Entries tagged as voting machine
Thursday, April 9. 2009
The state of California has made allowances for Instant Runoff Voting Software three times. First the state allowed San Francisco to knowingly purchase uncertified software for the sake of instant runoff voting, and then the state went on to grant 2 exemptions to use that uncertified software. And the vendor, Sequoia still hasn't gotten its crappy software certified yet. Then the hippocracy and irony come to play. California sued ES&S for selling a new version of the Automark ballot marking device, a federally certified machine but not yet examined by the state of California. Voting-machine company settles suit with state Wire Report 3/20/09 ...A voting-machine manufacturer has agreed to pay California $3.2 million to settle a lawsuit claiming it sold unauthorized machines to San Francisco and four other counties. ...In a statement, ES&S said the A200 had been approved for federal use and was “inadvertently deployed” in California. The machines have since been authorized.
ES&S must have really sorry lawyers if they can get beaned for $3.2 million for machines the state ultimately certifies and that were already federally certified. Especially when the state knowingly and deliberately allowed the city of San Francisco to purchase and then use uncertified software to tally highly complex elections such as instant runoff voting. Why did California allow all of the exceptions for San Francisco's new Sequoia software? Because its so darn hard to count IRV ballots, especially if you have a few hundred thousand. For Instant Runoff Voting, the standards suddenly don't matter: election integrity, requirements for voting systems, and transparency all get thrown away. Because its more important to give the image that IRV "is as easy as 1-2-3" than it is to hold all voting systems to high standards and protect all votes equally. Another waiver issued for voting system New voting equipment The City is using under a $12.6 million, four-year contract has yet to be fully certified by the state, which nonetheless gave San Francisco a waiver to use the system again in May. San Francisco is the only municipality in California that uses ranked-choice voting, so the software it is using, from Oakland-based Sequoia Voting Systems, has been modified. San Francisco previously used machines from Nebraska-based Election Systems & Software, which never received certification, only waivers. It was later determined that the most recent version of the equipment was unauthorized. With the Sequoia equipment, Secretary of State Debra Bowen issued a one-time waiver last year that allowed San Francisco to use the modified version of the software for the November election. However, the Secretary of State’s Office issued another one-time waiver March 5 allowing The City to use the modified software in May. Although there are no local races on the spring ballot, voters will use the Sequoia system, according to Elections Department Director John Arntz. “We’re confident that the system is counting votes accurately,” he said. — John Upton
Ah yes, there's that old saw - "We're confident... blah blah blah... " thanks, I've heard that crap before, and finally, after the debacle where 4,400 votes were lost on machines that officials were oh so confident in, we in North Carolina passed a law. We passed a law that sets high standards for ALL voting systems and to ALL voting vendors to protect ALL of the votes.
Friday, October 31. 2008
In an article by Todd Weiss at Computerworld, Are design issues to blame for vote 'flipping' in touch-screen machines? - a Diebold spokesman admits that his company isn't designing or improving any touchscreen voting machines. He notes the growing popularity of paper ballots across the US. "Since new touch-screen machines aren't being designed, no usability studies are being done to improve existing designs, he said. Of course Riggal, like makes sure to blame voters for the problems with touch screen machines. What about a possible Oprah effect? Oprah may have helped put another nail in touch screen voting's coffin - when she voted yesterday, electronically, the machine didn't record her vote for President at first. "It didn't record my presidential vote." Charles Stewart III over at Election Updates says that DRES (touch screens) are not gone for good, that "While DREs are declining, they aren’t going to disappear..." Well, I am still hoping that our entire country ends up ditching touch screen voting and goes to simpler more reliable and more transparent systems.
Thursday, October 30. 2008
A much needed stress reliever. Enjoy. Kim Zetter, the award winning journalist at Wired News has this treasure. At first I thought it was a joke, but this is a serious video, showing Mr. Rogers voting on a lever machine. This is so nostalgic. Sigh. Here's the Wired News Story Mr. Rogers Has a Voting Machine Mishap By Kim Zetter  October 30, 2008 Tired of electronic voting machines and all of the new problems they've created? Take a nostalgic trip back to 1974 as Mr. Rogers demonstrates how to cast a ballot on a 30-year-old mechanical lever voting machine and experiences a little glitch.... more at the link
Monday, October 27. 2008
Demos has a warning about provisional ballots. Provisional ballots are conditional ballots issued to voters who have registration problems. Some election officials like to describe provisional ballots as "Fail Safe". Demos warns that many states reject tens of thousands of these ballots. What many voters do not realize is that provisional ballots are not counted on election night, have to be approved before they can count, could go uncounted for several days after the election,and in some states a high rate are rejected. Provisional Ballot Problems Loom As 2008 Election Approaches, New Report Finds Oct. 27 NEW YORK, Oct 27, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Some States Reject Tens of Thousands of Provisional Votes in 2006; Provisional Ballots May Play a Significant Role in 2008 Provisional ballots could play a significant role in the 2008 Election, frustrating voters and leading to possible post-election wrangling, according to a study published this week by the non-partisan public policy center Demos. "Provisional Ballots: Where to Watch in 2008" ( http://demos.org/pubs/provisionalballot_brief.pdf) identifies eight states where there is significant concern over provisional ballot implementation and the high risk of many of those ballots going uncounted in this election. ...High rates of provisional ballot usage and rejection suggest persistent shortcomings in election administration. More than one in three of the nearly 2 million provisional ballots cast in 2004 election were ultimately rejected.
Voters should do everything they can to get a regular ballot, and that means making sure they are registered to vote, clearing up any registration problems before voting, and voting at the right polling place on election day. Do your best to get a regular ballot, but if the only way you can vote is by provisional, then accept it. If you have a voting problem at on election day, don't leave anything to chance, get help - call 1-866-OUR-VOTE.
Sunday, October 26. 2008
The New York Times has an editorial about North Caroline's confusing straight ticket voting law today: NY Times October 27, 2008 Editorial This Year’s Butterfly Ballot
In Florida’s “butterfly ballot” debacle of 2000, voters in Palm Beach County were so confused by the odd layout that many appear to have voted for the wrong candidate by mistake. At the time, there was a lot of talk about improving ballot design. Eight years later there are still far too many badly done ballots. North Carolina may have the country’s worst. It is already causing confusion with early voters. And if the presidential race is close, it could change the outcome.
Like a number of states, North Carolina allows its voters to choose a straight-party ticket. To do that, voters can mark one box and cast votes for all of the nominees of their preferred party. But North Carolina’s ballot has an unexpected twist. Even if a voter checks the straight-party box, he or she must vote separately for a presidential candidate.
...more at the link
North Carolina, October 27. 2008 NCVVNewswire/NC Coalition for Verified Voting
The State Board of Elections has responded to national concerns about NC's straight ticket voting problem by sending an advisory to all 100 County Boards of Elections. The email was sent Wednesday, at 5 PM 10/22. The email urges all County Board of Elections to have poll workers give handouts about straight ticket voting to all voters showing up to vote. It is not clear that all counties are complying.
Some North Carolina Counties are choosing not to comply with this directive. And the voters will suffer as a result. It is important that every single county, every single polling place - in early voting and on election day in North Carolina comply.
In North Carolina, straight ticket voting does not count for President. Many voters do not realize this and as a result, our state has one of the highestundervote rates for President in the US. In 2004 we lost 92000 votes for President, and in 2000 we lost 75,000 votes for Presidentbecause of this counter-intuitive law. See NC Voters' page on Straight Ticket Confusion
Below is the email sent to all counties, are they all complying? From: Johnnie McLean [mailto:Johnnie.McLean@ncmail.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 5:07 PMTo: Directors.boeCc: ElectTechs.Sboe;
Subject: IMPORTANT INFORMATION In order to ensure that all voters receive the information about President/Vice President being voted separately from all other offices you are directed to reproduce the following message (printed four to a page to be cut) and hand/mail to each voter when the ballot/voting equipment is assigned to the voter. Any color paper may be used to duplicate this information. This measure is in addition to the verbal instructions the pollworkers are to provide
****************************************************************************************************************NOTICE: E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties by an authorized state official.
***************************************************************************************************************
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties by anauthorized county official. If you have received this communication in error , please do not distribute it. Please notify the sender by E-mail at the address shown and delete the original message. [Attachment]
PLEASE NOTE:
A "straight party" vote does not include the office of president or
any nonpartisan race or issue. You must vote for president/vice
president separately from the other offices. Nonpartisan offices
and issues also must be voted separately. More detailed instructions are
on your ballot. For paper ballots, be sure to turn the ballot over.
#
Background information
North Carolina Straight Ticket Confusion - Voting Straight Ticket in North Carolina does NOT include the Presidential contest. NC Coalition for Verified Voting 10/17/08
How Bad is North Carolina’s Ballot Flaw? The Numbers Say, Pretty Bad By Lawrence Norden & Margeret Chen, Brennan Center for Justice 10/21/08
It May Be Harder to Vote in Swing States By: David Rosenfeld Miller-McCune 10/22/08
Tuesday, October 14. 2008
The good news. San Francisco gets to use their new voting machines. Results should be fairly quick. The San Francisco Department of Elections received good news Tuesday: Secretary of State Debra Bowen approved its optical scan voting machines for ranked-choice races in next month's election. The really really bad news. San Francisco should NOT use their new voting machines. Results may be quicker than counting by hand, but there is reason to believe the results can't be trusted. John Gideon, Co Director of Voters Unite delivers the bad news, (which is actually admitted in the Secretary of State's report): http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting_systems/sequoia/system40/2008-10-14_system40_approval.pdf
The approval is only for San Francisco in November. The report also says
that a Source Code Review found that previously reported security
architecture issues remain issues in version 4.0. They also found no
effective mechanism to protect the integrity of data transferred between
components and a potential vulnerability for SQL injection attacks, and
a user can exploit a system weakness to gain access to the database
without going through WinEDS. They found several other vulnerabilities.
Item #25 on Page 8 is especially puzzling. "By order of the Secretary of
State, voting systems approved for use in California shall comply with
all applicable state and federal requirements, including, but not
limited to, those voting system requirements as set forth in the
California Elections Code and the Help America Vote Act of 2002 and
those requirements incorporated by reference in the Help America Vote
Act of 2002. Further voting systems shall also comply with all state and
federal voting system guidelines, standards, regulations and requirement
that derive authority from or are promulgated pursuant to and in
furtherance of the California Elections Code and the Help American Vote
Act of 2002 or other applicable state or federal law when appropriate."
The Sequoia System 4.0 cannot be certified as meeting the above
requirements. Testing at the federal level had not even started as of
May 19. In fact they were still preparing the test plan at that time.
HAVA requires accessibility yet the state has waived that by allowing it
not to be tested. HAVA requires accuracy yet the state has ignored that
requirement by ignoring the fact that iBeta has not yet tested for
accuracy of the system.
Since May when the state of Washington began testing for provisional
certification the system version has changed from WinEDS 4.0.108 to
4.0.116 and this, again, is without a majority of testing taking place.
How many more version changes are going to be made before Nov. 4?
--
John Gideon
Co-Executive Director
VotersUnite.Org
www.votersunite.org
So, San Franciscans, still happy about those voting machines? Recent reports of problems (serious ones) with Sequoia machines October 3. 2008 NJ Judge Suppresses Report on Voting Machines' Security New Jersey Superior Court Judge Linda Feinberge has prohibited the scheduled release of a report on the security and accuracy of the Sequoia AVC Advantage voting machine. October 2. 2008 Test Shows Palm Beach Voting Machines Not Accurate! Tests run yesterday in Palm Beach County Florida show there is a real problem with their voting machines. The optical scan machines, made by Sequoia, can't count the same ballots the same way two times in a row! September 22. 2008 New York. Sequoia's Sinking Ship - voting machines still not certified Even Sequoia's disabled accessible optical scanner is easily hacked - the old fashioned way by physical stuffing through a gap in the ballot box. On August 18, Rady Ananda showed how you could stuff the Sequoia optical scanners like a Thanksgiving turkey. September 14. 2008 Pierce County Instant Runoff Voting System has new bug, says WA SOS - may affect San Francisco This email from the Secretary of State of Washington outlines another bug in the new IRV voting system for Pierce County. It affects "rank choice voting" (IRV/Instant Runoff) only.
|
