You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

for everyone asking questions about the NV paper trail ... [View All]

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 » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
NVMojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-04 02:42 AM
Original message
for everyone asking questions about the NV paper trail ...
Advertisements [?]

Nevada has long been a pioneer in the implementation of new voting technology. Clark County (Las Vegas) was one of the nation's first large voting jurisdictions to utilize electronic voting when they purchased the full face AVC Advantage from Sequoia Voting Systems nearly ten years ago.

Heller's decision was music to the ears of state Democrats, as their state chair penned a letter to the secretary of state a day before his announcement. However, the party is disappointed that 2,100 machines in Clark County won't have a paper trail until 2006. They plan to fight for voter verifiable receipts at Clark County polling areas for next year's election.
"Nevada has a history of close races, and 2004 is probably going to be another one of them," said state Democratic Party spokesman John Summers. "People just want to make sure their vote counts, and a paper trail is the best way to do that."

When the Gaming Control Board's Electronic Services Division reports to me that one system is superior to another, I'm going to place my confidence in that equipment," Heller said. "They are responsible for verifying the security and integrity of various electronic gaming machines throughout Nevada and, therefore, accountable for millions of dollars on a daily basis. My level of confidence in selecting Sequoia was greatly increased after receiving this report."
Heller said there were several other factors in his decision to select Sequoia Voting Systems for the entire state, including the fact that 70% of the state's voters already utilize Sequoia DRE voting machines. "Clark County has successfully used Sequoia DRE's for the past 10 years," Heller said. "That means the majority of Nevada voters are already comfortable and experienced in using this style of DRE machine."

Nevada has a history of close elections. As one of the top battleground states in the upcoming Presidential election in 2004, it is almost certain that the outcome of the vote in Nevada will be as close as ever. It would be irresponsible to have 2,100 machines in Clark County unable to verify the count of thousands of votes - in the case of a recount - by virtue of this decision, and prevent our ability to recount in Clark county, from where the majority of Democratic votes will come. NV State Dems to Heller & Lomax asking for printers on the old Clark County machines.
Oct. 29, 2003 PT

Software used by an electronic voting system manufactured by Sequoia Voting Systems has been left unprotected on a publicly available server, raising concerns about the possibility of vote tampering in future elections.
The security breach means that anyone with a minimal amount of technical knowledge could see how the code works and potentially exploit it. According to a computer programmer who discovered the unprotected server, the files also contain Visual Basic script and code for voting system databases that could allow someone to learn how to rig voting results. The programmer spoke on condition of anonymity.,1848,61014,00.html

Clark County may have to spend as much as $12 million by 2006 to replace 2,100 older electronic voting machines that cannot be upgraded to allow printing of each ballot cast, Registrar of Voters Larry Lomax said Wednesday. They already purchased 700 of these newer "Edge" machines.

Heller and Lomax initially thought the older Clark County Sequoia machines used for the last decade could be retrofitted with paper trail devices. But Lomax said he has had numerous discussions with Sequoia officials and they are not certain they can retrofit the older machines with the devices. He added he notified Heller and Clark County officials of the potential problem six months ago.


Although the VeriVote printers will be used in every Nevada county, only about 30 percent of Nevada's voters will vote on them. That's because Clark County, home of Las Vegas with 70 percent of the state's population, owns an older model of Sequoia touch-screen machines that can't be modified. The county will have to install at least one new machine with a printer in each polling place to give voters the option of having a paper trail. But Clark County won't have enough new paper-trail machines to accommodate more than a fraction of voters, and the deadline for replacing the remaining machines is the federal election in 2006.
The machines and procedures for using them need to be in place by Aug. 21, when early voting for the Sept. 7 primary begins. If the printers don't pass testing, the seven rural counties that plan to use them exclusively will get Sequoia optical-scan equipment instead. These machines require voters to fill out a paper ballot with a pen before it's scanned into an electronic machine.
Although Nevada voters may take comfort in their new printers, there is a glitch in the plan. Under Nevada law, if the election results have to be recounted, the printed ballots would not be used because they don't meet the current specifications for paper ballots. Current law refers only to standard-size paper ballots that voters use for absentee, provisional or optical-scan voting.
Stanford's Dill said a paper record is pointless if officials aren't required to count it.
"It is crucial that paper ballots have precedence over electronic records," he said. "The voters had a chance to verify the paper ballots but not the electronic records, so the paper ballots are more trustworthy."
The Nevada legislature could eventually change the law to accommodate the new technology, but the legislature meets only every other year and won't be in session again until February 2005.

Larry Lomax, registrar of voters in Clark County, Nev., which includes Las Vegas, is equally as confident of a successful election in his battleground state.
Nevada election officials tapped Sequoia Voting Systems Co. of Oakland, Calif., to provide touch-screen and other computerized voting machines, specifically because Sequoia could provide an ATM-style printer, which allows a paper trail.
Nevada Secretary of State Dean Heller used HAVA funding to buy more than 1,000 printers, which cost $500 per unit, as well as 1,935 touch-screen voting machines, priced at $2,500 each.
Mr. Lomax said touch-screen machines will be used exclusively in all counties except his own, Clark, which includes 70 percent of Nevada's voters.
"We're using 740 touch-screen machines, plus another 2,000 computerized machines. Of the touch-screens, we bought 200 in 2002 and 540 this year," he said.
A razor-thin outcome could have prompted a recount, but it would have likely been challenged in court because votes cast on touch screens everywhere but in Nevada cannot be manually recounted owing to the lack of a paper trail. Nov. 04

Ray Martnez, who until becoming an EAC commissioner was an Austin attorney, says that time constraints limited the EAC's work. Still, he's happy that provisional voting is now offered nationally, because in 17 states prior to the act, if people's names were mistakenly left off the voter rolls, they lost their vote, period.
But he allowed that more work may be needed, such as creating uniform rules about which provisional votes are actually counted, a distinction now left to each state.
He also addressed the issue of providing an auditable paper trail for electronic voting machines.
"Every jurisdiction provides what works best for them and the majority did not provide a paper trail, but they have their own ways to secure their systems," he said by phone from Cleveland, where he was monitoring the election.

"On the other hand, the state of Nevada decided that they feel best if they provide their (electronic voting) machines with a voter-verified paper ballot. They did that in September with their primaries and it was successful and they have implemented that system throughout the state."
Why only Nevada would demand such a trail from voting machine vendors is unclear. But it may be that since that state regulates hundreds of thousands of computerized slot machines, its officials know computers can go haywire.

From the airport, Bush rode with Nevada Attorney General Brian Sandoval and Secretary of State Dean Heller to the convention center. He briefly discussed Yucca Mountain, vowing to support any court decision on the proposed repository. He also touted Nevada's successful primary election, the first in the nation with the use of voting machines with verifiable receipts, Sandoval and Heller said."

Secretary of State Dean Heller, the state's top election official, should stop speaking at Republican-sponsored campaign events to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest, a liberal advocacy group said Thursday.

"He should be a statesman, not a politician," said Terence Tolbert, director of America Coming Together-Nevada.

The group, which backs Democratic candidates and liberal causes, charged that Heller was a "Republican operative" who would lose the confidence of voters should the election be particularly close in Nevada. "
The group also charged that, as a Republican, Heller would have knowledge of what they called Republican-backed voter suppression efforts in Nevada.

"You want to have confidence that the person in charge of elections in this state is not partisan," Tolbert said, acknowledging he had no evidence that Heller had done anything illegal. --LVRJ (10/08/04)

Nevada's top Republican political leaders, including Gov. Kenny Guinn and Attorney General Brian Sandoval, who is the state chairman for the Bush-Cheney re-election effort, also oppose the Yucca Mountain repository.

Nevada's top Republican political leaders, including Gov. Kenny Guinn and Attorney General Brian Sandoval, who is the state chairman for the Bush-Cheney re-election effort, also oppose the Yucca Mountain repository.

"For this year's general election, Nevada is the only state where virtually every voting machine has a paper backup that could aid in a machine malfunction, an audit or a recount.

"If you want to talk about security, I would say right now the electronic voting devices in Nevada are the most secure devices in the country right now," Heller says."
Nevada voters have been using the Sequoia touchscreen machines with the paper trail in Clark County -- which includes Las Vegas -- during early voting that began October 16.

Nevada was the only state to use "statewide" voter-verified paper ballot printers attached to electronic voting machines on Election Day. LVSun 11/12/04

And the lies continue ...or is it an attempt at making a smoke screen so no would take a closer look at those Las Vegas numbers on the old Sequoias??

There is more, I just got tired putting this together. I hope you can understand why I questioned this in Nevada I had some insider knowledge passed to me about Rove and Bush's campaign meeting with Heller, Guinn, and other top Republican state elected officials and party leaders that was held just before Heller announced his "paper trail strategy last year. Rove is from Reno, has a sister living there and a brother who owns Granite constrution. Rove was sure to hand his state to Bush just like Jebbie did in 2000.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
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