Navigation
Topics
Log In
Log Out
:
Special Search
New Today
New This Week
Advanced Search
Tree View
Your Account
Edit Profile
Register
Forgot Password
Tools
Help/Instructions
Policies
CLICK STATE TO SEE:
"WATCH LIST"
Marked with: 
"OPEN & HONEST"
Marked with: 
...
|
| Input requested on lay of the land in... |
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4186
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 8:53 am: | 
|
Input requested on lay of the land in state politics re: election reform
Black Box Voting goes local a lot. We do field work at the local level. We get to know public officials at the local level. As a 501c(3) we don't focus on lobbying (you have to be a 501c(4) for that.) We currently have a non-lobbying-related project that depends on knowing the political landscape in state and local jurisdictions.
We have a project relating to election reform education -- very short timeline, very high probability of payout on moving the ball forward in a significant way.
I would like to invite everyone to submit their perceptions of the political lay of the land for public officials in your state and county.
Which ones are the most approachable? Which ones typically impeded election reform? Which ones are on the right committees but seem to be on the fence?
We're not talking federal. State and local only, please:
I'll start with the obvious:
Ohio: Senator Theresa Fedor -- strong record on reform
California: Senator Debra Bowen -- gutsy record on election reform, chairs Senate Elections Committee
Washington: Toby Nixon -- generally approachable on reform, some concerns about his commitment to oversight by citizens.
This one's important. If you can provide phone numbers for each of their offices, plus fax, mailing address and email so much the better. Obviously, we are working on this in-house as well, but the more eyes on this prize the better.
No one knows the local political terrain better than the locals.
If you have a working relationship with a public official that you feel "gets it" please contact Jim March, 425-793-1030 or jim@blackboxvoting.org - he has a useful tool he can provide for you privately. |
James Michonski
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jmichons
Post Number: 5
Registered: 12-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 9:52 am: |
|
In Virginia: I emailed the Governor about concerns with people and processes as well as the voting equipment. I received a letter back from Viola O. Baskerville, Secretary of Administration (804-786-1201 I think this is the Governor's office). She was courtesous but the answers were not very forthcoming. I don't know whether there are sufficient efforts ongoing to strengthen people and process issues. There are no publically available documents outlining processes or personnel requirements (training, etc..). Got the standard feedback on equipment, "All currently certified Direct Recording Electronic(DRE) voting systems in Virginia have been tested by NASED to accurately count votes." Local contact I got from emailing the Mayor and Election Board in the City of Virginia Beach is Pat Harrington, General Registrar (PHarring@vbgov.com). She refered me to the State Board of Elections for all my questions. My sense is that publically there is not much concern from our elected officials or the elections officials. This is a recipe for disaster should something fail. Maybe I'm wrong and just haven't probed enough but I can't seem to get through too easily. |
Linda Franz
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Linda_franz
Post Number: 243
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 10:10 am: |
|
Bev,
I don't register concerns about Toby Nixon's commitment to oversight of elections by citizens.
It was Toby who wrote and sponsored the audit legislation that we attempted to get passed this year. He was very responsive to our concerns about language in the bill and made changes based on the recommendation of citizens.
Unless things have changed in the last couple months that I don't know about, Representative Nixon seems to be moving the ball forward in Washington State.
Question:
Do you want just the active legislators? I mean, those who have and will write and push legislation?
I know of some that will and have supported (for example, signed on as a sponsor or help with amendments) such legislation but don't generally originate it. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4187
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 10:10 am: |
|
I'll add this:
In Utah, governor's office seems more reasonable about election reform issues than Lt. Governor (Utah's equivalent of secretary of state). |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4188
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 10:13 am: |
|
Linda --- thanks, good input on Toby Nixon. However, at the Bellingham meeting he seemed generally prickly when it came to some of the citizen auditing issues. I'd have to take more time to formulate an answer about this. But yes, I agree that he seems to be one of the more courageous ones in Washington. Do you know what committees he's on, how much seniority, does he chair anything?
Also, yes, we want any and all. And as soon as I implement a couple edits for typos I spotted last night, I'll send you the tool we are referring to so you can use it as you see fit, because I know you have relationships with a lot of the effective citizens and officials in Washington state. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4189
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 10:15 am: |
|
Another: New Hampshire - Asst. Sec. State Anthony Stevens.
Gets it. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 54
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 10:29 am: |
|
Bev,
I'm not surprised about New Hampshire. Paper is engrained in the political culture there.
The rest of the northeast will be a bit more difficult. Decades of reliance on levers in bigger jurisdictions, which had next to no auditability, certainly no paper trail. I think that is a big hurdle for folks here "getting it".
They've trusted the 800 lb. "grey box" forever. A 20 lb. "black box" isn't so scary. |
Michelle Gabriel
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Michelle
Post Number: 6
Registered: 05-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 3:25 pm: |
|
I am working closely in California with the Alameda County Board of Supervisors. Keith Carson 510-272-6695 gets it. Gail Steele 510-272-6692 is starting to get it. Scott Haggerty 510-272-6691, Nate Miley 510-272-6694, and Alice Lai Bitker 510 -272-6693 don't get it. Alice is on the fence. Scott is a definite "No". Not sure where Nate really is yet.
Our RoV, Elaine Ginnold, is a big Diebold fan.
Is this the kind of information you are looking for?
Thanks,
Michelle |
Jerry Lobdill
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jerry_lobdill
Post Number: 1
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 4:14 am: |
|
Tarrant County, Texas (Fort Worth)--Second highest margin of votes for GWB in 2004. Orange County, CA was first.
I am a software engineer (retired). Our 2006 primary was on March 7. It was a disaster, with an overcount of about 100,000 votes. Election Office officials, assisted by a Hart InterCivic VP and the County Chairs of both parties did a coordinated song and dance to calm the waters and assure voters that it was only a minor "glitch" and that they would have a correct tally out within 24 hours. I found only one other individual who seemed to understand what had happened, and that person was a Republican incumbent judge who lost.
I was appalled at my Dem County Chair. He behaves as if he is getting paid by Hart. I was working in a campaign to unseat the Dem County Chair. My candidate lost due to vote fraud involving mail ballots.
I have launched a campaign to educate fellow Dems about how electronic voting machines can be compromised and why current machines are a fraudster's wet dream. I have given a PowerPoint presentation at our local DFA on this and am getting traction with Alan Dechert at OVC.
I am looking for officials in surrounding counties and at state level who will get on board.
Does this help? |
Eric Holte
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ericholte
Post Number: 1
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 9:41 pm: |
|
I've heard Daylin Leach speak progressively about voting reform. Add him to your list.
Daylin Leach (Democrat)
Montgomery County
House of Representatives
Hon. Daylin Leach
601 S. Henderson Road
Suite #208
King of Prussia, PA 19406
(610) 768-4200
Fax: (610) 768-4204
Hon. Daylin Leach
109A East Wing
Harrisburg, PA 17120-2020
(717) 783-9114
Fax: (717) 787-0861
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/member_information/house_bio.cfm? districtnumber=149 |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4202
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 10:54 pm: |
|
Thanks to everyone, and to all who have submitted additional details privately - crew@blackboxvoting.org and here.
And as for Hart -- notice we've recently posted 45 Hart Intercivic manuals (many have been considered "private" before) and Jerry -- I will enable you for the private tech area. Perhaps you'll find something there to help. If you're logged in, refresh browser and scroll all the way down the list of topics and a new one will appear for those who are enabled. Has some Hart stuff you may find interesting. |
John Hudgins
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Monkeycat
Post Number: 4
Registered: 03-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 9:41 pm: |
|
I attended a recent public meeting held by Warren Slocum, the Chief Elections Officer for San Mateo County, California. About 20 people attended, including some poll workers. The purpose of the meeting was to introduce the new machines the county is adopting in an attempt to be in compliance with HAVA. (Attendees also had an opportunity to try these machines.)
This county currently uses Eagle optical scanners. Slocum is introducing a small number of eSlate machines into special election centers for the June elections. These centers will be open for a week before the election to allow the handicapped time to vote. By November he hopes to have one eSlate in each precinct. These machines, though intended for the handicapped, can be used by anyone who wants to. The rest of us can still use the Eagles.
I am legally blind so I tried the machine in audio mode. It is a slow arduous process even with a vastly abbreviated sample ballot. With the usual California ballot with federal and local races and the usual packet of initiatives at the back, it would be a nightmare. I'd much rather have a friend help me with a regular ballot!
The eSlate also comes with foot controls and a "sip & puff" device for those who cannot use their limbs. I haven't personally seen any of the other DREs, but I haven't heard mention of these other methods of input. Do they have them? If they do not, it does not seem to me that they would be suitable for many of the handicapped.
Slocum seemed very aware of election concerns. He told us he reads Brad's Blog. When I made a short speech about DREs & voter fraud, he said to the audience, "Does this scare anybody?"
He dismissed the possibility of hand-counted paper ballots with, "It will never happen". He has watched ballot counting by hand in Albania, which he thought went smoothly; his concern is not with the counting at individual precincts but with the next stage, when ballots from all the precincts are gathered together in a central location. This part of the Albanian process caused him concern.
I asked him about using Votepads; he said that he thought they weren't legal. Does anybody know if this is true? puff
Slocum seems to care that voting is secure. He is aware of the problems with DREs. He is doing the minimum to comply with HAVA. He also said that he's overworked and under-funded and described some of the complexities of making elections secure, with or without machines. He asked, humorously, if anyone wanted his job and thinks that he may not run again.
The eSlates will cost $3,500 each and he has had to modify the county storage facility to accommodate their storage requirement, which has cost $200,000.
Slocum's office can be reached via the main County number: 650-363-4000. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4214
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 8:36 am: |
|
Warren Slocum is one of the first election officials to step free of the crowd and think for himself. Definitely one of those who is responsive to those he represents.
Thanks for the detailed information on his responses to each of the points you brought up with him.
Note also that Freddie Oakley, Yolo County, is another election official who has taken some hits for her willingness to step away from the pro-touchscreen contingent. Once, while the California registrars were having a press conference urging paperless touchscreen voting inside the secretary of state's office, Freddie Oakley was outside having her own press conference. It really took guts. I was very impressed with her. |
Joseph Hall
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Joehall
Post Number: 65
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 8:57 am: |
|
I know the ES&S AutoMARK can accomodate the binary switch needed to use a sip-puff device (not sure about foot pedals). I've heard rumors that the ES&S iVotronic can also be adjusted to accomodate a sip-puff device but cannot confirm this as true. I know of no others with this functionality. If anyone else does, please let me know. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 74
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 9:14 am: |
|
This is important generally for access but really is irrelevant to HAVA specifically. Sip and puff is not required by HAVA. |
Joseph Hall
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Joehall
Post Number: 66
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 10:13 am: |
|
Well, it's not irrelevant when you have multiple lawsuits (in CA and PA) that claim that if a voting system does not provide a binary switch of this nature, it's not accessible (the binary switch can be used with sip-puff, jelly buttons, foot pedals, etc. -- that is, it's a more interoperable and generic assistive device interface); regardless of what the definition of accessibility is (it's not defined in HAVA). HAVA requires a voting system equipped for people with disabilities... does that mean any old disabilities, certain disabilities, etc.?
Anyway, it's important to clearly know what disabilities systems can accomodate (and compound disabilities in the case of the Vote-PAD, which can accomodate people with both visual and auditory disabilities). |
V. Kurt Bellman
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 77
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 11:18 am: |
|
Joseph,
Compliance with disability access IS defined in HAVA - its all visual. There is no HAVA mandate for any other disability. The CA and PA suits will go down in flames if they're relying on HAVA.
I wasn't aware auditory problems were a problem. I know many deaf who comprehend the written word.
In HAVA, mobility and developmental handicaps are "out of luck".
Now if these lawsuits have a basis OTHER THAN HAVA, fine. Otherwise, they're going nowhere. |
Joseph Hall
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Joehall
Post Number: 67
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 11:50 am: |
|
Not meaning to belabor this much more...
HAVA says, (§301(a)(3)(A)) "The voting system shall [...] be accessible for individuals with disabilities, including nonvisual accessibility for the blind and visually impaired, in a manner that provides the same opportunity for access and participation (including privacy and independence) as for other voters[.]"
I wouldn't construe that to mean only visual disabilities and I have a hard time believing that a Court or any other authority would limit that language that narrowly. However, we shall see. The language in this part of HAVA is sufficiently imprecise as to clearly mean you have to accomodate people with disabilities (especially the blind) but it doesn't say at what point do you have to stop the accomodation. Clearly a voting system that just accomodated people with visual impairments would not be "accessible" to people with disabilities.
However, (leaving out a cite or two hear and there) the DoJ has already said, in the case of VVPATs, that it's not reasonable to demand that people with disabilities have the "exact" same experience because there will be necessary differences and some disabilities (such as compound disabilities) are impossible to accomodate fully in a private and independent manner. Other disabilities, like cognitive disabilities, are essentially being ignored but by a few commentors.
The two suits I speak of take a different stance and rely on a ton of other claims save their HAVA claim (personally, I think the HAVA claims are not their strongest).
I still think it's useful, especially from a consumer protection/advocacy perspective, to know exactly what certain systems accomodate in specific configurations. That was the intent of my original contribution to this thread. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 80
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 12:43 pm: |
|
Joseph,
Yes, but (§301(a)(3)(B)) states
"B) satisfy the requirement of subparagraph (A)
through the use of at least one direct recording
electronic voting system or other voting system equipped for individuals with disabilities at each polling place; and"
Now specifically in Pennsylvania, where one of the suits has been brought, the Chief legal counsel for the Secretary of the Commonwealth has informed counties, therefore, that the mere installation of a DRE in each precinct satisfies HAVA. The ONLY disability that ALL DRE's address is visual, with the audio unit.
I am aware that, for many, that is not enough, and I agree with where I think you are, that it is imopssible to address all disabilities, especially cognitive ones. And I agree that there are other civil rights laws that may be brought to bear, but for anyone to suggest, AS THEY HAVE, that without sip/puff, a system is not HAVA-compliant, is to fib a little, IMHO. |
John Hudgins
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Monkeycat
Post Number: 5
Registered: 03-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 2:14 pm: |
|
Election Chief Warren Slocum thinks the use of Vote-Pads is illegal. Is it? |
Joseph Hall
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Joehall
Post Number: 68
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 2:15 pm: |
|
We're in agreement... one thing: not all DREs have audio units. However, they'd better to even begin to claim to be accessible and even the first-generation DREs (Sequoia AVC Advantage and Shouptronic/ELECTronic 1242) are now being provided with an audiocassette alternative (although I can point to particularly critical evaluations of these as, in many cases, it requires the voter to count rows and columns on the ballot and press a button... which gives no "click" or other auditory signal to register the fact that a button has been pressed). |
V. Kurt Bellman
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 83
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 2:40 pm: |
|
Joe,
The Danaher 1242's and Sequoia Advantages have as user-friendly a audio system as any modern DRE. I've voted on them both. (audio)
People hereabouts who know me know I am an unabashed Danaher 1242 fan. It does not use a cassette. It uses digitized human voice, recorded at the time the database is built, and stored on the data cartridge behind the rear door. No rows and columns. The names are read to the voter. |
Joseph Hall
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Joehall
Post Number: 69
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 3:26 pm: |
|
Wow. I'd love to know more about both machines... I have precious little information on the two... especially how they aocommodate peoples with disabilities. It would be great to get a brain dump from you on this. Actually talking to vendors results in little because the don't tend to talk to us academics unless they have to. Of course, I'd like to improve their technology as much as they would like to. |
John Hudgins
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Monkeycat
Post Number: 6
Registered: 03-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 7:09 pm: |
|
If voting machines without sip & puff and foot pedals are in compliance with HAVA, they certainly are not in compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act.
ADA mentions voting as one of the areas in which "discrimination against individuals with disabilities persists".
The ADA says "qualified individual with a disability" means an individual with a disability who, ...meets the essential eligibility requirements for the receipt of services or the participation in programs or activities provided by a public entity."
Since most people with any disability meet "the essential eligibility requirements" for "the participation in programs or activities provided by a public entity",such as voting, not allowing people with impairments, other than visual, to vote, constitutes a violation of the ADA.
Couldn't the ADA be a basis for a lawsuit against those vendors who do not accommodate any disability but visual impairment? |
V. Kurt Bellman
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 86
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 7:31 pm: |
|
John,
Sure could. ADA and the Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act, or the VAEHA.
ADA has never had much teeth for voting because the VAEHA has typically been the vehicle used.
Kurt |
Joseph Hall
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Joehall
Post Number: 70
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, April 25, 2006 - 9:04 am: |
|
The ADA hasn't been that successful a vehicle for arguing disability access in voting litigation... mostly because of the passage you cite, John. Specifically, as long as you can engage in the service, with assistance or without assistance, that language in the ADA has been met (it doesn't have the "(including privacy and independence)" paranthetical of HAVA §301). The ADA has been most useful in arguing for physically accessible polling places (or curbside voting). best, Joe |
John Hudgins
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Monkeycat
Post Number: 7
Registered: 03-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, April 25, 2006 - 3:08 pm: |
|
Kurt & Joe,
In reading VAEHA, I see that it was originally written in 1973 and its solutions for the handicapped voter are based on the technology of the time, namely:
"(1) instructions, printed in large type, conspicuously displayed at each permanent registration facility and each polling place and
(2) information by telecommunications devices for the deaf."
Which is all we are getting from most of the DREs. Now that technology exists to serve all handicapped voters, limiting "privacy and independence" to the visually and orally handicapped is clearly in violation of the "equal protection " clause of the XIV Amendment .
Combining the HAVA , ADA & VAEHA requirements with the "equal protection " clause could be argued to establish an inclusive standard for the disabled voter.
In such a suit, a handicapped individual or individuals might find it easier than others have, to obtain standing. |
Joseph Hall
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Joehall
Post Number: 71
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, April 25, 2006 - 3:37 pm: |
|
Actually, an equal protection claim would have to show that people with disabilities couldn't cast votes or didn't have the opportunity to have their votes counted. The experience of casting the vote would be irrelevant unless it resulted in many people with disabilities not being able to vote for the candidate of their choice.
Kurt, could you send me email at joehall@berkeley.edu so that I can get you on the phone sometime? I'd like to talk to you about the Advantage and 1242. best, Joe |
Bill Thomasson
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Wathomasson
Post Number: 2
Registered: 08-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 28, 2006 - 7:53 am: |
|
I'm not sure precisely what BBV has in mind when it says "election reform" in this cointext. Here in Illinois the most urgent aspect of election reform is campaign finance reform: We have some of the laxest laws in the country.
The most prominent person making any sort of proposal about campaign finance reform is Republican State Treasurer and gubernatorial nominee Judy Barr Topinka. During the primary she suggested requiring corporations to report their campaign contributions and forbidding them from contributing to the campaigns of state officials with whom they do business. No-brainers, you'd think. But her primary opponents immediately pointed out that 90% of her campaign funds came from companies that did business with the State Treasurer's office.
Earlier, when Democratic Governor Rod Blagojevich was making noises about campaign finance reform, she suggested that she would give all her campaign money to charity if he would do the same. He immediately shut up -- he had three times as much money as she did. After all, What do you expect? Any company that does business with the state is going to contribute to the campaign fund of an incumbent governor.
Incidentally, I also happen to be legally blind, although my vision just barely meets the criterion -- I can read ordinary print with a good pocket magnifier. I didn't have an opportunity to use a DRE machine because I voted early -- something else new in Illinois this year -- and in Cook County there was concern about securing DRE machines over weeks in municiple buildings not specifically set up as polling places. So I used an optical scan ballot which, with my magnifier, wasn't really difficult for me. A bit easier than the punch cards we'd used previously.
Incidentally, the election-night mess in Cook Country illustrates the major advantage of DRE machines: You get TWO independent records (paper and electronic) of each ballot cast. Not only is fraud much more difficult than it has ever been befpre in our history, but if something goes wrong with one record, you still have the other. With optical scan, if the paper ballot gets messed up through fraud or incompetence, you're out of luck.
Of course, it also shows that even after two years of beta-testing some of these machines are not ready for prime time. In particular, those Sequoia machines need to be redesigned so that it's not so easy for people to mess up. (Basic design principle: If anything can be done wrong, it will be.) But maybe we'll get everything right by November. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 116
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 28, 2006 - 9:19 am: |
|
Bill,
I don't think this forum has much to do with campaign finance reform, except as a peripheral issue.
The focus here seems to be the mechanics of voting. Many believe (I do not) that electronic machines are so inherently vulnerable to hacking and other attacks, that not only CAN THEY be used to fix elections, but indeed that they already have been so used.
To me, personally, that belief is lunacy.
However, I do believe that transparency in elections is important, and that all must be done that can possibly be done to make these machines more transparent, accountable, and verifiable as they can be.
I am also concerned that, over time, these machines well may be compromised to the point of being able to fix elections. Election fixing is as old as the hills, Bill, and if these machines were ever used for nefarious purposes, it would be nearly impossible to detect that fact.
I am unwilling to wait until massive election theft is a fait accompli to address these issues. The perception of vulnerability of electronic voting is almost as pervasive and destructive as its actual vulnerability, so addressing these issues is a worthwhile use of resources.
You will likely hear from some others here that I am some kind of rightwing wingnut and Bush already stole the 2004 election. To my way of thinking, those people are wrong and may be a little "touched", as we used to call it. Despite that, the issue is real, and needs our collective attention.
Any others? |
Joseph Hall
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Joehall
Post Number: 72
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 28, 2006 - 9:53 am: |
|
Kurt, I apologize that I have no other way of contacting you aside from posting publicly in this forum.
Matt Zimmerman (EFF), Jack Lerner and I will be leading a tutorial on electronic voting issues, news and policy at CFP2006 this coming Tuesday in DC. One of the segments I'm responsible for is going over types and vendors of voting technology on the market or still in use. For this segment, I'd like to describe what has been done to the first-generation DREs (1242, Advantage) to market them as HAVA compliant or accessible.
You seem to know about them more than other people I know and contacting these vendors directly has been unsuccesful. Could you send me email at joehall@berkeley.edu with a phone number that I can reach you at to ask you some questions? I could also do an email interview with you if you'd prefer that. I hesitate to publish my phone number here as I like to keep it out of general circulation, but can do this if you'd rather call me.
Thanks for your time and I apologize to the BBV crew and readers here for the off-topic use of this thread. best, Joe |
Denise Zollman
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Azadvocate
Post Number: 31
Registered: 01-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 28, 2006 - 10:10 am: |
|
Mr. Hall,
Will your tutorial be videotaped? Will it be available for viewing online? If the answer is yes, could you forward a copy to BBV for posting?
Thank you in advance for considering this request. |
Kathleen Wynne
Moderator
Username: Admin_ii
Post Number: 267
Registered: 08-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 28, 2006 - 10:23 am: |
|
Joseph,
BBV's goal is to be a resource for educating ourselves and others about exactly what is necessary in achieving meaningful election reform. It's clear we believe it will be through investigations that unearth hard evidence which could stand up in a court of law; open, honest discussions and debate; and the sharing of information amongst ourselves as the best way of achieving it. We've certainly noticed that you have been taking advantage of this resource for some time now and we're glad that you have.
In that spirit, I hope you will remember us to those in attendance at this tutorial in D.C. and mention to the group that BBV has been one of your resources in gathering information and other experts on this subject and that we invite them to visit our site as well and share with us their knowledge on this issue.
Thanks.
Kathleen
* * * * * *
* * * * * *
* * * * * *
* * * * * *
TRIPLE PROTECTION FOR ELECTION 2006 - STARTING NOW:
(1) Use Freedom of Information, public records requests ("All American Paper Chase")
(2) Try Dumpster Diving for Democracy
(3) Candid America Project - Don't leave home without your camcorder
HOW TO DO IT: http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/6/6.html
|
Joseph Hall
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Joehall
Post Number: 73
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 28, 2006 - 11:01 am: |
|
Hi Denise: As I'm just presenting, I'm not sure if the tutorial will be captured in audio or video and available in real-time or afterwards. If so, I'll be sure to forward the info along to the BBV crew and post on this or another thread.
Hi Kathleen: I absolutely have been making use of BBV as an unparalleled source of information. The purpose of our tutorial will be to get hill staff up to speed on the issues and to present the various avenues of reform to them in an unbiased manner... well, unbiases will be hard because we're considered "e-voting critics" by most. Anyway, we will of course mention BBV in a number of areas such as system evaluation and such.
BTW, I managed to record a talk yesterday by Yochai Benkler here at UC Berkeley about his new book. He spent about 5-10 minutes of the talk illustrating the Georgia FTP site and the email memo archive stuff that Bev and Jim were directly involved in and pointed out how it resulted in decertification of the DESI tech. one year before the legal ruling that said DESI's use of copyright law was misuse. It was a great talk and many of you might find it interesting... find the audio here: http://josephhall.org/nqb2/index.php/2006/04/27/yochaiboalt |
Bill Thomasson
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Wathomasson
Post Number: 3
Registered: 08-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 28, 2006 - 12:46 pm: |
|
Kurt,
Yes, I knew that BBV had traditionally been concerned with ballot casting and ballot counting. That's why I was surprised that it was asking so broadly for information about "election reform." But it seemed at least possible that the wording had been chosen deliberately, so I thought it couldn't hurt to respond.
And certainly I know that we've had election fraud as long as we've had elections. How could I not? I was living in Chicago in the 1950s. That's when a ward committeeman notoriously advised his troops to, "Vote early and often." That's also when nobody was surprised to discover that a majority of the voters in one precinct had addresses in the adjacent cemetary. And there are a lot of people who think John F. Kennedy would never have been president had the 1960 ballots been honestly counted in Chicago. Although others say the reason Nixon never challenged the count was that he knew counting of absentee ballots in California wouldn't have stood up to scrutiny either.
That's my point. So long as you have only a single record of the vote, either fraud or incompetence (which is far more common) can mess things up good. Doesn't much matter what form that record takes: I need only point to the 2004 mess in King Co., Washington, to illustrate this. But in Illinois and other states that understand the situation, a DRE creates TWO independent records of each vote. If one gets fouled up, you still have the other.
Here I can point to the situation in my home country a month ago. At one level, a real mess. The candidate I'd spent hundreds of hours working for went to bed not knowing whether she'd won or lost. Some down-ballot candidates didn't know for a couple of days. But in the end, everybody is sarisfied the count was accurate.
And equally important is that this double record makes fraud far more difficult than it has ever been before. Any single record can be messed with, as we know well from history. With dual-record DREs, people not only have to mess with two records but have to make sure they still agree with each other after being messed with. I don't want to say that's impossible -- there's a lot of clever people out there -- but is certainly a lot harder than just dumping paper ballots in the wastebasket. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 118
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, April 28, 2006 - 2:29 pm: |
|
Bill,
In what some may think is a perverse way, I'd actually prefer going to bed not knowing who won an election, than know and have it not be true. In 2006, people had better start getting used to doing just that, at least in close elections. In fact, I'd wait a week or so before getting too riled up.
Speed in elections is the natural enemy of accuracy. I think I coined that line back in 2001. Anyone may use it.  |
|
|
