—and confidence in the tallies has been undermined. Many activists and legislators now question both the wisdom of relying on software to record votes, and the degree to which our elections depend on computerized voting systems and the manufacturers that sell them. ...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

In an Op-Ed in the Miami Herald today, the President of Sequoia and President and CEO of its parent company, Smartmatic, said, in defending the Sequoia ownership, "Most important, the idea that foreigners could somehow influence the U.S. voting process is untrue and ignores the numerous safeguards and stringent regulations in place to ensure fair and accurate elections. Sequoia Voting Systems' election equipment and software have been tested and qualified by federal Independent Testing Authorities and certified by individual states." The Independent Testing Authorities (ITAs) mentioned are companies like Ciber. Is this supposed to give us some confidence? Are they kidding?...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

"In the Cuyahoga case, the poll workers are charged with circumventing state recount laws that require a random sampling of at least three percent of the votes cast in a given precinct, to be recounted by hand and by machine. The prosecution charges that the workers instead hand picked sample precincts to recount that they knew did not have questionable results. Once they were able to match those recounts with official results, they could then do the rest of the recount by machine, in effect rendering the entire process meaningless. "This was a very hush operation," said prosecutor Baxter. Similar allegations have been made in other counties. Indeed, such illegal non-random recounting procedures appear to have been common throughout the state, carried out by board of election employees with the tacit consent of Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell", according to an article in "The Free Press"...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

The Duval Co. Florida finance committee approved funding for printers for the counties DREs (Diebold TSx). The first question that came to mind when I read this is, "How can Duval buy printers for their machines when the state has said they are not allowed and they are not state certified? Then I got deeper into the article. "Verifiable Paper Audit Trail"? Where is the 'voter'? Then it is all explained: “The voter will not see it and they cannot take it,” said Phillips. “The paper trail will be rolled up in the machine.” The voter will not see the printed ballot. In other words the county has approved funding to install a printer on the machines and that printer is already on those machines. Perhaps that's why in the cost breakdown no where do they mention the cost of the printers only repairs, maintenance, etc. In other words, this is all more misleading information and obfuscation on the part of an election official who only wants to promote confidence at the expense of the facts. / Three Cuyahoga Co. Ohio election workers went on trial today for 6 counts each of misconduct for rigging the 2004 state mandated recount in their county. The workers pre-counted and sorted ballots in order to find precincts where the recount would find no problems....

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

Mahoning Co. Ohio sits on the Ohio/Pennsylvania border. Like most of that area of the country they are struggling with funds to keep their infrastructure operating. In fact the county is discussing laying off employees. They have ES&S iVotronic DRE voting machines that use batteries that need to be replaced after 5 years. They have had the machines for 5 years so they went to ES&S for new rechargeable batteries and the chargers. ES&S wants $197,500 for the equipment. The county then found a company in California that would provide them with the batteries and chargers for only $50,877. ES&S and their ilk are raping this country in their efforts to squeeze every possible dollar out of the taxpayers....

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

According to "Roll Call", "After rewriting rules for lobbyists, increasing the federal minimum wage and moving on other election-year promises, senior Democratic Members in both chambers said Friday that within weeks they will begin scrutinizing electronic voting equipment and, for now, shelve other election-related proposals such as overhauls of 527s and electronic financial disclosure in the Senate. "The first thing is going to be elections," Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Senate Rules and Administration Committee, told a group of reporters Friday. "We're going into 2008 with [an electronic voting system] that is problematic." ...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

"…….all types of conniving methods are still being used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters. The denial of this sacred right is a tragic betrayal of the highest mandates of our democratic traditions and its is democracy turned upside down.
So long as I do not firmly and irrevocably possess the right to vote I do not possess myself. I cannot make up my mind — it is made up for me. I cannot live as a democratic citizen, observing the laws I have helped to enact — I can only submit to the edict of others. So our most urgent request to the president of the United States and every member of Congress is to give us the right to vote." Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., excerpted from a speech that Dr. King delivered before the Lincoln Memorial at the March on Washington, on May 17, 1957, three years after Brown v. Board of Education and eight years before the enactment of the Voting Rights Act....

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

In Ohio, as well as most states, "elections directors, particularly those operating with touch-screen voting machines, say their charges for special elections are rising because of the rising costs associated with modern voting systems, including delivering and setting up machines, building rentals and custodial fees, the paper that backs up the touch- screen voting and training sessions." This is part of what HAVA is costing this country. Direct Recording Electronic voting machines are not just expensive to buy; they are expensive to operate. Local school boards, fire districts, port and park commissions who have historically used county elections equipment will no longer be able to afford to have elections to raise funds to do their work....

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

"U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, today sent a letter to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission seeking answers as to why the Commission failed to notify election officials or the public about a serious problem with Ciber Labs of Colorado, one of three major labs that tests much of the nation’s software used in voting equipment. Senator Feinstein also asked for information regarding what went wrong at Ciber Labs to warrant its loss of accreditation." / "The move came one month after Brian Phillips, president of SysTest Labs, accepted the invitation of a Florida law firm representing a Republican candidate to witness a recount in a Florida election. 'When there's a conflict over an election, like there was in Florida, we don't want (these companies) to be hired by one party or another,' said Donetta Davidson, formerly Colorado secretary of state and now chairwoman of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission." This from the woman who told Florida election officials that she was unhappy to see the Republicans lose the Senate because she had promises from them that they would not allow any changes to HAVA. Commissioner, while you're on the conflict of interest theme, let's look inwardly; OK? ...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

"The manufacturer of voting machines under scrutiny in Sarasota County accused a House Democrat Tuesday of trying to ''intimidate'' and ''unduly influence'' a Florida appeals court. The move by Election Systems & Software comes days after Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald, D-Calif., chairwoman of the House Administration Committee, wrote a letter to the First District Court of Appeal in Tallahassee. She said she was ''concerned'' that a lower court judge had declined to give Democrats access to the software used in voting machines in the contested District 13 congressional election." // "Voting equipment suppliers built faulty machines and election officials failed to test it properly," say studies released Tuesday about the slow vote count in November's election.
A laptop-sized piece of equipment at each polling place that was supposed to total up and transmit the results from each precinct apparently had multiple problems" say reports from Cook Co. Illinois....

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

“Voting machines are different from other things bought by a government. In purchasing voting equipment, election officials must rely heavily on the integrity, honesty and reliability of the vendor selling them this equipment."--Gary Greenhalgh, VP ES&S. The same Gary Greenhalgh who was President of the Election Center and worked for convicted felon Ransom Shoup of Shouptronic fame and with MicroVote, another voting machine company with a checkered past. / "The 2006 election was a success: Most of the millions of Americans who cast their ballots did so with confidence. Despite some isolated problems, exit polls showed that in 98 percent of U.S. jurisdictions, the process worked so well that voter confidence rose to levels not seen since before Election 2000." This according to EAC Commissioner and Chief Blower of Smoke, Paul DeGregorio....

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

"There is by now no doubt that there are serious problems with electronic voting machines: they fail to record votes, and even flip votes from one candidate to another. Election officials like to defend the machines by noting that they have been certified by independent testing labs. But the certification process has long been deeply flawed, and last week there was even more disturbing news — that the leading testing lab has been unable to meet the federal government’s standards." NYTimes Editorial / Lowell Finley, the lead attorney for the non-partisan voting machine legal watchdog organization VoterAction.org has been named to be the new Deputy SoS for Voting Systems Technology and Policy in California today. This is a huge piece of news for all voters....

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

The EAC seems to be hiding a lot with regard to their not giving interim accreditation to Ciber for testing voting systems. One commissioner says there is no report that led to the lack of accreditation by the EAC. Part of that interim accreditation is an inspection of the lab's facilities and procedures. An advisor hired by the EAC did that inspection. How can there not be a report? Maybe it's not the final report. Maybe it's an interim report. No matter what it is called there must be a report. The government does not run without reams of paper. Why is the EAC obfuscating? What are they not telling us and why?...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

States are now beginning to question whether their voting systems were originally inspected and tested by Ciber and whether the quality of that testing should be questioned. / Meanwhile the EAC has sent their commissioners out to handle damage control. Commissioners are denying the existence of negative reports against Ciber and denying that Ciber has any problems beyond what they think is normal for an accreditation process. They, however, are not explaining why two other labs were accredited almost immediately and why Ciber's process has taken 5 months longer and is still not complete. / Another key member of the House of Representatives has weighed in on the disputed Florida Congressional election, saying that not only the litigants but the House itself would benefit from more open discovery. On Thursday, the incoming Chairwoman of the House Administration Committee, which has the responsibility for evaluating any House election contest, submitted a letter to the Florida First District Court of Appeal expressing concern with the inability of the Plaintiffs to pursue their claims....

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

"A laboratory that has tested most of the nation's electronic voting systems has been temporarily barred from approving new machines after federal officials found that it was not following its quality-control procedures and could not document that it was conducting all the required tests" according to the New York Times and the EAC forgot to mention it. Ciber Inc., apparently up until last summer, was one of three Independent Test Authority (ITA) labs that were allowed to hire themselves out to voting machine manufacturers for inspection and testing and ultimate certification of those voting machines. Ciber, along with SysTest and Wyle, held a very lucrative position in what has become the boondoggle of certifying of voting systems. They get test procedures written by the vendors and a hefty check from those same vendors and, apparently in Ciber's case, they don't do the paperwork or testing required and pass the voting systems on to the voters....