Diebold election unit submits voting printer to U.S. (DBD)

[caligirl]

1:51pm 01/27/05
Diebold election unit submits voting printer to U.S. (DBD) By Heather Wilson
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Diebold Inc.'s (DBD) Diebold Election Systems unit said Thursday that it has submitted a plan for a paper-based voter-verifiable printer to the U.S. government for qualification for use in federal elections. The AccuView printer model allows a voter to print out and review their voting selections made on the company's touch screen voting machines.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/newsfinder/pulseone.asp?guid={64340EFF-BF0E-4231-89AA-45D79248E3DC}&siteid=mktw

[bullimiami]

1. i think we have been scammed again

all of the solutions to voting problems have been delayed until bushco screwed with another election.

he cant be elected again so now they might have some possible solutions?

[judy]

2. Voter verifiable is OK BUT what really matters is

AUDITABLE!!
Meaning that the voter casts his\her printed ballot in a SEALED BOX, after having verified it.

This is the most important!!

[Andy_Stephenson]

3. No Verifiable is NOT ok

Voter Verified Paper Ballot is the language to use!

Verifiable can mean electronic verification a'la vothere.

Mind the words...I do.

[rdmccur]

8. What ever happened

with the server you had your hands on?

[Up2Late]

4. How much you wanna' bet

they make it VERY expensive, or so that it can ONLY use expensive Diebold Paper.:mad:
OR
They might make it so that it "Prints" with a HOT head, but then either it fades away quickly, or over heats the roll of paper to turn the roll completely Black.:argh:

[Zan_of_Texas]

5. Diebold internal emails a couple of years ago on paper printing

E-mail stolen from Diebold is a call to gouge Maryland

by Steven T. Dennis
Staff Writer
Gazette.net
http://www.gazette.net/200350/montgomerycty/state/191617-1.html
Dec. 10, 2003

ANNAPOLIS -- An e-mail found in a collection of files stolen from Diebold Elections Systems' internal database recommends charging Maryland "out the yin-yang" if the state requires Diebold to add paper printouts to the $73 million voting system it purchased.
The e-mail from "Ken," dated Jan. 3, 2003, discusses a (Baltimore) Sun article about a University of Maryland study of the Diebold system:
"There is an important point that seems to be missed by all these articles: they already bought the system. At this point they are just closing the barn door. Let's just hope that as a company we are smart enough to charge out the yin if they try to change the rules now and legislate voter receipts."

"Ken" later clarifies that he meant "out the yin-yang," adding, "any after-sale changes should be prohibitively expensive." The e-mail has been cited by advocates of voter-verified receipts, who say estimates of the cost of adding printers -- as much as $20 million statewide -- have been bloated.

"I find it appalling," said Del. Karen S. Montgomery (D-Dist. 14) of Brookeville, who plans to file a bill mandating a voter-verified paper trail. "I'd really like to have explained to me anatomically, with the assumption that almost any place it would be would be painful," she said. Montgomery said that the price to add printers should be much lower and that she thinks it is being high-balled in part to keep people from talking about the printing system. <snip>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://diebold.datengrab.biz/lists/support.w3archive/200302.dir/msg00069.html
RE: Ballot Receipt Printer NOW required in California

To: <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: RE: Ballot Receipt Printer NOW required in California
From: "Ken Clark" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 09:59:40 -0800
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <621FD3E588CC1B47A560B16C666D4039A66655@MSEXCH15 <msg00034.html>>

Title: RE: Ballot Receipt Printer NOW required in California
I came across Dr. David Dill <http://verify.stanford.edu/evote.html> while reading some of Paranoid Bev’s scribbling. Steve, I assume you have met this guy since he appears to be involved with Santa Clara. The key paragraph from his manifesto reads:

Touch screen machines that print paper ballots. Such systems would have many of the advantages of DRE machines, including potentially improved accessibility for voters with disabilities. There is at least one such machine that is certified in several states, and we hope that all vendors of existing DRE machines could provide an option to add ballot printers (DRE voting machines in Brazil have been retrofitted with ballot printers, for example). The paper ballots must be submitted by the voters, to be available for counting or recounting and to avoid vote-selling. The votes on the paper ballots must be regarded as the definitive legal votes, taking precedence over electronic records or counts.

This doesn’t tell us much about how exactly he envisions the system working though. Ken

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail]
On Behalf Of Green, Pat Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 4:46 AM
To: '[e-mail]'
Subject: RE: Ballot Receipt Printer NOW required in California
Steve,
Thanks for the heads up. We have had quite a few discussions about how we would do this, but as you noted, the solution will vary greatly depending on the answers to your questions (Allowed to touch it? Allowed to see it? Required to see it? Etc). Keep us informed and feel free to call me if you want to discuss it. Pat

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Knecht <<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 6:03 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Ballot Receipt Printer NOW required in California

The new Secretary of State just announced that he supports touch screen vendors being required to print a receipt. This has major implications for our new unit. He is only convening a task force at this point, so we don't know the answers to questions like: We don't know whether the voter would be allowed to touch the receipt. We dont' know whether the voter will be allowed to see the receipt. If voters know that a printed receipt is there, I believe there will be demand to see it. I am suggesting that R7 development and design folks begin having some discussions on various scenarios of a printed ballot receipt and how we could "hide" the receipt from the voter if necessary or keep them from touching if it comes to that. Clearly, we can't begin design on anything until we know the parameters. On the other hand, we will be asked for input, and we should have some well conceived input, vs. myself or frank or deborah speaking for development.
Yes, another bad idea, brought to you by our elected politicians.
SteveK

[Up2Late]

12. How did you find all this stuff?

I have that file, but it was just too overwhelming to me.

Also, Did you see this?:evilgrin:

<http://2004.georgewbush.org/deadletteroffice/index.asp>

[garybeck]

6. just say NO to DIEBOLD

I don't care what they submit, they need to be banned from elections

[Andy_Stephenson]

7. Agreed

agreed

[KerryReallyWon]

9. No more machines!!!!

When they do a recount they will just program it. Your little paper receipt will nean nothing. NO MORE MACHINES!!!!

[harmonyguy]

10. And here are the photos !!!

http://www6.diebold.com/whatsnews/pr/photo/accuview.htm

[judy]

11. And where does this little piece of paper go after this?

THAT's the IMPORTANT point!!

If it doesn't go into a sealed box for possible audit, then it is worth absolutely nothing.