Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NEW VOTING STANDARDS TO BE RELEASED THIS WEEK, WEEK OF JUNE 9-15, 2005

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
MelissaB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 10:13 PM
Original message
NEW VOTING STANDARDS TO BE RELEASED THIS WEEK, WEEK OF JUNE 9-15, 2005

NEW VOTING STANDARDS TO BE RELEASED THIS WEEK, WEEK OF JUNE 9-15, 2005


by HAZEL TRICE EDNEY
The Wilmington Journal
Originally posted 6/10/2005

BY HAZEL TRICE EDNEY
OF NNPA

WASHINGTON (NNPA) – New voting machine standards to be released this week are designed to prevent a recurrence of Election 2000-like debacles in congressional and senatorial races next year. However, activists and rights advocates say they are more concerned about the new machines that are supposed to correct the problem than old ones with proven flaws.

“On the average, people do not feel comfortable with automated voting without having some way of a verified way of knowing that the vote was actually the vote that they cast and the fact that they don’t know if it’s been counted. That concern is very high and across all demographics,” says Melanie Campbell, executive director and CEO of the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation. “When it comes to the machines, you’ve got a lot of new equipment. There are a lot of concerns still out there in the community, so the work continues. We need to just educate the community to make sure that they are involved and that they are a part of the process.”

Gracia Hillman, chair of the four-member bi-partisan U. S. Election Assistance Commission, has announced hearings to allow people to comment on the new standards. Her agency seeks to assure election officials and the public that new voting systems being installed around the country will work accurately and reliably. The 90-day period during which public comments will be accepted begins June 10. The first hearing is set for New York City.

Another hearing will be announced later, Hillman says.



More: http://wilmingtonjournal.blackpressusa.com/news/Article/Article.asp?NewsID=58166&sID=12
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 10:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. OK, MelissaB, how are we being nailed?
Sounds like they don't mention paper...wonder why? That would solve all the voting fraud problems.

Contact the DNC and Give 'em Hell About NOT Acting on Election Fraud

NEW LEADERS FOR A NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MelissaB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I don't know how we are being nailed, but I didn't know new standards
were being released.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Land Shark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. everyone on the committee is an elections official, or vendor...
you know, all the folks that have an intensive interest in maintaining their "privacy" of their work, whether it be trade secrets or the interest of the govt officials in not being subjected to public criticism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 10:34 PM
Response to Original message
3. Do we have any way of knowing how accurate those old lever machines
were? I want an auditable paper trail on thee new voting machines too, but it's gotten me thinking about the old machines. We all know about the problems with punch cards, I know there can be problems with optical scaners. I am now wondering about the old lever machines that I voted on from age 21 to 49 when I moved from Pa.

How do we really know if ANY of the elections we've had were really honest?

Once they did away with the really old paper ballots where you just marked your X in the box, there have been lots of possibilities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gaia_gardener Donating Member (333 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. At least optical scan leaves
a paper ballot that can be counted. And it's pretty darn easy to do - just draw a line to complete the arrow. The biggest problem you have is if the marking pen is out of ink.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. You're right about the optical scan. I still wonder about those old
lever machines. I'll be honest, I voted on them for many years, and never once questioned if my vote was recorded, but now....I wonder?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LightningFlash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. The ones Triad serviced sure don't....
Look up the Ohio history and Triad has been servicing the same machines since the 1988 scandals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. The biggest problem you have with OpScans is not ink running out.
It's the fact that OpScans are configured by the tabulators, and that they report results to the Tabulator.

That interface is troublesome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
garybeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #4
9. not exactly
scanned paper ballots are not that great. we have them in VT. unless you have an official recount they're worthless. Read this article about how easily the scanners can be hacked:

http://www.solarbus.org/election/articles/050602-bbv.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
garybeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. self delete dupe
Edited on Sat Jun-11-05 12:27 AM by garybeck
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-13-05 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #3
18. It has to do with fraud happening at the speed of light, napi22,
Edited on Mon Jun-13-05 05:09 PM by Peace Patriot
beyond the realm of human senses, and on a massive scale. The magnitude of the fraud potential (and actualization in '02 and 04) is way beyond anything humans can keep track of during an election. Add to that: secret, proprietary programming code, owned and controlled by Bush partisans, and what you have is...

A COMPLETELY NON-TRANSPARENT AND INVALID ELECTION SYSTEM, and WRONG RESULTS that cannot be tracked, or may be partially tracked and inferred (if there is some kind of a paper trail, or by means of exit polls) but only with great difficulty.

The thing is a done deal in head-spinning seconds, trumpeted by the media, and virtually impossible to audit, recount or make right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 02:28 AM
Response to Original message
11. kick n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-12-05 04:25 AM
Response to Original message
12. kick n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kip Humphrey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-12-05 07:01 AM
Response to Original message
13. EAH survey of findings will be submitted
The Election Assessment Hearing is collecting submissions of findings with supporting documents from investigations, research and analysis of electoral problems during the 2004 election.

Our initial release will be a survey of submissions given to the press and the Baker-Carter Commission. Submissions will then be assessed using information quality processes and measures (led by Larry English) which will be made public in a subsequent release to state election officials and the EAC.

Your support is needed. If you know anyone with research, investigative findings of evidence, or statistical analysis of election process failings during the 2004 election, ask them to contact Seth Johnson at Seth@electionassessment.org



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-13-05 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
14. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diva77 Donating Member (999 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-13-05 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
15. HELP! Can anyone remark on ESS AutoMARK, etc.
Since many of us will be in SacTown on 6/16 for VSPP mtg., would help to have informed remarks regarding following:

2. Election Systems & Software

a. Unity election management system
b. Model 100 precinct scanner
c. Model 550 central scanner
d. Model 650 central scanner
e. AutoMARK Voter Assist Terminal
f. AutoMARK Information Management System


Item 2: Staff Report (ESS system)
<http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/voting_systems/2005_06_16_2_s.pdf>
Item 2: Consultant's Report (ESS system)
<http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/voting_systems/2005_06_16_2_c.pdf>
Item 2e: Use Procedures (ESS AutoMARK VAT)
<http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/voting_systems/2005_06_16_2e_p.pdf>


Thank you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pig Farmer Donating Member (12 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-13-05 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. So basically, Automark sucks, but certify it anyways?
The staff report mentions how it can crash.

The staff and consultant both mention how slow it is - time to respond to inputs, time to recognize blank ballots, time to print ballots.

Not to mention lack of basic amenities like a "please wait" icon.

Yet they recommend certification -- becuase this is version 1.00 and they assume better is coming?

Why whould the disabled community settle for such 2nd class treatment?

PF
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diva77 Donating Member (999 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-13-05 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Is there any poss. of fraud being committed with AutoMARK?
is there any possibility of fraud being committed with the AutoMARk? thank you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-13-05 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. There is not just "any possibility," there is EVERY POSSIBILITY, given...
their SECRET, PROPRIETARY PROGRAMMING CODE, and the rightwing connections of ES&S.

Private companies out of our elections NOW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-13-05 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. I'm confused...again.
I think I keep mixing up AutoMark and AccuPoll.

Does not one of them have open software? (Not that I'm even thrilled with that, but it's a sliight improvement over secret code.)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diva77 Donating Member (999 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-13-05 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. request more specific info.
Since VSPP is more of a techie meeting, would appreciate technical aspects of how fraud can occur with AutoMARK -- lay people in the area seem to not be worried about it because they think its only function is to print a paper ballot...please help, I am not a techie and need to inform other nontechies

thank you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LightningFlash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-05 06:24 AM
Response to Reply #22
24. It has secret code.
The code MUST be auditable by non-partisans, under every circumstances.

http://www.velvetrevolution.us
http://www.votersunite.org

Otherwise, the vote can NOT be verified.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diva77 Donating Member (999 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-05 04:08 AM
Response to Reply #16
23. AutoMARK
Thank you PF -- your comments will come in handy ... much appreciated! Feel free to elaborate more --

diva
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amaryllis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-05 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #15
25. have you read Myth Breakers and Messups by vendor on the voters
Edited on Wed Jun-15-05 11:53 PM by Amaryllis
unite site?

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=74&Itemid=30

http://www.votersunite.org/info/messupsbyvendor.asp
Lots of great messups by ES & S and well documented for legislators or elecion officials.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-13-05 05:18 PM
Response to Original message
20. This 90-day period for public comment is a prime opportunity for...
election fraud/reform activists. I have the EAC deadline figured for the week of Sept. 4. We should keep this kicked and try to get some coordination on in-put, make sure all issues and legal bases are covered, and work for MEDIA SPOTLIGHT, public pressure, and educating the public, state legislators and state/local election officials.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 05:08 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC