Monday, November 20. 2006
There is a piece in the WAPO today recommending Vote By Mail.
It was written by the Secretary of State of Oregon, where Vote By Mail is used.
The article makes some serious claims -
-"proven to be fraud-free"
-gave Oregon turnout that was "among the highest in the nation"
-is "about 30% less expensive than polling place elections"
A Better Way to Vote
By Bill Bradbury
Sunday, November 19, 2006; Page B07
SALEM, Ore. -- "This month, as controversies emerged in other parts of the
country over polling place problems and malfunctioning touch-screen
machines, we here in Oregon prepared to swear in a new crop of elected
officials with nary a question about the legitimacy of the count or the
functioning of our electoral process. We accomplished this with a turnout
on Nov. 7 that was, once again, among the highest in the nation. How? With
Vote by Mail....
The system has proven to be fraud-free..."
There's a huge difference between "we verify signatures" to "proven to be
fraud-free". Instead, the fraud happens unseen.
VBM is not free from fraud in the form of voter coercion.
VBM uses central count optical scanners - which means all of the eggs are in one basket for each county. More votes in one place = greater risk.
"With voting by mail, Oregon's turnout is consistently among the highest of
any state without same-day voter registration..."
Could the additional turnout really be due to more engaged votes?Or could it be that those same voters who didn't care enough to vote before, who don't watch or read the news, who don't participate in our government - those same "no shows" found that their ballot was worth something to them - maybe a pair of jeans, or $50.00 or a bottle of liquor or a 6 pack of beer?
All the bad guy needs to do is get the person to sign the form and then they can vote the ballot as they choose.
"Voting by mail is also a cost-effective way to run elections, costing
taxpayers about 30 percent less than polling-place elections."
Elections do cost alot of money. But if the best way to vote costs more, than
I am for the best way to vote. VBM lacks transparency and secrecy of the ballot.
I haven't see the cost reports, but I have to say transparency trumps the cost.
"80 percent of voters across the political spectrum prefer it to voting at polling places...
The foundation of our democracy rests upon the administration of free, fair and highly participatory elections.
It's critical that Americans have faith in the security of their vote. Here in Oregon, with voting by mail, we have achieved those things and been able to assure voters that their votes count."
Its important that voters have REASON to have faith in the security of their vote.
That means having a secret ballot and votes counted publicly.
Part of the VBM movement was an effort to starve off the touchscreen/DRE vendors.
Now with all of the blowback against touchscreens this year, we hardly need to sacrifice
precinct style voting. Once the precincts are eliminated, it would be very hard to get them
restored.
Precinct voting allows for us to cast our ballot secretly, have it counted publicly (to a degree that needs to continue to improve) and it reduces the risks to our votes by limiting the number of votes counted in one location.
Lets continue to work towards increased transparency and accountability,
and not solve our problems with another problem.
Lets not lose the gains we have made so far.
Tuesday, November 7. 2006
New voting machines pose Election Day problems
Mississippi Sun
Voters at several South Mississippi precincts reported problems with the new touch-screen machines as voting got under way in midterm elections this morning.
At Gulfport Little Theater and Biloxi Community Center, for example, voters were handed paper ballots because workers were unable to make to the machines work.
And at Margaret Sherry Library on Popps Ferry Road, three of seven touch-screen machines were working while at D'Iberville Community Center, just four of 13 were working.
Votes cast with the paper ballots will be counted, assured David Blount, communications director with Secretary of State Eric Clark’s office in Jackson.
Voter smashes touch-screen machine in Allentown
The Morning Call
A man who reportedly believed Republicans were conspiring to steal today's election entered an Allentown polling site, signed in and proceeded to smash the screen of one of the electronic voting machines with a metal cat paperweight, poll volunteers said.
Michael Young, 43, of 375 Auburn St., will be charged with felony criminal mischief and tampering with voting machines, according to Ronald Manescu, chief of investigations for Allentown police.
Police gave no motive, but a source said Young, a registered Independent, believed Republicans had conspired to win the election by using electronic ballots. This is the first time electronic machines are being widely used in a Pennsylvania general election.
"He smashed it with the cat's ears," said volunteer Jim Govostis, who watched the incident unfold at Raker Center, a nursing home owned by Good Shepherd, around 12:30 p.m.
Young, who brought the paperweight with him, then sat down, hung his head and waited for police, who arrested him without incident.
"He came in here very peaceably and showed his ID," said volunteer Gladys Pezoldt, "then he got on the machine and just snapped…He was immediately remorseful. When the police came, he got up, turned around and put his hands behind his back." Using a metal cat was a nice touch. Bricks and hammers are so unimaginative.
Vote by mail is the answer
Senator Ron Wyden
As already reported voting difficulties continue to frustrate voters in another decisive election, U.S. Senator Ron Wyden renewed his proposal to simplify the way Americans vote. Wyden has introduced legislation to provide funds to help states adopt Vote by Mail election systems, such as Oregon's.
"The great Yogi Berra said it best: 'It's Déjà vu all over again.' Except instead of the boys of October, we're talking about the long lines and broken machines of November." Wyden said. "Allegations of election fraud and voter suppression were once rarities, today they're business as usual for the American voter. It's time to stop throwing taxpayer dollars at a broken system. Oregonians have a solution--Vote by Mail."
For more than a decade Oregonians have been successfully voting by mail. Up to three weeks before Election Day, ballots are sent to all registered voters, giving busy families time to research their votes and carefully mark their ballots, which are then either dropped in the mailbox or delivered to secure drop boxes at libraries, county offices and other convenient locations. Trained election officials then match the signature on each ballot against the signature on each voter's registration card, before processing the vote.
The transparency of Vote by Mail eliminates virtually all fraud, while addressing many traditional voting challenges:
- Vote by Mail eliminates poll problems--there are no long lines, polls to open late or even confusion about where to vote.
- Vote by Mail eliminates voter roll issues and the need for provisional ballots--ballots are mailed only to registered voters at their official address. Those who do not receive a ballot have ample time to resolve the issue with election officials.
- Vote by Mail virtually eliminates voter fraud--no vote is processed or counted until a trained election official is satisfied that the signature on the ballot matches the signature on the voter's registration card.
- Vote by Mail reduces the risk of voter intimidation--a 2003 study of Oregon voters showed that groups--like the elderly--who are most vulnerable to coercion prefer Vote by Mail.
- Vote by Mail creates a paper trail.
- Vote by Mail increases voter turnout--by eliminating the need to stand in line at the polling place, voting becomes convenient for hourly wage employees and other working families. Oregon's consistently ranks among the top five states in voter participation.
- Vote by Mail encourages educated voters--receiving ballots weeks in advance, gives voters an opportunity to research issues and deliberate in a way that is not possible in a voting booth.
- Vote by Mail saves taxpayer dollars--because there is no longer a need to transport equipment to polling stations and to hire and train poll workers, Oregon has reduced its election-related costs by 30 percent since implementing Vote by Mail. In September of this year, building on the success of Vote by Mail in his own state, Wyden teamed up with Senators John Kerry and Barack Obama to sponsor legislation to help other states implement their own version of VBM. Wyden's bill creates a $110 million, three-year grant program to provide funds to states to help offset the cost of adopting VBM election systems. States have the option of adopting VBM statewide, within a group of selected counties (or municipalities in states where elections are overseen at this level), or even in a single county or municipality.
"Vote by Mail works. This legislation gives states funds they can use to make the transition away from traditional voting methods that have led to so many problems, so many concerns and so little confidence in the American election system.," Wyden said.
CHAOS: Problems worsen, Dems seek voting extension
Denver Post
On a day already rife with computer glitches, long lines, and legal appeals to extend voting in Denver, provisional ballots are now running out at some Denver voting centers.
Democratic party leaders are in court this afternoon, seeking a two-hour extension for voting in Denver, due to massive computer problems which have kept many from casting their vote.
Party spokesman Brian Mason said the motion was in response to "the huge problems in Denver this morning."
The problems began right at 7 a.m. as computer problems at the voter-check in stations bogged down, creating a bottleneck in the first hour of voting as a rush to the polls overloaded the system.
Power failures slowed voting at some locations, Denver Election Commission spokesman Alton Dillard said.
Voting machines had backup power and weren't affected, but laptop computers used to verify voter registration were knocked out, forcing workers to call the central office for the information, he said. Power has ALWAYS been the Achilles' heel of these systems.
Mark Coles, a computer technician with the Denver Election Commission, said the election system had to be split onto three separate servers to handle the backlog.
"It's just like traffic on (Interstate) 25," Coles said. "It's as if we are building two more I-25s right next to it" to ease the traffic congestion. And you didn't forsee this??!!
But the fix did not come in time to help some voters who hoped to vote before heading to work.
"We will not get to vote today," said a frustrated Lauren Brockman as he left the Botanic Gardens.
At Corona Presbyterian Church, voters were being told to expect about a two-hour wait as they snaked around the building.
"All my friends, I told them to vote between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m.," said Rob Weil the election judge supervisor at Corona. "But if it keeps being this slow, this line will stay." Remember how election officials and vendors told us that e-voting would "speed" things up?
Voting problems reported in NJ
WABC
The US Attorney for New Jersey has dispatched investigators to run down complaints of voting machine problems which are preventing voters from casting ballots for GOP Senate hopeful Tom Kean, Jr.
The counsel for the NJ Republican State Committee, Mark Sheridan, says he has four sworn affidavits and has received more than two dozen calls alleging that some of New Jersey's electronic voting machines were either "pre-voted" for Democratic incumbant Bob Menendez, or were otherwise inoperable when voters sought to cast votes for Kean.
Sheridan says complaints had come in from five NJ counties, some of the polling places affected are in Passaic, Paterson, Scotch Plains and North Bergen, though Sheridan refused to be more specific, citing a fear of depressing voter turnout in the affected locations.
New rules, machines frazzle poll workers
Associated Press
Programming errors and inexperience dealing with electronic voting machines frustrated poll workers in hundreds of precincts Tuesday, delaying voters in several states and leaving some with little choice but to use paper ballots instead.
In Cleveland, voters rolled their eyes as election workers fumbled with new touchscreen machines that they couldn't get to start properly until about 10 minutes after polls opened.
"We got five machines — one of them's got to work," said Willette Scullank, a trouble shooter from the Cuyahoga County, Ohio, elections board. Gee, wouldn't that make a great epitaph for our democracy?
In Indiana's Marion County, about 175 of 914 precincts turned to paper because poll workers didn't know how to run the machines, said Marion County Clerk Doris Ann Sadler. She said it could take most of the day to fix all of the machine-related issues.
Election officials in Delaware County, Ind., extended voting hours because voters initially couldn't cast ballots in 75 precincts. County Clerk Karen Wenger said the cards that activate the push-button machines were programmed incorrectly but the problems were fixed by late morning.
Pennsylvania's Lebanon County also extended polling hours because a programming error forced some voters to cast paper ballots. Is it just me, or could we have used paper ballots and saved about $100 million on machines that don't work?
At some Broward County, Fla., precincts, electronic ballots were mixed up and, in one case, a poll worker unintentionally wiped the electronic ballot activators.
In Utah County, Utah, workers failed to properly encode some of the cards that voters use to bring up touchscreen ballots.
Rep. Harold Ford (news, bio, voting record), the Democratic Senate candidate in Tennessee, claimed a polling place in Jackson shut down because its machines weren't working, but Tennessee election coordinator Brook Thompson said he knew only of typical election morning problems starting machines.
In Illinois, some voters found the new equipment cumbersome.
"People seem to be very confused about how to use the new system," said Bryan Blank, a 33-year-old librarian from Oak Park, Ill. "There was some early morning disarray."
But voting equipment companies said they hadn't seen anything beyond the norm and blamed the problems largely on human error. Once again, we hear this attempt at a Jedi mind trick. So, let me restate what should be obvious:
COMPUTER VOTING SYSTEMS MUST BE DESIGNED FOR USE BY HUMAN BEINGS WITH NO COMPUTER EXPERIENCE. IF YOUR SYSTEM FAILS WHEN USED BY ORDINARY HUMANS, YOU, THE DESIGNER ARE AT FAULT, NOT THE USERS.
Monday, November 6. 2006
Get Ready for the Glitches
Time
Even before it starts tomorrow morning, the 2006 election is already shaping up as one massive lab experiment in how we cast and count 80 million votes or more. When you figure that most of us will have the chance to make anywhere from 20 to 25 choices at polling stations — on statewide races, local elections, constitutional amendments, local options and your county library and community college board elections — we are talking about tracking and tallying upwards of 2 billion different decisions. It's a wonder we can do it at all.
But it's not the sheer numbers that make 2006 unlike any election in the past. There are new legal and technical requirements this year, which could stretch some parts of this count well into the week.
For the first time this year, nearly 40% of Americans will vote by electronic device; nearly all of us will have our votes counted that way. That alone will cause some delays: voters won't all know how to operate them, poll workers will not be all fully trained, and, if recent primary voting is any indication, there are going to be technical problems. As states and counties certified their new devices in October — and it's not uncommon for multiple types of machines to be used in almost every state — there were reports of glitches, ballot errors, machines communicating in the wrong languages with voters, and continued doubts about chain of custody in the wake of multiple reports that most of the machines can be easily hacked. More than 26 states have adopted some kind of verifiable audit trail so voters can check their choices against the machine, but many states lack a paper trail of any kind, contending that it's not necessary or the printers are too expensive. Guam, at least, isn't taking chances: On Saturday, the American protectorate's governor signed a bill suspending the use of the electronic devices next week. There will almost certainly be dozens of real-time reports from polling places of machine malfunctions; each one will have to be run down and checked. Let the recount begin.
Thursday, November 2. 2006
The Two Faces of Diebold
Rebecca Abrahams
In September, 2003 Linda Lamone, the Administrator of Maryland's State Board of Elections and President of the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) hands over a critical study on the security of the Diebold Election Systems machines that count all of Maryland's votes.
Between the time that the State of Maryland commissioned the highly respected Scientific Applications International Corporation (SAIC) to evaluate the effectiveness and security of their electronic voting machines and the time that the study is made public, critical pieces of information have been edited, omitted and, in some cases words added, to fundamentally alter the original meaning of the report's conclusions.
Enter the world of electronic voting machines, the "cure" to hanging and dimpled chad.
It is a seamy world of secrecy, proprietary software, partisan executives "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President", politicians asking programmers to design software to flip vote totals, and lots and lots of money.
Please read the entire report
And it is a world of completely inconsistent realities. Diebold and the other manufacturers insist that their machines are safe and secure yet every single cyber security expert and computer scientist has, for years, been screaming into an empty wilderness of media attention, that . . .
The machines can be hacked, by the implanting of malicious code, at the factory.
The machines can be hacked during transport from the factory.
The machines can be hacked while on "Sleepovers" before the election.
The machines can be hacked (in 1 minute with a .50cent mini bar key) during the election, and
These machines can be hacked, at the tabulator, after the election.
What makes this SAIC report, called "The Pentagon Papers of Electronic Voting" by some computer experts, so important is that:
1. It shows, in black and white, that what Diebold says to election officials and voters across the country is not the truth.
2. It shows that there are virtually no security protocols in place for certain Diebold machines and that the recommended security protocols were purposely removed.
3. It shows that the analyzed Diebold machines were not functional nor secure for use in elections and raises serious doubts that they are ready for the November 7, 2006 Midterm elections. Long time readers will know that we have been saying here all along.
We have repeatedly shown that Diebold lies to the public and to election officials. We have shown over and over that Diebold "bends reality" to its own way of thinking. We have said dozens of times that security wasn't done poorly, it pretty much wasn't done at all.
We have also pointed out that these machines have been "certified" despite all these problems, demonstrating unequivocally that the certification process is a complete joke.
Wednesday, November 1. 2006
E-Voting Still Stirring Controversy as Mid-Term Elections Approach
E-commerce Times
According to published reports, Diebold Election Systems quietly replaced flawed components in several thousand voting machines last year. The repairs were aimed at fixing a so-called "screen-freeze" problem discovered three years earlier. The state's Board of Elections is considering whether Diebold's failure to inform the board of those changes is a violation of the company's contract.
The case involves machines in Maryland, where, according to published reports, Diebold Latest News about Diebold Election Systems quietly replaced flawed components in several thousand voting machines last year. The repairs were aimed at fixing a so-called "screen-freeze" problem discovered three years earlier.
Now, the state's Board of Elections is considering whether Diebold's failure to inform the board of those changes and what brought them about represents a violation of the company's contract with the state. In North Carolina, failure to inform the BoE of bugs or other flaws is a CRIME.
Diebold reportedly replaced motherboards on some 4,700 machines in a handful of Maryland counties. Maryland has been at the forefront of a movement to create broad access to e-voting systems and as a result has found itself in the spotlight of controversy. 4,700 motherboards!
This is a MASSIVE failure.
|
