what CA's Kevin Shelley did with the e-vote machine on election day, and tell me what you think? The report may or may not give you some additional thoughts for FL.
here is the link to the pdf file. It is very big and slow to download, but as an overall picture as to what can be gleaned from this audit may be interesting.
under the title: November Parallel Monitoring Program
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/touchscreen.htmthis is what he says in the Summary:
Members of the Secretary of State Elections Division staff, along with
independent consultants from the consulting firm of R&G Associates, LLC (R&G),
developed the Program to implement the Secretary’s directive. The Program
provided for the random selection of DRE voting equipment to be set aside for
use by experts to test on Election Day, simulating actual voting conditions, to
determine the accuracy of the machines to record, tabulate, and report votes.
Program Purpose
Current federal, state, and county accuracy testing of Direct Recording Electronic
(DRE) voting systems occurs prior to elections and does not mirror actual voting
conditions. The March Parallel Monitoring Program was developed as a
supplement to the current logic and accuracy testing processes. The goal was to
determine the presence of malicious code by testing the accuracy of the
machines to record, tabulate, and report votes using a sample of DRE equipment
in selected counties under simulated voting conditions on Election Day.
Notwithstanding this additional level of testing, there are forms of malicious code
that could affect the accuracy of a voting system that would not be detected by
federal, state, local or parallel testing. Other detection methods, such as the
Accessible Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (AVVPAT), are necessary to expose
these types of election tampering.
The Program results provide a “snapshot” of a specific system’s behavior on
Election Day. Thus, the value of the results is limited to the November 2, 2004
Election Day.
Ultimately, he concluded the machines performed with 100% accuracy, and wherever there were discrepancies is was tester error. I do see it to be open for discussion.