Need BBV Help!

[Shakeydave]

Please help me formulate a reply to this response from my Supervisor of Elections.

Dear Mr. ......... :

The iVotronic voting system that we use in ....... County does not print out a receipt for the voter. There is no system available for purchase that does. In order for us to do that, we would need to have such a machine developed; it would need to be certified by the State of .....; and our election laws would need to change.

We do have a print-out at each precinct on election day that gives the totals of all votes in that precinct. These totals are compared with the number of voters that signed in on the precinct registers. Our system also has the ability to print out every ballot image that was voted in every machine on election day, if necessary.

The operative word in the Miami Herald article is "theoretical." The article says that new research from computer scientists on the theoretical dangers......... Investigative journalists like Bev Harris and computer scientists have never been near an election. They have no understanding of the processes and security procedures in place as we conduct elections. All they are doing is trying to shed suspicion on these new systems to perhaps make a name for themselves.

I would be happy to answer further questions or to sit down and talk with you.

...... Supervisor of Elections

Any help would be great! Thanks in advance!

[ParanoidPat]

1. Hi Dave! Surf on over to.....

....BBV Report.org and sign up! :evilgrin:

Perhaps we can help each other put an end to this electoral madness sweeping the country. :)

We're starting to build a nation wide network of activists and we'd love for you to join us! See this thread and drop Bev an e-mail! [e-mail]

[Shakeydave]

6. I'm signed up!

Thanks! :hi:

[GAspnes]

2. point out that:

1) there *are* systems that print a voter ballot (see Bev's thread on controlling the language Avoid these Black Box Voting "Weasel Words") so all the 'development/cost' arguments go away;

2) congratulate him on a procedure to compare voter reg counts with vote totals to eliminate ballot-stuffing, but point out that that proves a voter voted -- not that his or her vote was recorded correctly;

3) suggest, politely, that the effort required to change the election laws will be less, and less costly, than defending against a vote-tampering suit. "Better to be safe than sorry." Appealing to a bureaucrat's safety is always a compelling argument to him or her;

4) the "it's just theoretical" argument is irrelevant. You're not concerned with the safety and efficacy of their election procedures, you're sure those are fine -- you're concerned with the accuracy and verifiability of the machines, and that you are certain the Supervisor of Elections is an honesty, upright, moral person, but you're not so sure about the morals and ethics of an anonymous programmer in Ohio working for a Republican boss who's the state chair of a re-election campaign.

[Shakeydave]

7. Thank you!

You guys are the best! :thumbsup:

[Eloriel]

3. Oh, brother

Here's a really good (IMO) overview article you could share with him if you think it appropriate:
http://www.dailytrojan.com/article.do?issue=/V150/N31&id=03-elec.31v.html


"Any programmer can write code that displays one thing on a screen, records something else, and prints yet another result." -- Dr. Rebecca Mercuri


So printing out "ballot images" after the fact, after the voters are long gone, does nothing but show what the computer programmers caused to be printed, which may or may not be what the voter voted or even what was recorded to be tallied later.

The best physical security measures in the world will do NOTHING but protect tampered with votes from further tampering if there's malicious code within the software -- and no, certification at national and state levels does NOT check for that nor can the L&A and other testing detect or prevent that.

Not many people would do business with any bank whose ATMs didn't provide receipts. The IRS wouldn't take your Quicken printout (analogous to the ballot images and other reports) instead of your actual receipts. We need voter-verified paper BALLOTS that can legally be used in recounts and audits as a protection against computerized vote fraud. It won't PREVENT computerized vote fraud, but it will give us an alternative method of determining the voters' intent.

And so on.

Eloriel

[Shakeydave]

8. Thanks for taking the time to respond!

All of thius is good ammo! :hi:

[Noordam]

4. First there is a company that makes

TS with printers. And the TS in Hillsborough have a small printer with each TS BUT it is not set up to print receipts. So first tell your SOE to check with Hillsborough.

I have fought Pam Iorio until I am blue in the face over her TS. but now she is Mayor of Tampa.....

[Shakeydave]

9. Right on!

I found my SOE's response to be highly smug! I'll definitely hit her with that!

[Noordam]

5. I forgot

my article on the hardware IMHO you would have to have to rig a TS system...

http://www.allhatnocattle.net/november92002.htm

[BikeDeck]

10. Quick Quesiton

If the recall was defeated on Tuesday, how many of these discussions would be happening?

I saw several high power democrats interviewed, including Jesse Jackson who were complaining of voters being disenfranchised. They were saying that they were going to file suit, complain to the civil rights commission, etc... They were asked "if the recall is defeated will you be filing these lawsuits?" And everyone said NO! Seems to be situtational posturing.

Not to say that issue isn't serious and doesn't need massive attention. But honestly, if Gray had won, how big of a topic would this be right now?

[SharonAnn]

11. These discussions would still behappening. The point is that

we need Voter Verified Paper Ballots and proper auditing.

Nothing less will do.

[ParanoidPat]

12. I can't speak for Jesse Jackson or anyone else.....

.....and since you haven't posted a relevant link to the alleged statements made by the "several high power democrats" you saw interviewed it's hard to even comment on your allegations. I can say that the fight for transparency in our electoral system most definitely would still be going on whether the election was 'win, lose or draw'. :evilgrin:

Welcome to DU. :hi: Stick around awhile, you'll be amazed at what you can learn here!

[shirlden]

13. Hi BikeDeck and welcome to DU

Allow me to give you a short answer to your question "If the recall was defeated on Tuesday, how many of these discussions would be happening?"

All of them and more.

One election does not change the "fact" that electronic voting machines which do not produce a voter verifiable paper ballot can never be trusted by the voter. This is a non-partisan issue and it has nothing to do with the California re-call or the results. It has everything to do with the right of every American to have his ballot count the way he cast it.

Next question, please

:bounce:

[RedEagle]

14. This is Garbage

But I expect that from Florida election officials, most of them. Paul Craft (Croft?) is the guy who said that Florida would never allow a voter-verified paper ballot systems in the state. He's the head tech guy or something.

Two systems produce a voter-verified paper ballot.

ES&S has a prototype.

Sequoia can do it if required but it's on a sequential roll.

And I suppose Hopkins and even the SAIC report, as redacted as it was, is irrelevant?

Plus, and this is not original, nothing administrative is going to make a darn bit of difference if the mechanics are flawed. How can election personel know anything more about computers then computer scientists? It's not the evironment that controls it all.

This is absolute condescending arrogance.

[ParanoidPat]

15. Remember, ANY state or local official can be recalled......

.....in California! :evilgrin:

[JanMichael]

16. KICK dammit!

:kick: