So why do they keep advocating for them?
"...only a local election..." Yep. The type of election that will likely never be adequately audited and therefore ALWAYS be determined by malleable software if optical scanners are used.
The article goes on to wrongly suggest the pilot (sic) program will only involve 16 counties,
"according to election officials". Only off by a factor of three. :eyes:
Why is there so much ignorance about this in NY State? Why did a county election official recently claim that optical scanners aren't computers? Why do so many (refuse to read the law, and therefore wrongly) assume that HAVA, rather than ERMA, requires the replacement of lever voting machines?
A likely major source of the confusion is New Yorkers for Verified Voting and their chief evangelist for computerized vote counting, Bo Lipari.
New Yorkers involved in election administration and advocacy could do their constituents well by taking the time to learn the facts.Here's a summer reading list:
ERMA
http://www.elections.state.ny.us/NYSBOE/hava/Chapter181VotingMachines.pdfhttp://www.elections.state.ny.us/NYSBOE/hava/Chapter506.pdfHAVA
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/voting/hava/HAVA_2002.htmlBryan Pfaffenberger - Machining the Vote: A brief history of lever voting machines
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Machining-the-Vote--A-brie-by-Rady-Ananda-080628-791.htmlTeresa Hommel - WheresThePaper.org
http://www.wheresthepaper.org/ny.htmlHoward Stanislevic - E-Voter Education Project
http://e-voter.blogspot.com/UCONN - Voting Technology Research Center
http://voter.engr.uconn.edu/voter/reports/