McClatchy: Did Washington waste millions on faulty voting machines?

[babylonsister]

Did Washington waste millions on faulty voting machines?


Rosemary Rodriguez, chairwoman of the federal Election Assistance Commission, says that voters seem to want a paper record of their ballots.

By Greg Gordon | McClatchy Newspapers



WASHINGTON _ Hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding that have gone to upgrade the nation's voting machines since 2003 were used to purchase touch-screen systems that many states are now scrapping because of concerns about their security and reliability.

State governments in Alaska, California, Florida, Iowa, Maryland, Tennessee and New Mexico have decided to replace their touch-screen electronic machines. While some states have completed the switch, others won't finish replacing the machines until 2010. Nationwide, the federal government spent $1.2 billion on new voting machines between 2003 and 2007.

Optical scanning equipment is becoming the preferred replacement because, unlike touch-screens, it preserves each voter’s original paper ballot in the event of a recount.

Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner is seeking to recover millions of dollars her state spent on the touch-screen machines and is urging the state legislature to require optical scanners statewide instead.

In a lawsuit, Brunner charged on Aug. 6 that touch-screen machines made by the former Diebold Election Systems and bought by 11 Ohio counties "produce computer stoppages" or delays and are vulnerable to "hacking, tampering and other attacks." In all, 44 Ohio counties spent $83 million in 2006 on Diebold's touch screens.

The Election Technology Council, a Houston-based trade group for voting machine manufacturers, recently circulated a pamphlet saying there's an "absence of evidence" to support allegations that voting machines have been used to commit election fraud. It blamed the government for a "broken system" that treats the industry as an adversary, rather than as a stakeholder. Nevertheless, the shift away from the suspect touch-screens is gaining momentum.

more...

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/48509.html

[Botany]

1. The machines were not faulty .... they did what they were designed to do

Rig elections.

[babylonsister]

2. Did you bother reading the article? nt

[Botany]

4. yes

n/t

[Wilms]

3. This, in part, is why all the teeth-gnashing over the Holt bill was a waste of time.

Without a federal law to help, touch-screens are on the way out anyway.

So now more and more people get to say, "at least I vote on a paper ballot". Yep. A paper ballot scanned and counted by a computer.

And lots of people say, "a paper ballot can be recounted if there's any question". Really? I still have questions about OH 2004, and FL 2000. Where's the recount?

I think it's time for the EI community to make serious effort to get risk-based audits implemented and figure out the chain of custody issues involved. Anything less is still faith-based elections.

As a side note, all of these problems are virtually solved, if not avoided, by a lever machine.

[demodonkey]

5. Except in a few key states. Pennsylvania for one. Many DRE-lovers & a recalcitrant General Assembly.

It will be as hard as hell to get them to switch statewide, and it is not for our lack of trying.

And in the meantime, as long as a big swing state like PA has 7 million votes on paperless DRE, there will be NO presidential election that is safe.

Marybeth in PA

[Wilms]

7. Except for a few key states? Maybe that's why Holt bills have three times flopped.

Maybe other states aren't going to use congress to come to the aid of another state. Not sure. But there's been ample opportunity and no luck.

I didn't think the Holt bills were as great or terrible as claimed. I think they were hugely successful in dividing the EI community, however.

Meanwhile, DREs are being scrapped a county at a time if not by states at a time. And what are they replaced with? Paper ballots scanned by computers and generally inadequately audited, if at all.

I know you've got problems in PA. I don't want to sound like I'm ignoring that. But expecting a federal bail-out ignores the previous failed attempts. Plus, it ain't like Santorum was reelected.

Perhaps a new approach will have to be crafted and tried. When NJ was pushing their audit bill, a number of national groups put their shoulders to the effort, as I recall. Maybe that's the ticket? :shrug:

[L. Coyote]

6. "federal government spent $1.2 billion ..." SUE!

44 Ohio counties spent $83 million in 2006 on Diebold ... Make that 44 lawsuits instead of one. Make it painful for Diebold.