Reply #13: Maryland dumps Diebold voting machines

[stillcool]

By Joe Baker, Senior Editor

The state of Maryland has dumped its $90 million Diebold voting machine system. The Maryland House voted 137-0 to dump the Accuvote TS system because it does not provide a paper record of votes.
The Baltimore Sun reported lawmakers concluded the state had adopted a voting technology that makes it impossible to audit election results, impossible to carry out recounts in close or contested races, and makes it possible for the machine makers to rig election results without fear of detection.

The voting machine maker offered to replace 5 percent of Maryland’s voting machines with models that are linked to a printer. So replacing about 1,000 of the state’s machines with printer-linked models would cost approximately $5 million, versus the estimated $12 to $16 million for leasing such a system for a year.
The plan met with strong and heated rejection from Gov. Robert Ehrlich Jr. and members of the Maryland House. Henry Fawell, a spokesman for the governor, said: “The governor does not believe that is even close to a sufficient solution. The governor believes we need a solution that protects every vote, not 5 percent of the votes.”
Delegate Elizabeth Bobo, who backs the House’s proposed optical-scan system, said the Diebold option does nothing to fix machines she says are full of flaws. “It doesn’t matter if we have printers for these Diebold machines,” she said, “they are inherently insecure. If something were to go wrong, we would never know it.”

Gov. Ehrlich jumped into the fray three weeks ago when he stated he no longer had confidence in the State Board of Election’s ability to carry out an accurate and tamper-free vote in November. He also said he lacks confidence in Linda Lamone, the board’s director, who backs Diebold. Soon after, information was disclosed that Lamone had allowed uncertified Diebold software to be used in the 2002 and 2004 elections. Maryland also had massive machine failures in the 2004 vote.
Lamone insists on the Diebold machines, contending they are sound and secure. Replacement of the system would mean testing and certification of new machines, and reeducation of voters and election workers.
“The rallying cry now is: ‘Diebold out of Maryland,’” said Linda Schade, a member of a group called TrueVoteMD. “It’s unbelievable. They should not be signing any more contracts with Diebold, they should be suing Diebold.”

From the March 22-28, 2006, issue

http://www.rockrivertimes.com/index.pl?cmd=viewstory&cat=2&id=12721