Check out the first sentence. Dan Bare, Board of Elections Director, Clermont County…the county that turned the election from Hackett to Schmidt in August (Ohio’s 2nd District) after stopping the vote count due to “humidity.” This is the same Dan Bare who was described in the affidavits below The Enquirer article. The Enquirer knows this. It’s all a big joke. People who have a reputation for poor election practices get quoted as experts by a newspaper that knows better on a topic that makes no sense. Just buy paper ballots, it’s easy and cheap. Hamilton Co. picks optical-scan voting
$10M system to make debut with 2006 elections
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050913/NEWS01/509130374/1056Tuesday, September 13, 2005
By Kimball Perry
Enquirer staff writer
Dan Bare loves the optical-scanning voting system that Clermont County has used for more than a decade.
"It's great. It puts the ballot in the hand of the voters from cradle to grave," said Bare, director of the Clermont County Board of Elections.
That's the kind of experience Hamilton County hopes to have for its more than 573,000 registered voters when it switches to a $10 million optical-scanning voting system next year.
"The whole point of this is, what is the voter's intent (and) giving the voter total control of the ballot," said John Williams, director of Hamilton County's Board of Elections.
The board last week selected the eScan optical-voting system made by Hart InterCivic of Austin, Texas.
The optical scanners will replace the punch-card voting system in effect since 1974.
<snip>
Warren County also plans to use an optical-scanner voting system.
Butler County has opted for a touch-screen system.
From “Scoop” Independent Media re: Don Bare, the Enquirer’s expert, and the 2004 Clermont County Recount (consider the expertise the Enquirer chooses to lead with)
The Veteran Of Fallujah Defeated By OH's Humidityhttp://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0508/S00186.htm “Witness Carolyn Betts attended the Clermont Board of Elections meeting on December 16, 2004, when the recount was certified. As she describes it, then and current Board Director Dan Bare was intent on certifying the recount by the December 20. He was also intent on accommodating his staff members’ desire for a holiday vacation. According to Betts’ account, Bare “would not discuss providing ballot books, uncounted absentee ballots and uncounted provisional ballots until the hand recount was complete.” “Ballot books” are the large bound printouts that poll workers use to check off names as voters enter the polling place. If there are 1000 votes cast in a precinct and only 800 signatures in the ballot book, there are serious problems. If any of the names on the ballot book cannot be confirmed as residents of the precinct, there are serious problems. For these reasons, ballot books are vital in determining the legitimacy of an election.
<snip>
In addition, the Clermont recount was not done as a random sample. The 3% of votes recounted came from smaller precincts, because the Clermont board, according to Betts, believed this would create “fewer problems.” Even if none of the problems described had occurred, the use of a non random sample for a 3% recount meant that the recount was inherently flawed and invalid.”
And now, for a some advice on disaster planning from former FEMA Director Brown…give me a break!
CLICK HERE to get quick access to Election Results and Discussion Forum on your “Latest” page.