John Gideon contributed to this report.
A group of Arizona voters have filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction against Sec. of State Jan Brewer to halt the purchase of electronic touch-screen voting systems in the state made by both Diebold, Inc. and Sequoia Voting Systems.
The voters announced today that the motion was being filed in time to stop the use of the Diebold TSx and Sequoia Edge II systems in the state’s upcoming 2006 elections, due to security, verifiability, and disability access problems with these systems.
In addition to the litany of security issues concerning Diebold’s TSx, details from the most severe one to date were just revealed publicly last Friday with more chilling details filed in the Oakland Tribune by Ian Hoffman today, the suit also contends the machines, being purchased and implemented in many Arizona counties for the first time this year, are accessible only for a small number of voters with disabilities.
Indeed, on Monday, Diebold issued a press release about new disabled-accessible features that the company is now making available for their line of touch-screen voting machines. The press release can be seen as a tacit agreement, of sorts, that those systems had not been previously accessible to all disabled voters as required by the federal Help America Vote Act (HAVA)?
In a press release issued this morning by VoterAction.org, a non-partisan legal advocacy group who has previously helped file similar suits in both New Mexico (against Sequoia machines) and California (against Diebold machines). The action in New Mexico eventually led to a new law banning Sequoia’s touch-screen systems in the state, and so far, 7 of the 18 counties named in the California suit have announced they will abandon Diebold’s touch-screens and use paper ballots instead this year.
One of the disabled plaintiff’s in the suit is quoted in today’s press release discussing the problem with disabled-accessibility of the Diebold and Sequoia systems:
A telephonic press conference was held this morning. The attorneys, plaintiffs and expert witnesses were all on the call to answer questions from the media. The entirety of the media in attendance was David Wagner from the Arizona Republic and John Gideon representing The BRAD BLOG. Apparently the integrity of our electoral system is not of great importance to most of the mainstream corporate media.
In response to questions about the security vulnerabilities of the Diebold and Sequoia Direct Recording Electronic (DRE, touch-screen) voting machines, computer science professor Doug Jones, of the University of Iowa, told both of the media representatives in attendance that the federal ITAs (Independent Testing Authorities) have been taken in by an amateurish veneer of security software because they do not understand software security. The ITA consists of three test labs that are supposed to inspect, test, and certify voting systems as being accurate and secure. However, they are paid for by the electronic voting machine vendors themselves, and essentially only look at what the vendors ask them. And little more. Their failure to adequately test these machines for security issues and for compliance with federal Voting System Standards has been devastating around the country.
When asked if Arizona can meet the HAVA mandates for disabled-accessibility in this year’s Arizona primary and general election, Lowell Finley of VoterAction reported that the counties affected (13 of 15 counties) can use accessible AutoMark voting machines or other voting devices that allow voters to mark paper ballots. But that the machines in question, from Diebold and Sequoia, do not fit that bill.
In an AP article about today’s lawsuit, without any information from the tele-conference, AZ Secretary of State Jan Brewer is quoted as saying, “I cannot understand for the life of me why they would want to prohibit the disabled from voting privately and independently like you and I. Every piece of equipment that we have has a paper trail.”
Of course Brewer is seemingly missing the point. And apparently purposely hoping to spin the lawsuit into something that it clearly is not. She also proves that she is very confused because accessibility for voters with disabilities has little to do with a paper trail.
This is not the first time that Brewer, and the top Election Officials in her office have been “confused” about the facts of the very voting systems they are now forcing on the citizens of Arizona. See this previous story in which Brewer and the AZ state Election Director Joe Kanefield, refused to speak with The BRAD BLOG’s Brad Friedman in a live radio interview, and otherwise offered a host of complete misinformation to AZ voters on a number of issues, live and on the air.
Friedman has since challenged Brewer to a public debate on the topic to benefit Homes for our Troops, a charity who constructs homes for the most severely disabled Iraq and Afghanistan War veterans. Brewer has yet to reply to Friedman’s offer.
We cannot understand for the life of us why she would want to hurt the most severely disabled of our American troops by refusing to help raise thousands of dollars for them.
I am constantly concerned, when I ask "what is wrong with this picture", and I try to focus, first, on the big picture, and the big picture is "destabilization of democracy".
I mean, hell, if there was a conspiracy to destabilize the American democracy, why not screw up the election process so that the people’s will would be thwarted?
I have heard it expressed by bloggers, whether troll or not I can’t remember, that Americans are f**ked up anyway, and are just interested in comfort and their vote is not much help anyway.
I tend to defend the American people, and criticize or condemn the government here that claims to represent the Americans.
I do not blame Americans for what the government does, especially when that government has nothing but contempt for the polls (a.k.a. what the people think).
But I know that if some have contempt for the American democracy, and want to destroy it, the easiest way I can see is to hit only three entities.
There are millions of entities in the United States … schools, state governments, colleges, airports, seaports, cities, towns, bridges, and on and on.
But if I were to destroy any one of the above, I would not destroy all of them.
To do that, I would destroy the vote of the people. I would have to destroy thousands of counties if I did it on a county by county basis …
But I could destroy all by destroying something in each of three voting companies that supply all of those thousands of counties.
I could destroy the sanctity of the vote. Which three entities control: Diebold, ES&S, and Sequoia.
Their IT (Information Technology) managers manage computer and software production. If I can control only these three people, I control the votes of all Americans. Something is wrong with that picture.
Think about that when you think ‘train wreck’, end of American democracy, dictatorship, and put it in your own terms.
Because you can’t just protect only your democracy, you can only protect our democracy because it is not about you … or me … it is about US.
You are county oriented in your vote in term of what you see when you go to your precinct.
But three people control what you see when you go to your precinct … in terms of election machines.
DREDD,
Did you intend to give a completely free pass to AVS and Hart Intercivic?
I DO understand your point, though. Diebold, ES&S, and Sequoia are the bigger players, by far.
That makes the other two less powerful. It doesn’t, however, make their products fundamentally any better, does it?
They all seem pretty "me too" to me.
V Kurt Bellman #2
Good question.
No, I intended to press the point that the bulls eye is very small, compared to the overall target.
Thanks for adding that insight …
We are all in this together … and lets all work to fix it and get back to democracy (implementing the will of the people, not the will of the "government").
Excuse me for some of my typos or lack of structure in thought …
… as we speak my cat is having kittens at my feet, and my feet have some blood on them … I rescued her from living on the street … and she is fond of me … more fond than I would like … nevertheless I am with her in her hour of need … one was just born … wow … how cute they are when they first breathe air … like my daughter and son who were also borne at home … and who gasped for air … like all of us should be able to so do without impairment, without fear, without feeling alone … knowing the rest of the people of earth are there for them … not against them …
anyway V … I digress … but I am with you in your effort to protect the jewels of freedom … and I expect (yea demand! that) you to perform admirably!
DREDD\Everyone Else:
I need your help!
Facts:
* I am a resident of New Jersey.
* Sequoia electronic voting touch screen systems will be installed between now and November 4 in precincts and districts throughout our state.
* Up to and including our last election we have used the old lever voting machines exclusively.
* For the past few weeks I have been reading about the string of travesties created by these horrible machines going on throughout the country.
*I have called my congressmans’ offices but can never get them on the phone. At best I get a Congressional Aide who tells me to send an email about my concerns (Their idea of email is using a webform as a contact). I did this and got no response. More specifically, when I called my Representative’s office back his Aide told me that I should wait for an answer by way of postal mail. He claimed that they are not legally permitted to respond by way of email. However, in the past I have raised concerns to my State Senators and they did, at times, respond by email. Also, I have never received any correspondence through the postal system to date neither by my Senators nor Representative. Am I getting the shaft? Why can Senators respond to voter concerns by email but Representatives claim they can’t? Am I being remiss?
* In the meantime, no one here in New Jersey has a clue about the voting trauma we are in for. As far as our communities are concerned its just another election. What’s worse is that the voting debacle hasn’t been mentioned at all on TV, radio or in any of our local or state newspapers.
Question:
In light of these circumstances, please tell me how do I\we make the voters of New Jersey aware of, and inform them of, the devastating facts surrounding our upcoming elections well before election day?
The internet is only a partial answer since there are still millions of people who either don’t have a computer or don’t use the internet even if they own a PC. This is particularly true of our senior citizens. You would be surprised as to the number of people who have never even used a computer let alone how to operate one.
I am wide open for any thoughts, ideas, experiences, answers, etc., you may have in this regard. If we know that the train is going to crash at the end of the line (Nov. 4), we desperately are in need of preventative and proactive measures to try to at least lessen our casualties.
DREDD,
By the way, congratulations on the birth of your new baby kittens. I’m sure they are just adorable.
Mr. Conrow,
Who is your Congressman? If you live in Rush Holt’s district, I can assure you, he knows all about this.
Do you know what variety of Sequoia you have in your county? If it is the older bigger Advantage machine, you have a better machine than if you have the Sequoia Edge. I said "better", not "good".
Your county should not be using Sequoia’s tabulation software to accumulate results. It has been proven by Dr. Michael Shamos, when he examined it for Pennsylvania, that the results database can be hacked from Microsoft Access, and the vote totals can be changed.
At the VERY minimum, results from individual voting machines should be tabulated outside of the Election Management software manually or using Excel or some such.
It MIGHT be worse than that. More will be learned soon. Hang in there.
V. Kurt Bellman (# 6).
My Representative is: Robert Andrews (District # 16)
My Senators are: Frank R. Lautenberg and Robert Menendez.
Sequioa Edge or Advantage Machine: My Representative’s Office is checking on that. They will get back to me (low and behold – by email!).
Sequoia’s tabulation software to accumulate results will be coming with the machines. But whether or not our election officials plans to use this software is unclear.
I appreciate your help and please keep me updated.
Thanks.
New Security Glitch Found In DIEBOLD Systems
Harry J. Conrow: Don’t forget to visit and contact Bev Harris of http://www.blackboxvoting.org , too!!!
V. Kurt Bellman (# 6).
I spoke to our Superintendent Board Of Elections Official. His name is Ray.
He told me that New Jersey will be using Sequioa Advantage Machines. They started using them in our School Board Of Elections Election held a couple of months ago. He claimed that there were only minor problems.
Sequoia’s tabulation software to accumulate results will be coming with the machines. They plan to use the bundled software and use the printouts that are generated by the machines themselves. He further said that they would do manual counts only if the machines fail. In other words, they would not be working outside of the Election Management Software. Wouldn’t that be too late? Isn’t that putting the cart before the horse?
Ray also said that he does not know Dr. Shamos. Too, he asserted that he knows nothing about what Dr. Shamos has proven in Pennsylvania. Moreover, he denied that the results database can be hacked from Microsoft Access and that the votes totals, he said, cannot be changed.
It sounds like more voting corruption to me.
What next? What do I\we do now?
On another note, Ray claimed that the Sequioa machines were massed produced in New York, not China. He further claimed that the mahines from Diebold and ES&S were also mass produced in New York, not Russia. Is he telling the truth? Or is this just another fabrication?
Finally, Ray had no comment when I told him one of these machines was known to explode like an M80. However, he admitted that these machines do overheat very easily and sometimes catch fire. He claimed that the fires are self contained. It’s scary what we voters in New Jersey have to look forward to.
Mr. Conrow,
I do understand that Dr. Shamos does NOT do state certifications for New Jersey. May I suggest that it is their loss?
"Ray" should at least know of Dr.Shamos’ work. While he does like DRE’s, he is aware of their shortcomings. Dr. Shamos, in his work for Pennsylvania, has certified successfully numerous DRE systems, including some very controversial ones. He has also allowed the Sequoia Advantage voting machines themselves to pass certification.
But Dr. Shamos (Are you SURE Ray said he didn’t know him? Wow!) has refused to certify Sequoia Advantage’s tabulation software for use in Pennsylvania because it is too unstable. During Dr. Shamos’ examination, he attempted to prove to an observer how the results database could not be changed from outside the Election Management System, and WHAM, he found exactly the opposite, that it could!
The one county in Pennsylvania that uses the Advantage, Montgomery Co., will be using the Advantages, but not the tabulation software, and will be assembling election results mannually or in a speadsheet, from each machine’s paper tape. There is no excuse for New Jersey’s failure to recognize this shortcoming, but as long as they crosscheck using each machine’s tape, they may be avoiding a problem.
I would hesitate to suggest malice. Ray may just be ignorant of what is going on over here on the other side of the Delaware.
I cannot address the site of manufacture. I simply do not know. To the best of my knowledge though, the Advantages are made domestically. I’m sure components come from all over.
Mr. Conrow:
Let me break it down like this for you:
If Dr. Michael Ian Shamos, one of the nation’s most ardent supporters of DRE voting, refuses to certify Sequoia Advantage’s tabulation software because it’s too insecure, what does that tell you?
Mr. Conrow,
For your own edification here is a Philadelphia Inquirer article about the Sequoia issue. Is this MSM enough for everybody?
Harry J. Conrow #4
On your question as to why there is no public information about voting machine problems that may cause the wrong person to be placed in office.
The media and the voting officials nationwide have decided to ignore any negative talk involving the issue of the voting machines. They covered it SCANTLY a couple of years ago, but seem to think it will cause more problems then it solves to alert people to problems!
Or, they have been told to BLACK OUT any mention of problems. This includes media outlets, politicians, and voting officials. There are only a handful of officials who have tried to ensure a fair and open election. They are being harrased and threatened!
Don’t bother calling your local news organizations, because the best you’ll be able to do is talk to a low level reporter who may be completely simpathetic to your cause, and maybe even pass on your information, but nothing will happen!
If you want to get any information to the people in your district, you will need to go door-to-door or stand on a street corner with a sign or pamphlet!
V. Kurt Bellman (#s 11-13)
Mr. Bellman, I was mistaken. Phyllis Pearl is New Jersey’s Superintendent of Elections, not Ray. Ray is the Director of Elections. I was unable to speak to either of them on Friday because they were in meetings all day. However, I spoke to Tom Castellano, Administrator of Elections, on Friday. He told me that all Sequoia Advantages and their tabulation software is certified by employees of Sequoia. Is it legal for the vendor to supply the machines, certify the machines, certify and pass the memory cards, and also certify the tabulation software? Isn’t this a conflict of interest? Is there anything that can be done about this? Please respond to these questions.
Yes, not having Dr. Michael Ian Shamos doing our state certifications is catastrophic to the voters of New Jersey. I don’t know yet whether or not Phyllis has ever heard of Dr. Shamos. I will ask her on Monday along with other relevant questions including the issue of instability in the tabulation software and crosschecking using machine’s tape. I will keep you posted.
In the meantime, Tom said that he didn’t know anything about the tabulation software being unstable.
Thank you for helping me with this. Also, thanks for the Philadelphia Inquirer article, “Voting software vulnerable to hackers.” It was informative.
V. Kurt Bellman (#s 11-13)
Mr. Bellman, I was mistaken. Phyllis Pearl is New Jersey’s Superintendent of Elections, not Ray. Ray is the Director of Elections. I was unable to speak to either of them on Friday because they were in meetings all day. However, I spoke to Tom Castellano, Administrator of Elections, on Friday. He told me that all Sequoia Advantages and their tabulation software is certified by employees of Sequoia. Is it legal for the vendor to supply the machines, certify the machines, certify and pass the memory cards, and also certify the tabulation software? Isn’t this a conflict of interest? Is there anything that can be done about this? Please respond to these questions.
Yes, not having Dr. Michael Ian Shamos doing our state certifications is catastrophic to the voters of New Jersey. I don’t know yet whether or not Phyllis has ever heard of Dr. Shamos. I will ask her on Monday along with other relevant questions including the issue of instability in the tabulation software and crosschecking using machine’s tape. I will keep you posted.
In the meantime, Tom said that he didn’t know anything about the tabulation software being unstable.
Thank you for helping me with this. Also, thanks for the Philadelphia Inquirer article, “Voting software vulnerable to hackers.” It was informative.
V. Kurt Bellman (#s 11-13)
Mr. Bellman, I was mistaken. Phyllis Pearl is New Jersey’s Superintendent of Elections, not Ray. Ray is the Director of Elections. I was unable to speak to either of them on Friday because they were in meetings all day. However, I spoke to Tom Castellano, Administrator of Elections, on Friday. He told me that all Sequoia Advantages and their tabulation software is certified by employees of Sequoia. Is it legal for the vendor to supply the machines, certify the machines, certify and pass the memory cards, and also certify the tabulation software? Isn’t this a conflict of interest? Is there anything that can be done about this? Please respond to these questions.
Yes, not having Dr. Michael Ian Shamos doing our state certifications is catastrophic to the voters of New Jersey. I don’t know yet whether or not Phyllis has ever heard of Dr. Shamos. I will ask her on Monday along with other relevant questions including the issue of instability in the tabulation software and crosschecking using machine’s tape. I will keep you posted.
In the meantime, Tom said that he didn’t know anything about the tabulation software being unstable.
Thank you for helping me with this. Also, thanks for the Philadelphia Inquirer article, “Voting software vulnerable to hackers.” It was informative.
Larry Bergan (# 14)
You’re telling me that we have a hopelessly impossible situation. We all might as well pack up our things and go right now. Democracy along with fair and just elections has died and there is no way in the world we can regain it.
In other words, a New World Order has taken over our country. A Corporate-Political dictatorship is holding America hostage and for ransom. Without fair elections any freedoms we may have had, both real and imagined, will all soon completely vanish. They are disappearing and fading by the day. This is not an illusion but tragically the majority of America can’t even see the truth when it falls right on top of them.
It won’t be long before entire groups or classes of people begin disappearing. If we are not seen as part of this New World Order, we too will eventually be among the missing. The only problem is that no one will notice or even care for that matter.
Mr. Conrow, you wrote a sobering but true statement. People just don’t realize how important TRUST in the voting system (or anything else for that matter) is!
We’ll have to see if the New York Times and Wall Street Journal articles covered on this site die or not, but based on the fact these papers are STILL giving equal weight to complete nonsense from officials protecting corporations right to sequester voting information, we’re screwed!
V. Kurt Bellman (#s 11-13)
Larry Bergan (#s 14 & 19)
Ray Coxe, New Jersey Director of Elections, said today that Election Support and Services certifies the Sequoia Advantages. He also said that the Superintendent of Elections Office certifies the tabulation and Election Management System software. Too, he stated that federal and state officials approves the overall certification for the machines review and assignment to precincts throughout the state.
I asked Ray if he heard about Dr. Shamos’ interview and the article you provided me a link to "a Philadelphia Inquirer Article" titled "Voting Software Vulnerable To Hackers." Ray’s response was that our Sequoia Advantages use different software and memory chips than what they use in Pennsylvania. He concluded therefore that our tabulation software is secure where Pennsylvania’s isn’t.
I’m not at all convinced. In my previous conversation with Ray, he said that he never heard of Dr. Shamos. Today, he said he knew about Dr. Shamos, the article in the Philadelphia Inquirer, and the knowledge of how our memory chips and software are "different" from the Sequoia Advantages in Pennsylvania. Conclusion: I was lied to. Question: Why was I lied to?
Moreover, whenever I speak to Ray and bring up Dr. Shamos’ name, he instantly gets edgy and immediately goes on the defensive. What is he so nervous about? These are clear indications of someone who is hiding something. But what is he hiding?
It seems to me that we have no independent certifier in place (most other states have Dr. Shamos). Election Support and Services is also directly tied to our Superintendent of Elections Office. They in turn are hired and assigned by our federal and state government officials. We therefore end up with a threeway "conflict-of-interest". Our elections are therefore biased and rigged from start to finish. Does anybody have any answers to this dilemma?
By the way, Phyllis Pearl is New Jersey’s Superintendent of Elections. She claims that she never heard of Dr. Michael Ian Shamos. The same thing Ray Coxe said last week when I spoke to him. But today suddenly Ray knows about the good Doctor? I get a very uncomfortable feeling having these people in charge of our elections in New Jersey.
Harry J. Conrow #20
I just read some of Dr. Shamos’s writings on his support of DRE’s and I wouldn’t want to admit I ever knew him either.
In any case, welcome to crazy world!
Harry J. Conrow #5
I did not intend to ignore your questions, and am glad to see other bloggers helped out.
We have been aware of these issues for a long time and are not giving up.
But, to be real, we do face a very real problem, and it is earthshaking in scope.
Keep informing others, stay aware of The Silence of The Goats (election officials), and stay tuned.
The blogs are the last bastion of speaking truth to power now that the MSM is loosing its way.