|
|
|
Earthquake Development in Fight for Paper Trail: Calif. secretary
of state pulls plug on some e-voting
By Jim Wasserman, Associated Press
April 30, 2004
(AP) -- Secretary of State Kevin Shelley called for a criminal
investigation of a leading electronic voting company Friday as he
banned touch screen voting in four California counties in the November
election and threatened to block computerized balloting statewide.
Saying the lack of a paper trail makes e-voting unreliable, Shelley
said he had concerns about the security of machines manufactured
by Texas-based Diebold Election Systems, many of them used for the
first time in the March election. Shelley asked the attorney general's
office to investigate allegations of fraud, saying Diebold had lied
and that its actions in California were "absolutely reprehensible."
A spokesman for Attorney General Bill Lockyer said prosecutors would
review Shelley's claims. Diebold issued a statement saying it was
confident in its systems and planned to work with election officials
in California and throughout the nation to run a smooth election
this fall. The action represents a major setback for Diebold, a
national leader in electronic voting machine technology, and could
have a wider impact as counties gear up to spend billions of dollars
to modernize the way Americans vote. "Voters and voting officials
across the country are watching California closely now," said
Kim Alexander, director of the California Voter Foundation. "California
is turning away from e-voting equipment and other states are sure
to follow." The decision will have an immediate impact on as
many as 2 million voters in San Diego, Solano, San Joaquin and Kern
counties who will take a step back from the future and return to
using paper ballots. Registrars in counties that made the switch
to paperless voting said the move spelled chaos after making the
difficult transition to the computer age. "There just isn't
time to bring this system up before November," Kern County
Registrar Ann Barnett said. "It's absurd." Shelley also
said he would make Diebold pay for the disruption of idling 14,000
of its AccuVote-TSx machines in the four counties. The fate of other
electronic voting equipment was less certain. Ten counties could
use their machines in November if they meet 23 conditions that include
making alternative paper ballots available to voters, Shelley said.
Those include an earlier generation of 4,000 Diebold electronic
voting machines in Alameda and Plumas counties, and approximately
24,000 machines manufactured by three other companies for use in
eight other counties.
Shelley also banned any new electronic voting machines in the state
for the November election unless they produce a simultaneous paper
record of the voe that voters can verify as correct. California
counties with
6.5 million registered voters have been at the forefront of touch
screen voting, installing more than 40 percent of the 100,000-plus
machines believed to be in use nationally.
The decision six months before a presidential election reflected
the growing concern about paperless voting inside the secretary
of state's office and among many voting activists and computer programmers.
Many believe a paper printout of voter choices -- required in California
by
2006 -- will protect against fraud, computer hacking and electronic
errors. Diebold has been a frequent target of such groups, though
most California county election officials say problems have been
overstated and that voters like the touch screen systems first installed
four years ago. A state advisory panel conducted three days of hearings
on touch screen voting before recommending that Shelley ban the
Diebold machines in four counties and only allow it elsewhere if
voters could opt to use a paper ballot. A state investigation released
this month said Diebold jeopardized the outcome of the March election
in California with computer glitches, last minute changes to its
systems and installations of uncertified software in its machines
in 17 counties. It specifically cited San Diego County, where 573
of 1,611 polling places failed to open on time because low battery
power caused machines to malfunction. Diebold officials, in a 28-page
report rebutting many of the accusations about its performance,
said the company had been unfairly singled out for problems with
electronic voting and maintained its machines are safe, secure and
demonstrated 100 percent accuracy in the March election.
But Diebold acknowledged it had "alienated" the secretary
of state's office and promised to redouble efforts to improve relations
with counties and the state. The company, based in McKinney, Texas,
is a two-year-old subsidiary of automatic teller machine maker Diebold,
Inc., of North Canton, Ohio, and represents about five percent of
its business. Last week, Diebold Chairman and CEO Walden W. O'Dell
downplayed the significance of California's moves and said the company
planned to stay in the elections business. Diebold also has extensive
touch screen business in Maryland and Georgia. California lawmakers,
meanwhile, still plan a hearing Wednesday on a bill that would ban
all touch screen voting in the November election. The bill is sponsored
by lawmakers in Orange County, where some touch screen voters in
March received the wrong electronic ballots and Alameda County,
where some machines malfunctioned and forced voters to use paper
ballots. Thad Hall, a political scientist and program officer with
The Century Foundation in Washington, D.C., said that Shelley's
decision could eliminate new technology. "I'm concerned that
this ruling will cause some states to step back," Hall said.
"That would be a bad thing because it would only serve to hurt
voters who have been marginalized in the past."
Copyright 2004, Associated Press
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
Take Action Today to Make Sure Your Vote Counts!
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Breaking News
• Sept. 23, 2004 'A Massive Experiment' in Voting in The Washington Post
• Sept. 20, 2004 The Magic Voting Touch, an Editorial in The Washington Post
• Aug. 27, 2004 After Your Vote Vanishes, an Editorial in The Washington Post
• Aug. 26, 2004 Voting machine safeguards in question in The Baltimore Sun
• Aug. 25, 2004 Md. Machines Seek Vote of Confidence in The Washington Post
• How
They Could Steal The Election This Time: The Nation Magazine's exhaustive
examination of the potential problems with DRE voting systems, including Diebold in Maryland
• The Washington Post on TrueVote MD!
• Blackwell Halts Deployment of Diebold Voting Machines for 2004
• Gov. Ehrlich appoints new member
to election board
• E-voting regulators often join other
side when leaving office
• Women Voters Drop Paperless Vote Support
• The Disability Lobby and Voting
New York Times editorial
•Scans of the Hack the
Vote article
from the April issue of Vanity Fair magazine.
•Think You Voted in Maryland? Think Again
• Takoma Park
supports legislation to require modifications to new voting machines
purchased by the State of Maryland to create a verifiable paper trail
• Diebold "basically
had no interest in putting actual security in this system," said
Paul Franceus, one of the consultants. "It's not like they did
it wrong. It's like they didn't bother."
• MD Senate report finds security
risks, recommends paper
• Diebold gives paper
trail for FREE to San Diego County!!
More news.
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|