Ohio Elections Official Calls Machines Flawed: Secy. of State proposes replacing all voting machines

[DeepModem Mom]

Source: New York Times

By BOB DRIEHAUS
Published: December 15, 2007

CINCINNATI — All five voting systems used in Ohio, a state whose electoral votes narrowly swung two elections toward President Bush, have critical flaws that could undermine the integrity of the 2008 general election, a report commissioned by the state’s top elections official has found. “It was worse than I anticipated,” the official, Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, said of the report. “I had hoped that perhaps one system would test superior to the others.”

At polling stations, teams working on the study were able to pick locks to access memory cards and use hand-held devices to plug false vote counts into machines. At boards of election, they were able to introduce malignant software into servers.

Ms. Brunner proposed replacing all of the state’s voting machines, including the touch-screen ones used in more than 50 of Ohio’s 88 counties. She wants all counties to use optical scan machines that read and electronically record paper ballots that are filled in manually by voters. She called for legislation and financing to be in place by April so the new machines can be used in the presidential election next November. She said she could not estimate the cost of the changes.

Florida, another swing state with a history of voting problems, is also scrapping touch-screen machines and switching to optical scan ones for the election. Such systems have gained favor because experts say they are more reliable than others and, unlike most touch screens, they provide a paper trail for recounts.

Ms. Brunner, a Democrat, succeeded J. Kenneth Blackwell, a Republican who came under fire for simultaneously overseeing the 2004 election and serving as co-chairman of President Bush’s re-election campaign in Ohio. She ordered the study as part of a pledge to overhaul voting after problems made headlines for hours-long lines in the 2000 and 2004 elections and a scandal in Cuyahoga County, which includes Cleveland, that led to the convictions of two elections workers on charges of rigging recounts. Ms. Brunner’s office temporarily seized control of that county’s board of elections.

The study released Friday found that voting machines and central servers made by Elections Systems and Software; Premier Election Solutions, formerly Diebold; and Hart InterCivic; were easily corrupted....

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/15/us/15ohio.html

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. Good for her!

Perhaps she should talk to our SOS, Debra Bowen...

She has already reached the same conclusions...

[samplegirl]

2. I still lament

about how good it would of been with Kerry.

[Joe Chi Minh]

15. Same here, even from the UK.

[WCGreen]

3. Last Friday, I went through a recount on the touch screens in

Cuyahoga county...

Cleveland...

Well, it's a cluster fuck to be sure...

Even the winners thought the process was impossible and the recount was baiscally useless since the machine bound up tighter than a drum...

Optical Scans of paper ballets is the only way too go...

[DeepModem Mom]

4. Thanks for an "on-the-ground" view, WC! nt

[magellan]

5. Opti-scans aren't safe either

They have tabulators that can be messed with. Hand-counted paper ballots is the safest.

[orleans]

6. i agree. k&r this thread. n/t

[WCGreen]

7. They run them through twice and if they get two numbers they

hand count...

Everything can be fucked with...

You could slip paper ballots...

Have poll workers fuck with stuff on site...

If we trust nothing we are lost...

[truedelphi]

8. The problem with OptiScan is that

In addition to the fact that the vote still ends up recorded on computer mempory type devices is that in the event tht you need a recount, you may find the local Voter Registrar saying that it is more than $ 1.50 per ballot.

At least that is what has been happening in Marin County. ROV wants $ 13,000 up front - and if it is a county wide election, a grand total of $ 161,000.

[WCGreen]

9. All Boards of election will recount if the vote is close, say within

1/2 ot 1 percent...

After that, the cost falls on the people requesting the count...

[truedelphi]

10. I don't believe that is true. At least not in Marin County

In a County wide election, where my candidate was off by a mere 600 votes, out of a vote total of 101,000, he was still required to pay the $ 161,1000.

And to make matters worse, the seat on The Hospital Board in question was a non-paying position!

[WCGreen]

12. Well here in Ohio, and they pretty much follow national precedent

the 1/2 of 1 percent applies...

If there were more than one candidate in the mix, that could have changed the formula they use to see if the results fall within the parameters they have set for being inside the statistical range of error....

[truedelphi]

14. And then the other problem using OptiScan is that

If you do feel it important to keep the cost down, you have the option of simply running the results through the same computer memory that may well have been altered the first time.

That has happened in Riverside CA where contested elections for a populace of 250,000 voters only cost $ 9,000.

However, if you suspect the results are tainted, does running the tainted memory one more time accomplish much??

Also, in earlier post, I meant to type $ 161,000 (with three zeroes after the comma not four)

[Rene]

17. I'm not sure about the optical scan of paper ballets either. The POST processing/lying can still be

a serious problem. Our little town has had 3 recounts, in the days after our Nov election....triggered by 2 office holders being within 20 votes.
We now have 4 different totals from the tabulator and the 3 recounts.
I've filed an Election complaint about what I observed on Election night and during the multi-hou recounts. MANY procedure steps were done illegally....and the election officials kept going into a side room from our primary meeting room to do their 'counting.
On Election night...they had barred us from the room for 50 minutes...illegally.
In our town we have a very viable and official 3rd party. Both the Dems and Repugs were collaborating in their run against them. The D and R vote counting officials illegally barred our party from participating in the recanvasses. The State has confiscated ALL the voting materials and the tabulator....I hope and pray for an honest investigation.

If there hadn't been a challenge because of the close count....all that we now know about the mis-handling of vote counting AFTER the election would have been permanently buried.

Now we can clearly see how you cannot believe the optical scan results....and election night announcements of vote totals. PEOPLE with agendas manipulate them. Never allow the same people in your town COUNT the votes each time.

[donkeyotay]

11. While we're replacing the flawed machines, can we replace the flawed president they elected? nt

[BadGimp]

13. Entirely too much Logic being employed here..

"In addition to switching machines, Ms. Brunner recommended eliminating polling stations that are used for fewer than five precincts as a cost-cutting measure, and introducing early voting 15 days before Election Day."

I mean come on, why all the fuss about protecting the integrity of the voting process in this country?

{sarcasim off}

If Ohioians are not careful they just might produce an election in 08 that is fair and accurate.

[Zorra]

16. Paper ballots. Pens. Hand counts under surveillance.

What is so freaking hard to grasp about this process, which is so successful in Canada? How long do we have to experiment with rectangular wheels before we figure out that round ones work a million times better?
:banghead: