Clarifying some points on NYS voting machines

[brooklynite]

This forum has been flooded with recent articles about groups supporting an effort to retain NY's long-used lever machines for voting, as opposed to replacing them (currently mandated by HAVA) with newer systems. Based on information I got at a recent public workshop on New York City's selection of machines for the future, I'd like to clarify the choice.

First, there are currently only two systems which meet State voting standards available for procurement: Sequoia and ES&S. Regardless of which system is used, 100% of state ballots will be paper and 99% will be filled out manually.

Second, electronic machines will not be used to cast votes -- they will be used to optionally help a voter fill out a paper ballot, and through a seperate device, to tally, using OCR, the paper ballots filled out by voters. The paper ballots will be stored in a secure vault in the device and will be available for recounts or validity checks.

By comparison - the lever machines are considered attractive because votes can't be lost and they can't be "hacked" -- I would argue that this isn't the case; in an isolated setting (say an election precinct at 2 PM when nobody's showing up to vote), a corrupt election official could quickly and easily add a dozen votes to the machine for the candidate of their choice, without any paper trail that might look suspicious (say, a stack of ballots with only a vote cast for the preferred candidate). Add to that the facts that the machines are not accessible to the handicapped, requiring a segregated system of voting on paper for those who can't use the lever machines, and the fact that the machines are old, and do break or jam, and are increasingly expensive to maintain. I acknowledge that companies say they can repair them indefinitely, but providing replacement parts and labor for devices that haven't been manufactured in decades is going to be an increasingly costly effort.

[aquart]

1. Stuff it in an orifice. I WANT MY LEVERS!!!

Filling out paper forms ups the possibility of error and outright insanity. I saw the ballots in the Franken case. Paper forms can be disappeared. Harder to hijack a lever machine.

Sorry. None of those crappy machines are worth spit. The levers work. Let the levers work.

[brooklynite]

2. To follow your position to its logical conclusion...

...no absentee (paper) ballots would be allowed

...no provisional (paper) ballots would be allowed

...anyone physically unable to use the level machine wouldn't be allowed to vote

...if a level machine breaks during the day (and I've seen them do so), no emergency (paper) ballots would be allowed while the machine was waiting to be fixed

[Bill Bored]

5. It's not the ballots, it's the COUNTING!

...no absentee (paper) ballots would be allowed

Nobody is against absentee voting, except if it's ONLY for the sake of "convenience." It's fraud-prone because the chain of custody of these ballots can never be fully verified. But of course if someone can't make it to the polls for a good reason, they shouldn't be denied the right to vote, which would be the greater evil.

...no provisional (paper) ballots would be allowed

Of course they would, because of our other computerized voting system problem: The Registration Database! HAVA requires both the database and the provisional ballots.

...anyone physically unable to use the level machine wouldn't be allowed to vote

Nonsense! We solved that problem in 2008, in compliance with HAVA and NY law with the BMDs -- one at every poll site. Those ballots are hand counted, mind you, and anyone is allowed to use an accessible marking device. That said, the vast majority of voters with disabilities vote absentee in NY.

...if a level machine breaks during the day (and I've seen them do so), no emergency (paper) ballots would be allowed while the machine was waiting to be fixed

But the election law requires emergency paper ballots and I don't see anyone suggesting that this should be changed. The difference is, with scanners, our poll workers might have to count up to 4,000 ballots on election night by hand at a single poll site where a scanner failed, before they could legally adjourn. With lever machines, the damage is limited to less than 800 ballots per machine.

[brooklynite]

6. You missed my point...

I was responding to someone who doesn't want paper ballots.

[Bill Bored]

3. Clueless, vendor-inspired hogwash!

Let's take 'em one at a time:

"This forum has been flooded with recent articles about groups supporting an effort to retain NY's long-used lever machines for voting, as opposed to replacing them (currently mandated by HAVA) with newer systems."

There is no such mandate in HAVA. I suggest you read it instead of parroting party lines from vendors, misinformed advocates and other useful idiots.

"Based on information I got at a recent public workshop on New York City's selection of machines for the future, I'd like to clarify the choice."

So you saw Sequoia and ES&S hawking their wares? How interesting! What do you expect them to say? That they can't even get their shit certified? That they make "CRAP", as one NY State BoE Co-Chair said recently? That the levers work better than anything else we've ever had, according to a State Election Commissioner of the other major political party? I love it when there's bi-partisan consensus, don't you?

"First, there are currently only two systems which meet State voting standards available for procurement: Sequoia and ES&S."

Bullshit. No system currently meets NY and federal 2005 standards. The State Board of Elections has been trying to certify lever replacements for years and has not been able to. I suggest you read a little history about this futile effort, which you can find here:
http://re-mediaetc.blogspot.com/2008/10/mission-possible-fight-now-to-retain.html
here:
http://re-mediaetc.blogspot.com/2008/10/nys-testing-labs-accreditation-pulled.html
and here:
http://re-mediaetc.blogspot.com/2008/11/breaking-ny-state-board-of-elections.html

"Regardless of which system is used, 100% of state ballots will be paper and 99% will be filled out manually."

Which gives us what? Lots of paper ballots counted by computers! Read the election law and tell me how many of those ballots are likely to be counted by human beings...ever! If you don't know the answer to that, you are not qualified to comment on lever machine replacement.

"Second, electronic machines will not be used to cast votes -- they will be used to optionally help a voter fill out a paper ballot, and through a seperate device, to tally, using OCR, the paper ballots filled out by voters."

No OCR as far as I know. Just plain old mark-sense. But nevertheless, the ballot WILL BE COUNTED BY COMPUTERS -- AND IT'S THE COUNTING, STUPID!

It's a pretty lame argument to suggest that electronic vote counting is somehow NOT electronic voting. Unless you don't CARE if the votes are counted as cast. Do ya?

"The paper ballots will be stored in a secure vault in the device and will be available for recounts or validity checks."

Really? Have you seen this yet?:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Ballot-Stuffing-Holes-Ill-by-Rady-Ananda-080812-253.html
Doesn't look too secure to me.

Have you read the election law? Do you know how many ballots will actually be recounted for "validity checks?" Hint: Not enough of them!

"By comparison - the lever machines are considered attractive because votes can't be lost and they can't be "hacked" -- I would argue that this isn't the case; in an isolated setting (say an election precinct at 2 PM when nobody's showing up to vote),

You mean when there are NO bi-partisan teams of election inspectors watching the machines, the poll books, and every other OBSERVABLE aspect of the process as required by NY election law (which of course is impossible with things like ballot scanner SOFTWARE)?

a corrupt election official could quickly and easily add a dozen votes to the machine for the candidate of their choice,"

Trouble with that argument is that for every corrupt election official, there is an equally corrupt one of the other party looking over his shoulder. And if they're BOTH THAT CORRUPT, they'd have a field day once computers start counting our votes, don't you think? The truth is, it's a LOT easier to stuff votes as seen in the above video of the Sequoia-Dominion ImageCast op scan machine. Fortunately some patriotic Board of Elections whistle blower allowed that to be demonstrated. I doubt the vendors would have extended the same courtesy at the "workshop" you attended.

"without any paper trail that might look suspicious (say, a stack of ballots with only a vote cast for the preferred candidate)."

Do you really think anyone would attempt to rig an election in such an obvious way, when all they had to do was hack the ballot definition files or memory cards? Please.

"Add to that the facts that the machines are not accessible to the handicapped,"

We know that. That's why there are non-tabulating ballot marking devices. That problem was solved in 2008, without taking the risk of counting votes with software.

"requiring a segregated system of voting on paper for those who can't use the lever machines,"

Wrong again. ANYONE can use a BMD if they want and there are minimum requirements for usage to preserve voter privacy. No one should be forced to have their votes counted by a computer. Everyone should be allowed to use a paper ballot or a lever machine, at their discretion. This was the situation in NY in 2008 and it worked fine. HAVA does NOT require everyone to vote on the same machines. It simply guarantees equal OPPORTUNITY to vote.

"and the fact that the machines are old, and do break or jam, and are increasingly expensive to maintain."

All I can say about that is: You ain't seen nothin' yet! How do you think ES&S and Sequoia are going to make their money after rigging FL 2000 with those sub-standard punch cards? Maybe you should check with Dan Rather in case you don't know what kind of folks you're suggesting that NY do business with. See: http://www.hd.net/drr227.html
Very responsible vendors you are promoting there in Kings County!:wtf:

"I acknowledge that companies say they can repair them indefinitely, but providing replacement parts and labor for devices that haven't been manufactured in decades is going to be an increasingly costly effort."

OK, I admit that while I usually go to Home Depot for everyday low prices on that kind of stuff, sometimes I do prefer my local mom & pop hardware store, so maybe you got a point there. Those nuts and bolts can really add up! Sometimes I even have to use folding money to pay for 'em.

I think you really need to do some research on this issue and stop listening to vendors and other special interest groups. The DU Election Reform forum is a good place to start. You can bookmark it using this URL: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=203
Follow all the interesting links to posted articles and stuff, and maybe you'll learn why we can't trust computers to count votes. Oh, and check out Teresa Hommel's latest: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x512293
I hear she's thinking of changing her domain name to: WheresTheLever.org:rofl:

[Wilms]

4. Since you're such an educated consumer, you'll no doubt recognize a great deal when you see one.

And today, there's a special for those who attended voting system workshops. They'll include those two tall buildings in the background.



But you can't have the river. That's where they'll dump the paper ballots.


On a more serious note, please don't jog in Prospect Park after dark.