New Jersey is in the process of testing and buying printers for the Sequoia touch screen voting machines that were purchased in 2005 to comply with the Help America Vote Act- sponsored by non other than Bob Ney of Ohio. In the rush to buy these machines we may have not selected the best kind. It is crucial that the State get a secure reliable voting system because this is how we deliver democracy to the people.
We need to know if the printers are working well and will not break down constantly. We need to know that the VVPT (voter verified paper trail) is legible and well designed; A large sample voters, from all walks of life, should review sample VVPTs and see if the design is clear and easy to understand. We need to know that there will be sufficient audits of the VVPT to ensure that paper tallies correspond to machine tallies. And we need to have good protocols for the storing and delivering of the machines and for how election workers should proceed if fraud is suspected.
New Jersey should also use the experience of other states as a guide. In Feb. 2007 Gov. Crist (FL) announced plans to abandon the touch-screen voting machines bought in 2002, to adopt instead a statewide system of casting paper ballots counted by optical scanners. In Mar. 2006, Gov. Richardson (NM) signed a bill requiring optical scan, saying "Paper ballots serve as the ultimate back-up for our elections, providing secure and permanent verification of the will of the people."
If Sequoia is unable to produce a reliable printer for the VVPT on their touch screen machines we should consider a switch to a paper ballot optical scan system. Other states have abandoned these machines fearing for the security of their elections. Or if we have enough confidence in the Sequoia with the new printer we might consider the example of Virginia: This month Virginia passed a bill to phase out the machines as they wear out, and replace them with optical scanners.
Over half of American voters already cast paper ballots read by optical scanners. The technology is secure. It's accurate. It's accessible. It's verifiable. And it's cost-effective. Voters must have confidence that their vote has been accurately recorded and counted and that election results can be examined and confirmed. The State of New Jersey must do everything possible to provide these guarantees.
We may be better off if we adopt a single statewide system using paper ballots, precinct based optical scanners, and accessible ballot marking devices. Along with auditing protocols for verifying that the optical scanner count conforms to the count of paper ballots. And a bi-partisan approved system for ballot design and protocols for storing and transferring the optical scan machines as well as procedures for the detection of fraud.
Thanks to the state legislature, New Jersey is already scheduled to require a paper trail by January 2008. The state's plan has been to 'upgrade' the existing Sequoia machines with printers. This week, a lawsuit aimed to get the machines thrown out now. The Ledger reports that the ruling is in: Superior Court Judge Linda Feinberg is not throwing out the machines now, but she has a lot of skepticism about current plans. She said the state has to have a backup plan to replace the machines, and that she needs to see progress soon:
She scheduled May hearings to chart the state's course, and admonished state officials to cooperate with voter-rights activists in the meantime. "This is a public issue with regards to voting. This should not be an adversarial proceeding. This is what we need to do to ensure the integrity of the voting system," the judge said.
Update: Perhaps I should say a bit more. If you hoped that the electronic machines with no paper trail would be gone by your next election, then this ruling is disappointing. On the other hand, if you've been worried about this loophole in the law:
A waiver of the provisions of this paragraph shall be granted by the Attorney General if the technology to produce a permanent voter-verified paper record for each vote cast is not commercially available.
The judge has shown she is very serious that the paper record will be available, and will be keeping a close eye on the state and Sequoia.
And on Monday, Representative Rush Holt, Democrat of New Jersey, plans to introduce a bill in Congress that would require all voting machines nationwide to produce paper records through which voters can verify that their ballots were recorded correctly. Mr. Holt's bill would also substantially toughen the requirements for the touch-screen machines that have printers, and experts say this also could give more impetus to the shift toward the optical scanning systems.
Immediately after Nancy Pelosi's swearing-in as Speaker of the House, Representative Rush Holt put the House of Representatives on record that the swearing-in of a Member of Congress does not prejudice the pending inquiry of a contested election in Florida's 13th district.
Holt: Madam Speaker: In light of the facts that partisan and non-partisan lawsuits are underway with regard to Florida's 13th Congressional District and that the votes of 18,000 voters were not recorded on the paperless electronic voting machines in an election decided by 369 votes, may I ask for the record whether a notice of contest has been filed with the Clerk on behalf of Christine Jenningspursuant to law, and what effect, if any, today's proceedings have on pending contests?
Speaker Pelosi: The Chair is advised by the Clerk that a notice of contest pursuant to the statute, section 382 of title 2, United States Code, has been filed with the Clerk. Under section 5 of article I of the Constitution and the statute, the House remains the judge of the elections of its Members. The seating of this Member-elect is entirely without prejudice to the contest over the final right to that seat that is pending under the statute and will be reviewed in the ordinary course in the Committee on House Administration.
Congressman Rush Holt will be busy when the house goes back in session this January. He has decided to put the House on record as supporting a challenge to the election results of FL-13 involving Democrat Christine Jennings.
Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12) today announced that he intends to take steps to put the U.S. House of Representatives on record as recognizing the justification of the electoral challenge filed by Congressional candidate Christine Jennings regarding the disputed election in Florida's 13th Congressional District, and making clear that any House proceedings on January 4, 2007, will not prejudice legal proceedings or legislative inquiry regarding the election's validity.
Democratic Chairman Howard Dean has already said the Dem's should not seat her opponent Vern Buchanan without another election.
According to evidence provided in the Florida case, to date, 18,000 ballots cast on electronic voting machines did not record the voter's selection for the House of Representatives, more than enough to change the outcome of the election, which was awarded to Vernon Buchanan by a margin of 369 votes. Had all votes been counted, the outcome would have been different, according to Dr. Michael Herron, an independent expert hired by ES&S, the manufacturer of the electronic voting machines used in Florida-13.
A reminder: the question of what to do about the thousands of voting irregularities in Florida's 13th district remains unanswered.
Rick Hansen of Election Law is calling on the House to take action. Representative Holt should take note. And you should contact his office, and tell him to take action.
Sent to his office this afternoon. Do the same, if you think it's right.
Rep. Holt,
I was glad to see you step up and say something about the voting irregularities in Florida 13, where 18,000 votes are missing in an election decided by a mere 400. Today, as you know, a lack of a paper trail prevented a thorough audit, and Florida has certified a winner in this election.
That is unacceptable.
While legal actions are being taken, there's a good chance they will not succeed. Something more must be done.
That is why I ask that you lead the fight on the House floor to prevent a member being seated from this district until the House investigates and produces a reccomendation. Petitioning a federal election on the floor of Congress has precedent in Indiana 8 in 1984 and New Hampshire Senate in 1974.
As a nationally recognized advocate for clean electronic-voting, you should lead this fight. For if this and similar acts of disenfranchisement are not beaten back now, then when?
Earlier this week, Representative Rush Holt cited the mass undervoting in a section of Florida's 13th district as evidence the nation needs verifiable voting. Some voters in this area have complained the race was not on their screens, while it is likely the odd placement made the race hard to find. (Notice it is page 2, carrying over from the other FEDERAL race on page 1.)
But this was not a minor problem for a few absent-minded voters. In his press conference, Rep. Holt reminded, "More than 18,000 votes were uncounted in a race separated by less than 400 votes." Voters did not receive receipts (Good eye, FogerRox) left no paper trail to investigate their undervotes in the race, and their complaints have fallen on deaf ears. Like Holt said, "Without a voter-verified paper audit trail, no satisfactory resolution is possible. One side or the other will always doubt the result."
Tomorrow, Florida will certify the Republican as the winner, and some are asking whether there are other paths to recourse. This informative thread over at Kos asks whether a new election is possible. In the comments, readers cite the precedents of Indiana 8 in 1984 and New Hampshire Senate in 1974. In these cases, the federal government helped resolve the matter while the states sat on their hands. In the former, the House refused to seat either member until they reviewed the case and determined the winner qualified. In the latter case, the Senate was petitioned to review the matter and the two candidates agreed to a new election.
If the House refuses to seat the member from Florida 13, as Kos reader gatordem comments, "Under Florida law, the governor is required to call a special election to fill the vacant seat." But of course, a member of the House has to lead that effort.
As a nationally recognized voter-advocate, Representative Holt is the natural choice for such a job. He should strongly consider taking the lead. Contact his office here.
Representative Rush Holt held a press conference today to address irregularities with some electronic voting machines in last week's elections.
As we stand here today, the results in at least one House race remain unknown because thousands of votes were lost by electronic voting machines. Until we require that these systems produce a voter-verified paper audit trail, voters will continue to doubt the outcomes of elections involving these machines, because the results will be unauditable.
The inaccuracy of electronic touch-screen voting machines poses a direct threat to the integrity of our electoral system and to our nation’s democracy. Once again this broken system has been exposed in Florida’s 13th Congressional district where over 18,000 votes went uncounted. Without the means to fully guarantee that every vote is counted as fairly and accurately as possible, the authenticity of our recorded vote will always be uncertain and open to electoral and legal challenges.
There seems little doubt that next Tuesday will produce a Democratic Landslide, both in Jersey and throughout the country. Every day shows more and more shift to the Democrats, and suggestions of a 45-60 seat win are no longer wildly optimistic. The voters are sickened by the Bush policies and ready to show it. All that is needed is for their votes to be counted honestly.
Unfortunately, that is not a certainty, or anything near it. Worries about electronic voting are no longer the province of the 'moonbat' and 'tinfoil hat' group. Tonight there will be a documentary on HBO detailing the problems with the Diebold machines -- and pointing out the ties between Diebold and the Republican party.
And almost every computer magazine and website has had articles on this. (A particularly good one is in Ars Technica)
And it isn't just Democrats who are screaming. Lou Dobbs, hardly a leftist, has had continuing and superb coverage of the topic, frequently comparing the US to a 'banana Republic.' (*sigh* Dobbs' biases can get in the way. I would find a far better comparison to some of the ex-Soviet Republics.)
To demonstarte the problem, New Jersey uses Sequoia machines. An article has been posted -- no I will not link to it, even as a warning, but it is readily findable -- showing that someone with no computer knowledge or training can vote multiple times on such a machine. Sequoia has admitted that it was aware of this flaw, and warnings have been sent to those polling places in California (but not in NJ, so far, to watch for this.
Already states that have early voting have been reporting numerous examples of voters attempting to vote Democratic, Libertarian, or Green and seeing their votes appearing as Republican on summary sheets. See this article in the Miami Herald and this in the Tampa Bay Tribune for examples.
For what we can do to protect ourselves besides voting see below the fold.
Prof Ed Felton and two graduate students - Ariel J. Feldman and J. Alex Halderman were able to hack into a Diebold electronic voting machine and install a virus that changed the results of an election, leaving no trace of tampering. We mentioned this a few days ago, but now you can watch the demonstration they did on Fox "News":
You can read the full research paper and see a more detailed video demonstration at their website. Diebold predictably responded by insisting that their machines are safe, but they still refuse to allow independent testing of their machines. What are they so afraid of? The fact is that any computer can theoretically be hacked, and this latest demonstration should lend more urgency to the need for a voter-verifiable paper record, like Rush Holt's HR-550.
