Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

It's Official Paper BALLOTS for the State of New York

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
DogPoundPup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-23-08 11:12 PM
Original message
It's Official Paper BALLOTS for the State of New York
Source: The Brad Blog

Congrats to Bo Lipari and the NY Verified Voting crew, on a milestone in their long, and continuing fight for election integrity in the state of New York. Writes Lipari this morning:

It's now official. Liberty Election Systems has withdrawn their DRE from the New York State and has informed the State Board of Elections that they will not pursue further certification testing or fill their one current order. LibertyVote/Nedap was the only remaining vendor offering a DRE in New York. The move represents the end of an era in New York State, and could be a harbinger for what lies ahead in the rest of the nation...
...
So for the first time since HAVA passed in 2002, New York State has no DREs of any type being purchased by any county, or undergoing NYS certification testing for 2009 purchases. For the vendors who for 6 years told us New York is a DRE state, we tell you now as we told you then, Wrong. New York is a paper ballot state.
Now, of course, the fight will continue to make sure the state actually bothers to count those paper ballots when they get them, as it will be error-prone, hackable, optical-scan devices that are purchased across the state.



Read more: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5922



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-23-08 11:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. You can still hack a scanner.
I fill out a paper ballot and then it is scanned into a machine. I get back a number...#201. How do I know my paper ballot was even counted? It's not done in public either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-23-08 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. In Minnesota, there are random audits...
...in which a small percentage of the paper ballots are hand-counted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-23-08 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. We voted by absentee ballot hoping they
Edited on Wed Apr-23-08 11:24 PM by mac2
wouldn't count them by machine or computer. Wrong. They collected them and counted them all on the scanner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabbat hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-25-08 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
16. but the paper ballots can be hand counted
if there is a problem.
how can you ever know for sure that your vote was counted? under no system do you get a "copy" of your vote.

What more do you want?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-25-08 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. "the paper ballots can be hand counted if there is a problem"????
Really???

Then why weren't they counted in FL 2000, or in OH 2004???

If there's a problem, you'll often be unaware without a good audit (which few states have) or something triggering a recount.

Think about it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabbat hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-25-08 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. because the SCOTUS
stopped the count in florida.

A hand count being the primary counting method, is actually the most inaccurate way to go, why would you want inaccuracy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. No matter that it was SCOTUS, the recount wasn't completed.
Edited on Sat Apr-26-08 12:05 AM by Wilms
And I'm not really sure you are wrong about a hand-counts accuracy.

But it isn't accuracy of the count but of the outcome that is most important. I realize that's a bit awkward but you may agree.

Short of maintenance issues or humidity problems I have a sense that these machines do a good job of what they are programmed, mis-programed, or maliciously programed to do.

HCPB at the precinct does make a lot of sense. Even then, I'd prefer statistically significant auditing.

-edited to add-

I think NY would do well to fight to keep it's levers (because HAVA doesn't call for them to be replaced) and use ballot markers for accessibility.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. You count the paper ballots in public at a local level
The media only reports the results. Right now the media gets to collect the vote results and report them. There is little over sight.

Yes..the lack of enough paper ballots when the machines break down is another ploy to steal them. They break down in minority areas mostly. Is that because they aren't new or just manipulated?

The Supreme Court, state legislative bodies and election officials, the media, and the Democratic Party leaders themselves all stopped the vote counting before they were finished. Re-counting never happened as required by state law in a close elections. No way do I believe my vote matters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #21
24. "You count the paper ballots in public at a local level"?? Really?? Where???
Are we having two different conversations?

All I'm saying is that you fill out a paper ballot and feed that into a machine.

That machine COUNTS your vote.

You trust that? :shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabbat hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #24
28. what would you trust then? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #28
31. I wouldn't TRUST anything. I want elections verified.
HCPB at the precinct AND random statistically significant audits.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabbat hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #31
36. paper ballot hand count
Edited on Sat Apr-26-08 06:21 PM by sabbat hunter
is inaccurate. with that random statistics get thrown off.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. A statiscally significant audit accounts for that, if only through an amount of fraud it assumes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #36
43. I don't know what a "random statistic" is, but random errors do NOT favor specific candidates.
These are the kind of errors you may have with lever machines and hand counts. Not necessarily with computers however.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #16
42. "if there was a problem?"
How can you know if there was problem? You need the hand counts to determine that. Suspicions might be raised by some wack-a-doodle results, but there are much more subtle ways to rig elections and they include the use of computerized paper ballot scanners.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #1
41. Don't confuse us with the facts. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BadgerKid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-23-08 11:32 PM
Response to Original message
4. May there be no ballot shortage either. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magellan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-23-08 11:48 PM
Response to Original message
5. For the cost of buying, maintaining and storing all those opti-scanners
...precincts could instead hire ballot counters and watchers at a flat, nominal fee for the time required to hand count the ballots. Seems to me that'd be less of a conflict of interest than paying private firms to come up with machines and software that aren't open source.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-24-08 01:06 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Automation is good
There's nothing wrong with scanners and the like, as long as there are audits and a paper trail to refer to in case of a dispute. Pure hand-counting is less accurate in general. Look at how a bank counts money - they have machines to handle the bulk counting of cash, but when they pay out cash to you at the counter they count it out by hand. The problem comes when there is no paper trail and no audit - a hand-counted paper ballot system can also result in false vote counts, it's just harder to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magellan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-24-08 01:20 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Learn about tabulators.
They're the computer part of the opti-scanner system that can be made to do anything with the counts, regardless of audits and paper trails.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-24-08 01:32 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. But they don't need to be computers
Tabulators can be mechanical... they may be using electronic tabulators but that doesn't necessarily need to be the case. The interface between scanner and tabulator ought to be audited routinely where these things are in use.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #10
44. NY has mechanical tabulators now. They are called lever machines.
And some of the so-called "verified voting" crowd can't wait to get rid of them. They prefer the theory of being able to get a fair recount, to the reality of how difficult that might be based on things like election laws, chain of custody problems, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #7
22. Hand counting is cheaper and more accurate than
computers. Many developed countries have all their votes counted in days. Ours take longer.

Computer programming is easy not complicated to just count and add the sum. Why keep the programs secret? Stealing the vote and switching to the other party is more complicated is it not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BigDaddy44 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #22
40. If hand counting is cheaper and more accurate than computers....
Edited on Sat Apr-26-08 09:27 PM by BigDaddy44
How come banks rely on electronic counters for large sums of money instead of hiring people to do it? I am not a luddite. Yes, computers can be hacked, but with some routine analysis, they can be checked and verified. Guess what, people can intentionally count wrong also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #40
45. You ask, "How come banks rely on electronic counters?"
Because those are not anonymous transactions. People can complain when they are shortchanged, and so can banks. Not so with secret ballots. This can easily be exploited.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-24-08 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. The cons with counting paper ballots by hand
consider that each ballot has how many races? It would increase the odds of the votes not being tallied correctly.

If there is only one or two races on the ballot then it would be simple.

The old machines might be better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-24-08 12:22 AM
Response to Original message
6. I want my levers. Nothing wrong with my levers.
Bastards are taking my levers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-24-08 01:17 AM
Response to Original message
8. Congratulations!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-24-08 10:07 PM
Response to Original message
12. Bo sold out the levers. HAVA doesn't require replacing them.
Look. It's wonderful to see DREs kicked to the curb (a national trend, BTW). Bo Lipari worked his tail off to warn the world against getting involved with DREs. But did he really have to advocate tossing levers and IN FACT argue to have New Yorker's votes counted by computer?

Awful.

HAVA doesn't require replacing levers. Read the law!


Why doesn't Bo Lipari get a job selling Optical Scan?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabbat hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #12
30. I love the levers
but they are prone to breakdown and are very old.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. Get new ones.

You think Optical Scans aren't prone to breakdowns and age?

Do you really need to review Bo Lipari's talking points??

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabbat hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. does anyone
still make the lever machines?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #34
38. Probably not.
Watch what happens for a state to put out a bid.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-24-08 11:13 PM
Response to Original message
13. Optical scanners are the same as a "get away car"
they not only count our ballots in secret, they lock up our ballots and get them out of our precincts, RIGHT BEFORE OUR VERY EYES!

Mom always said (hand) count your change before you leave the store or bankers want you to (hand) count your money before you leave the window.

But yet, we don't see a need to (hand) count our ballots before they leave our precincts.

K&R...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-25-08 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. It is voting fraud right in front of our eyes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabbat hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-25-08 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. when the votes are tabulated
under any voting scheme, it is done in "private" albeit with poll watchers from the democratic and republican party present to make sure there is no hanky panky being done.

What more do you want?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #17
23. Standards and exit polls to make sure the vote makes
sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #17
25. Your statement doesn't actually square with reality.
If poll watchers are there, it isn't private.

And if a machine is mis-programmed, people standing over it is unlikely to accomplish much.

Hanky-panky? :shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabbat hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. by private
I mean that it isnt open to the general public.

relying on a hand count as your primary vote count is not an accurate way of going.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. We already addressed the accuracy issue.
Believe what you like and stand over an Optical Scanner while it's tabulating and tell me with a straight face if you can tell if it's been programmed correctly.

Better, tell your college Logic professor.

Are you an NYVVer??

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabbat hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. are you saying
a hand count would be more accurate?

and yes if there is a computer screen you can tell if the machine is tabulating correctly by test feeding a few ballots and checking the totals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #29
33. You're new to all this?
It's already been shown that the machine can be hacked in a way to pass L&A testing then miscount the election.

I said before that accuracy of the outcome is more important than accuracy of the count. That's what I'm saying. That's most important. Even if you don't agree, I hope you could understand that's what I'm sayin'.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabbat hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. without an accurate count
you may not get an accurate outcome, especially in a close race.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #35
39. For a really, really, close one. Yes.
That's what a recount is for.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #35
46. You didn't address Wilms' point about rigging L&A tests (not to mention vote counts).
See this stuff from our neighboring state of CT:
http://voter.engr.uconn.edu/voter/Reports.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eppur_se_muova Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-25-08 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
14. Is McThuselah doing his version of Phil Hartmann's Frankenstein monster in your sig?
I can just imagine him bellowing out "Fire bad!".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Sep 02nd 2014, 06:40 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC