September 09, 2010

Providing legal resources and election news to California election officials and the attorneys who represent them.

« January 2006 | Main | March 2006 »

February 27, 2006

Bowen slams voting systems in S.C. speech

From the Santa Cruz Sentinel:

"State Sen. Debra Bowen ventured onto Bruce McPherson's home turf Saturday to let voters know she's gunning for his job.

The tech-savvy legislator, D-Marina del Rey, spoke to a group of 20 Santa Cruz Democrats in the basement of the Veterans Hall about inconsistencies and a lack of security in American and California voting systems.

"You cannot maintain a democracy where a significant number of people have doubts about the legitimacy of an election," Bowen said. She criticized Secretary of State McPherson for certifying on Feb. 17 voting systems made by Diebold Election Systems of Canton, Ohio, whose CEO made campaign contributions to the Bush-Cheney 2004 re-election campaign.

"This is not a company we ought to be doing business with," she said."

Posted by Randy Riddle at 8:48 AM | Permalink. . .

February 23, 2006

Senator Bowen seeks reversal of Diebold conditional certification

You can find Senator Bowen's letter here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 4:13 PM | Permalink. . .

February 22, 2006

Man Pleads Not Guilty in Voting Device Case

From the LA Times:

"A word processor accused of stealing damaging documents about electronic voting machine manufacturer Diebold Election Systems was arraigned Tuesday on three felony counts.

Stephen Heller was charged in Los Angeles Superior Court with felony access to computer data, commercial burglary and receiving stolen property. He pleaded not guilty.

"It's a devastating allegation for a whistle-blower," said Blair Berk, Heller's attorney. "Certainly, someone who saw those documents could have reasonably believed that thousands of voters were going to be potentially disenfranchised in upcoming elections."

The charges arise from Heller's alleged disclosure two years ago of legal papers from the Los Angeles office of international law firm Jones Day, which represented Diebold at the time. Heller was under contract as a word processor at Jones Day.

The documents included legal memos from one Jones Day attorney to another regarding allegations by activists that Diebold had used uncertified voting systems in Alameda County elections beginning in 2002."

In the memos, a Jones Day attorney opined that using uncertified voting systems violated California election law and that if Diebold had employed an uncertified system, Alameda County could sue the company for breaching its $12.7-million contract.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 12:30 PM | Permalink. . .

FUNDING TO BE SOUGHT FOR TOUCH-SCREEN VOTING DEVICES

"In slightly more than 100 days, the June 6 primary election will happen. Butte County Clerk-Recorder Candace Grubbs said the county will be ready, but it won't be any kind of easy.

"The amount of work to go into this will be horrendous," said Grubbs on Tuesday in her Oroville office.

Just a week earlier, she told the Butte County Board of Supervisors preparations for the coming election were so bogged down that it was possible the whole thing would have to be conducted as a by-mail exercise.

Butte County, like the rest of the counties in the state, is under a federal mandate to have at least one voting machine in each precinct designed to be used by disabled individuals. The device must allow the disabled person to vote unassisted and in secrecy.

The problem was California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson has been tardy in certifying machines to be used for the process.

Speaking to the supervisors, Grubbs said, if the machines were not certified quickly, the only option open to the county would be to get legislative approval to hold an all mail-in election for the primary.

Supervisors voted unanimously to urge the Legislature to approve a measure that would allow for a one-time, mail-in election.

However, on Friday McPherson gave his official nod for the use of the Diebold touch-screen voting machines that Grubbs wanted to use for the primary.

Next Tuesday, Grubbs will again go before the supervisors to get permission to spend roughly $3 million to purchase 600 of the machines, replacing all of the existing county voting machines."

You can find the article here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 12:28 PM | Permalink. . .

Lawmakers may review initiatives

"Secretary of State Bruce McPherson on Tuesday said he plans to propose an indirect initiative process in California enabling the state Legislature to review measures before they are placed on the ballot.

McPherson, who made the comments while giving a speech during a Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce luncheon at the Hyatt downtown, said the details of his plan are still being hammered out and that he's unsure if he will introduce his bill to the Legislature this year or next.

State ballot measures can take the "worst form of special interest politics in the state," he said, adding, "I think people are just sick and tired of seeing all these initiatives on the ballot."

There are more than 60 initiatives currently in circulation for California's June and November ballots, he said.

All eight initiatives on the Nov. 8, 2005, special election ballot failed, four of which were supported by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Eight states currently offer some type of indirect initiative process, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures."

You can read the article here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 12:26 PM | Permalink. . .

February 17, 2006

Secretary of State Conditionally Certifies Diebold TSx Touchscreen System

Here is Secretary McPherson's statement:

"Secretary of State Bruce McPherson today announced his decision to certify with conditions the Diebold TSX and Optical Scan (OS) voting systems for use in California’s 2006 elections. The decision comes after months of thorough review of both voting systems, their compliance with both state and federal laws and the completion of an additional security analysis by independent testers from computer labs at the University of California, Berkeley. “As the State’s chief elections official, the decision to certify voting systems is a very serious responsibility, and a number of factors must be carefully weighed before I determine whether to grant certification,” said Secretary McPherson. “This is precisely why I created 10 strict standards that must be met for a voting system to be certified, making California’s process the most stringent in the nation. We have applied these standards and after rigorous scrutiny, I have determined that these Diebold systems can be used for the 2006 elections.” Mikel Haas, San Diego County Registrar of Voters said, “I appreciate Secretary McPherson’s leadership in establishing what must be the most comprehensive and rigorous certification process in the nation. To comply with new federal and state laws regarding elections, we need a new and different set of tools and Secretary McPherson made sure we got those tools.” San Diego is home to California’s first federal election of 2006, a special congressional vacancy election to be held in April. The current voting system certification process was established by Secretary McPherson shortly after taking office in 2005. The certification process requires that each voting system or vendor meet 10 strict standards as conditions for use in the State’s elections. The certification standards are designed to ensure that every voting system is secure, reliable and accurate for California’s nearly 16 million voters. Among the requirements, systems must: undergo a first-in-the-nation requirement for a “volume test” to ensure the systems will withstand election day levels of activity, deposit a copy of the system source code and the binary executables with the Office of the Secretary of State, and establish a California County User Group to review the system and ensure voter usability.

After the completion of the federal and state certification requirements, as well as a complete and thorough review of the voting system components, Secretary McPherson requested that Diebold undergo an additional security analysis of the source code on the system’s memory card. Computer scientists at the University of California, Berkeley laboratory conducted the additional security review of the memory card components for both systems. The independent reviewers concluded that while some of the code on the memory cards should be rewritten for an improved long-term solution, the problems identified are “manageable” and “the risks can be mitigated through appropriate use procedures.” In his certification of the systems, Secretary McPherson is mandating the additional use procedures from the independent reviewer’s analysis to further bolster security and oversight of the use of these products. Counties wishing to use either the upgraded OS system or the upgraded, paper audit trail-retrofitted touch screen (TSX) system for elections in 2006 must comply with these requirements. Diebold will be required to make all recommended long-term programming modifications contained in the report and submit the modified product to the Federal Independent Testing Authority (ITA) for requalification and state certification. On December 20, 2005, Secretary McPherson requested that the ITA conduct an additional review of the Diebold systems. To date, that review is not yet complete. However, the additional security review conducted at the University of California, Berkeley addressed the identical issue that the federal testing authority was asked by this office to examine. Currently, Diebold’s OS is certified for use in 37 states including California, and the TSX is certified for use in 19 states including California. Eighteen of California’s 58 counties used earlier versions of Diebold voting systems in the 2005 Special Election and in prior years. Both systems comply with federal and state laws.

The county elections official must submit to the Secretary of State a plan for voter and poll worker education no later than 30 days prior to the election in which the system will be used. Training shall be conducted for all personnel, including poll workers, regarding proper treatment of memory cards and how to check for problems with seals, as well as how to record any problems discovered and what to do if such problems arise. In addition, the following security procedures will be in effect for use of the AV-TSX and AV-OS systems:
• The elections official must reset the encryption key used for all AV-TSX units to change the key from the factory default setting prior to programming any units.
• Each memory card shall have a permanent serial number assigned to it.
• Each memory card must be programmed in a secured facility under the supervision of the registrar of voters/registrar of voters’ staff. Once a memory card is programmed for the election, it must be immediately inserted into its assigned unit and sealed with a serialized, tamper-evident seal by the registrar of voters or the registrar’s staff, and have its serial number logged into a tracking sheet designed for that purpose.
• The county must maintain a written log that records which memory cards and which serialized tamper-evident seals are assigned to which units. Any breach of control over a memory card shall require that its contents be zeroed, in the presence of two election officials, before it can be used again
• On Election Day, prior to any ballots being cast on any unit, the integrity of the tamper-evident seal must be verified by the precinct officer before opening the compartment containing the memory card and unit power switch. The serial number of the seal must also be verified against the log provided the Precinct Inspector. This procedure must be witnessed by at least one other precinct officer or staff of the registrar of voters.
• If it is detected that the seal has been broken prior to the unlocking of the compartment, or if there is a discrepancy between the log and the serial number, the discrepancy must be confirmed by one or more of the remaining members of the precinct board, documented, and immediately reported to the county elections official for the jurisdiction. The elections official shall immediately investigate and determine appropriate action. If this potential breach occurs in unit, the specific unit must undergo a full manual reconciliation of the electronic votes cast and captured on the memory card against the paper audit record for that unit.
• The county must maintain a written log that accurately records the chain of custody of each memory card and unit from the point of programming the memory card for use in the election through the time of completion of the official canvass.
• Access to the GEMS server shall be tightly controlled and all persons having access to it at any time shall be pre-approved by the county elections official and
noted in a log that details name, time, and purpose of access to the room in which the GEMS is housed.
• If being used to meet the accessibility provisions of federal or state law, or if for any reason only one such unit is being used at the precinct, once one vote is cast on a TSX unit, the poll workers shall ensure that at least two more ballots are cast on the machine, even if not by a voter needing its accessibility components, in order to protect the privacy of the voter.
• Any issues that arise relating to voting equipment shall be reported to the Secretary of State’s Office of Voting Systems Technology Assessment on Election Day, including a complete description of the problem and how it has been resolved. The Secretary of State will provide a telephone number for this purpose. Prior to certification of the official canvass of returns by the county, the county will provide a written report to the Secretary of State addressing any issues related to the implementation and operation of the voting system. The county will make available for inspection by staff of the Office of the Secretary of State the chain of custody logs and/or documents relating to the system’s use in that election. The Secretary of State reserves the right to monitor activities before, during and after the election at any precinct or registrar of voters’ office, and may, at his or her discretion, conduct a random parallel monitoring test of voting equipment. Certification for use without the additional safety measures is contingent upon Diebold Election Systems Inc. making the suggested modifications to its software as outlined in the independent state audit report dated February 14, 2006, and successfully completing federal qualification by the Independent Testing Authorities or their successors as established by the federal Election Assistance Commission."

You can find the statement here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 4:47 PM | Permalink. . .

"Elections chief questions use of electronic voting"

"The accuracy of California elections could be undermined if the state switches to all-electronic voting machines owned by private companies, according to San Mateo County’s chief of elections.

“Maybe the government should develop its own voting system, rather than allow private companies to refuse to turn over their source code for their machines,” Elections Chief Warren Slocum said in testimony Thursday before a state Senate committee hearing on whether federal certification for voting machines has been sufficiently rigorous.

Most, if not all, of the private companies that have so far developed election machine software have refused to turn over their programming code for inspection, citing proprietary concerns. Without the code, the systems are unverifiable and opaque, according to a panel of computer technology experts who also testified before the Senate Elections, Reapportionment and Constitutional Amendments Committee chaired by state Sen. Debra Bowen, D-Redondo Beach.

“Elections are not the property of any private company or individual,” said Aviel Rubin, Technology Director for the Information Security Institute at John Hopkins University. “They belong to the people.”

Slocum agreed with testimony from the panel that officials and the public should be able to audit voting machines, and he said that without a paper trail, elections offices could be forced to pay computer scientists to maintain and run elections systems."

The article is here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 8:36 AM | Permalink. . .

February 16, 2006

Proposition 77 Decision

Today the California Supreme Court issued its decision in the Proposition 77 case, which involved the propriety of pre-election review and the whether the differences between the version of the redistricting measure submitted to the Attorney General and the version circulated to and signed by voters were so significant as to justify its removal from the ballot. As to the latter issue, the Court, by a 4-3 vote, concluded that "[e]valuating the significance of the differences in the two versions in light of the legal standard established and applied in the numerous prior California decisions reviewed above, we conclude that although the variance in the two versions constituted a constitutional and statutory defect, the inadvertent differences at issue here did not mislead the public or otherwise defeat or undermine the fundamental purposes underlying the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions and thus there was substantial compliance with those provisions. Accordingly, we conclude that the discrepancies did not require or justify withholding the initiative measure from the ballot."

Significantly, however, the Court held that the trial court and court of appeal were correct in engaging in pre-election review. First, the court noted that the challenge was not to the substance of the meausre, but to its procedural problems:

"The legal challenge in the present case does not relate to the substantive validity of the initiative measure but rather involves a procedural claim pertaining to the preelection petition-circulation process. Past cases establish that, at least as a general matter, this type of procedural challenge -- that is, a challenge based upon an allegation that a proposed initiative measure has failed to comply with the essential procedural requirements necessary to qualify an initiative measure for the ballot (for example, an initiative petition’s alleged failure to have obtained the requisite number of qualified signatures) -- may be brought and resolved prior to an election."

The Court gave a second reason for finding pre-election review appropriate:

"Furthermore, once a measure has been placed on the ballot and has been voted upon by the electorate, California decisions have been most reluctant to overturn the results of an election on the basis of procedural defect that has occurred at the petition-circulation stage of the process, inasmuch as such a defect ordinarily will have no effect on the material that is before the voters or on the fairness or accuracy of the election result."

The Court concluded:

"In light of this well-established remedial limitation regarding postelection challenges, it cannot be said that there is no harm in postponing until after the election a determination of the validity of this type of procedural challenge to the petition-circulation process, because after the election the procedural claim may well be considered moot. Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court and the Court of Appeal did not err in entertaining the procedural challenge in this case prior to the election."

Accordingly, the Court affirmed the principle that pre-election review is appropriate where the challenge is to the procedure by which the measure qualified for the ballot.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 1:33 PM | Permalink. . .

Motion aims to block lawsuit against initiative

From the Desert Dispatch:

In the ongoing Indian gaming saga, attorneys for former councilman Manuel Gurule and a citizens group have filed a notice in attempts to throw out a lawsuit aimed at blocking a casino initiative.

The motion, filed in San Bernardino County Superior Court, lists various reasons for dismissing the lawsuit, including an argument that a review of the initiative should take place after the election.

"Due to the deadlines necessary for printing and circulating ballot materials, courts have little time to examine, digest, and rule on pre-election challenges to initiative measures, and appellate review of the trial courts' decisions are rarely possible. A rush to judgment under the pressure of the ballot deadlines creates the possibility of an erroneous decision that would deprive voters of their constitutional right to adopt or reject an initiative measure as a matter of public policy," according to court papers filed earlier this month in the Barstow courthouse.

Gurule, the architect behind the casino initiative, maintains that the Los Coyotes tribe, along with developer BarWest LLC, are trying to prevent residents from expressing themselves.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 9:36 AM | Permalink. . .

February 15, 2006

"Get set to vote by mail"

From the Santa Cruz Sentinel:

"County voters might mail in their ballots for June's primary election if a resolution before the county Board of Supervisors today finds favor in Sacramento.

The board will vote on supporting clerks and election officials statewide who are asking the Legislature to let voters cast ballots by mail. The request comes as the state and nation grapple with the 2002 federal Help America Vote Act, which was passed in the wake of the Florida "hanging chad" recount in the controversial 2000 presidential election.

Under the Help America Vote Act, every voter — including those with disabilities — must be able to vote on their own and in private. The current system of filling in rectangles on a piece of paper is difficult for those who can't hold a pencil, are blind or can't read English, for example.

New touch-screen voting machines would help solve those problems, said county Clerk Gail Pellerin.

Under the act, the machines must be ready by the June 6 primary. But only one system has been approved by state and federal standards for a California federal election, and it has yet to be certified by the secretary of state.

As election officials nationwide clamor for the machines, it's also hard for providers to keep up with demand, Pellerin said.

That leaves many wondering how they can have all the needed touch-screen voting machines in place on time.

Advertisement

The back-up alternative? An all-mail election."

Posted by Randy Riddle at 1:42 PM | Permalink. . .

February 9, 2006

Voting System Certification Hearing

The Secretary of State's office will conduct a public hearing on March 1, 2006 to receive public comment regarding the proposed certification of a number of voting systems for use in California, including systems from ES&S, Hart InterCivic, Sequoia Voting Systems and Populex Corporation. The agenda for the hearing is here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 10:06 AM | Permalink. . .

"State Eyes Open Source at Polls"

"California lawmakers on Wednesday debated the use of open-source software in the state’s electronic voting systems in hopes it might build public confidence in the nascent technology.

Sen. Debra Bowen (D-California) called the hearing, citing successful use of open-source software—programs based on widely published code—by large companies including Amazon, AOL, and IBM.

No action was expected to be taken. The hearing was scheduled more in the interest of expanding discussion of open-source alternatives, said a spokesperson for Sen. Bowen.

California has already taken steps toward using such software throughout the state. In 2004, the California Performance Review strongly recommended the use of open-source software and VoIP as cost-cutting measures, saying such moves could save the state $32 billion over five years.

During September, state Chief Information Officer J. Clark Kelso established an open-source working group composed of IT managers from 10 state departments.

According to the performance review, open source is not just about cost savings, either. “Since the code is open, it offers the flexibility for organizations to modify the code as needed for specific uses. … Open source can [also] provide superior security than closed source,” said the report.

At the very least, lawmakers want to learn more about open-source applications currently on the market and the steps to go through when evaluating a potential application, said Sen. Bowen’s office.

The 2000 U.S. Presidential election made the words “hanging chads” synonymous with election snafus, as Florida officials recounted hundreds of thousands of paper ballots during a chain of events that ended in front of the U.S. Supreme Court.

The open-source software would be used in electronic voting systems. But the ability to verify votes in those systems has been marred by criticisms of companies like Diebold, blasted for purported errors in its electronic machines and the need for paper trails.

The hearing included presentations from Red Hat Vice President Michael Evans and Deirdre Mulligan, of the University of California, Berkeley. Four proprietary voting system vendors, including Diebold, were invited to take part in the hearing, but didn’t attend. Hart InterCivic, for example, said it had a scheduling conflict."

You can read the story .

Posted by Randy Riddle at 9:00 AM | Permalink. . .

"City Council forms citizens voting panel"

Sron the San Diego Union Tribune:

"For the first time in months, no one is actively campaigning in the city of San Diego.

With the short respite, the City Council yesterday unanimously approved creating a citizens task force to look at ways to make it easier to vote in the city.

The 10-member panel will examine the potential use of mail-only ballots and instant runoff voting for certain elections. It also will emphasize voter outreach and investigate the practicality of using a private vendor for election services."

Posted by Randy Riddle at 8:57 AM | Permalink. . .

February 7, 2006

"Diebold CEO Reviews Fate of e-Voting Unit"

From the AP:

"Diebold Inc.'s new chief executive, determined to cut $100 million in costs over three years, said he is reviewing whether the company should continue investing in its embattled electronic voting business.

CEO Thomas Swidarski insisted in an Associated Press interview that he feels good about the performance of the e-voting operations, even as some shareholders and computer experts complain that Diebold touch-screen voting machines have had a history of hardware and software woes.

"There's pieces and aspects of each of our businesses that I'm going to be looking at with a very critical eye in terms of what the future holds for us," Swidarski said in his first media interview since taking over in December the company best known for its automatic teller machines and security systems.

Risk within any of Diebold's businesses will be weighed against profit potential, Swidarski said. "If any of the pieces don't fit or any of the pieces don't add the value we think is associated with that risk, then we'll make appropriate decisions at that point," he said."

Posted by Randy Riddle at 4:15 PM | Permalink. . .

"States slow to improve voting systems -report"

From Reuters:

"Many states have fallen behind in efforts to upgrade voting equipment and improve voter registration and identification ahead of November's congressional elections, a report issued on Tuesday said.

The report said nearly half of the states missed last month's federal deadline to implement changes required by the 2002 Help America Vote Act, which Congress passed to help restore confidence in the integrity of a process shaken by the drawn-out 2000 recount saga in Florida.

The report, by the non-partisan Electionline.org project, said reforms have stalled across the country for a variety of reasons, including growing concerns about the reliability of electronic voting machines and about the legality of voter ID requirements.

"The lack of progress in nearly half of the states throws into doubt whether HAVA's goals can be achieved in time for the November 2006 vote," said Doug Chapin, director of Electionline.org, which analyzes election reform efforts around the country.

The report said concern about electronic voting machines and their susceptibility to tampering has steadily grown since passage of the law, and 25 states now require either the use of paper audit trails or that a ballot be cast only on paper."

You can find the electionline report here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 3:25 PM | Permalink. . .

February 6, 2006

Secretary of State's Statement Regarding Peace and Freedom Party's Ballot Access

"The Secretary of State's office feels strongly that the Office's interpretation of California election code, section 5100 is correct regarding the qualification of the Peace and Freedom Party for the June 2006 ballot. However, upon review of the historical precedent (the practical application of the statute which illustrates examples dating back to 1934), it appears that precedent supports the party remaining on the ballot. "I strongly favor greater ballot access for qualified parties; therefore, I have chosen to act upon the side of the historical precedent," said Secretary McPherson. "I appreciate the communication we have had with the Peace and Freedom Party and have welcomed dialogue on this unique precedent." The Secretary of State's Office notified the Peace and Freedom party this afternoon that they will remain on the ballot. The Office has also notified counties that the party will remain on the ballot. In the future, the Secretary of State may seek legislation to gain clarification on the statute."

You can find the statement here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 1:54 PM | Permalink. . .

"Mail-only ballots would avert June crisis"

From the San Jose Mercury News editorial:

"The June election is already turning out to be a nail-biter -- not for candidates -- but for county registrars of voters who will run it. They need quick help from the Legislature to let them escape a crisis they didn't create and lawsuits they wouldn't deserve.

This will be the first election in which counties must comply with both a federal law requiring a handicapped-accessible voting machine in every polling place and a state law requiring that all touch-screen voting machines produce a paper copy that lets voters verify how they voted.

Both laws are important. The federal law ensures voter independence. A paper receipt provides a safeguard against fraud or malfunction.

The trouble is, with four months to go, only one vendor's voting machine, used by only a handful of counties, has completed federal and state certification. The majority of the state's 58 county registrars are worried that they'll either be scrambling to acquire certified machines at the last minute or, worse, be stuck with uncertified machines they've already bought (a potential issue for Santa Clara County).

A sensible alternative would be for the Legislature to waive the state and federal laws by permitting voting only by mail in the June primary. Elections officials and supervisors of San Mateo and Alameda counties have proposed this escape valve.

A mail-in only ballot would give the Secretary of State's office time to thoroughly vet the electronic voting systems without feeling the political pressure of an impending deadline. It also would give the counties time to negotiate deals and train poll workers for the November election."

Posted by Randy Riddle at 9:08 AM | Permalink. . .

February 5, 2006

"Peace and Freedom Party back on June primary election"

From the San Jose Mercury News:

The Peace and Freedom Party was added back to the June primary ballot Friday, two days after the state's top election official ruled the party didn't have enough registered voters to qualify.

Secretary of State Bruce McPherson said Wednesday that the party fell short of the minimum 77,389 registered voters needed to nominate candidates.

That figure is 1 percent of the total votes cast for governor in the 2002 general election. The party also could have qualified for the ballot by having a candidate received 2 percent of the total vote in the 2002 election, McPherson said.

The Peace and Freedom Party did not field any candidates in the 2002 election. But party Chairman Kevin Akin argued the number of votes the party gathers in this November's election for governor should determine whether the party gets kicked off the ballot, not the 2002 race.

McPherson believes his legal interpretation is correct, said spokeswoman Jennifer Kerns. However, in five similar situations dating to 1934, the voter-deficient parties were allowed to remain on the ballot until the next election.

"There appears to be a historical precedent to the Peace and Freedom Party being back on the ballot," Kerns said.

McPherson will seek legislation to clarify the law, she said."

Posted by Randy Riddle at 11:21 AM | Permalink. . .

February 2, 2006

"E-voting systems OK'd, except Diebold's"

"After months of anxiety, California elections officials learned Wednesday that nearly a half-dozen voting systems could be ready for purchase and use in the June primary.

The state's chief elections officer, Secretary of State Bruce McPherson, had wielded the power of the nation's largest voting market in ordering U.S. voting-machine makers to finish private, national testing by Tuesday.

Manufacturers balked, but the market pressure worked: By day's end, all but one major manufacturer had cleared national testing and now are lined up for California review.

Only Diebold Election Systems Inc., which has struggled more than two years for California approval, still was in national testing Wednesday for its new, flagship voting system. But state elections officials said Diebold still could clear that final hurdle and supply voting equipment to nearly a third of California counties, including Alameda, San Joaquin and Marin.

Local elections officials voiced some relief. Each voting system still faces examination and mass testing — a kind of mock-election run on dozens of voting machines to verify their reliability.

"It's very good news, and I think we're very glad to hear this," said Janice Atkinson, assistant registrar of voters in Sonoma County. "But how long will the state certification take, and once the state certification is complete, how long will a vendor take to deliver the equipment?"

"At least now," said David Tom, elections manager in San Mateo County, "there's more definition to where we could be, whereas before we didn't have much of a timeline."

The crunch in voting systems for California and most other states came from twin deadlines last month that almost half of the counties in the nation broke. Federal law required at least one handicapped-accessible voting machine in every polling place by Jan 1. State law in California and 25 other states also require any new voting system to offer some form of paper record as a backup or for use in recounts."

The article is .

Posted by Randy Riddle at 8:58 AM | Permalink. . .

February 1, 2006

"Voting Systems Lawsuit Reaches U.S. Supreme Court"

"A little-noticed voting rights lawsuit has made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court (Docket No. 05-930). The lawsuit challenges the use of voting machines and absentee voting in elections for public office.

The lawsuit was originally filed by freelance journalist Lynn Landes in July of 2004 in Philadelphia federal court (U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania). The Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Landes on November 2, 2005.

In her lawsuit Landes claims that, as a voter and a journalist, she has the right to direct access to a physical ballot and to observe the voting process unimpeded. Voting by machine or absentee, Landes claims, introduces obstacles and concealment to a process that must be accessible and transparent in a meaningful and effective manner.

Landes is representing herself in this action.

"I tried to get civil rights organizations interested in this case, but had no luck. Their disregard for this issue is incredible. It's clear to me that without direct access to a physical ballot and meaningful transparency in the process, our elections have no integrity whatsoever," says Landes.

The defendants in the Landes lawsuit are Margaret Tartaglione, Chair of the City Commissioners of Philadelphia; Pedro A. Cortes, Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; and Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States.

Attorneys for the defendants have successfully fought Landes, claiming that she did not prove an injury and therefore does not have standing. Landes counters that she has the right to challenge the constitutionality of acts of the legislative branch under federal statute and case law."

The article is .

Posted by Randy Riddle at 12:43 PM | Permalink. . .

"Peace and Freedom Party fails to qualify for June primary election"

From the AP article:

"The Peace and Freedom Party has failed to register enough voters to qualify for the June primary election, meaning the party cannot nominate candidates, Secretary of State Bruce McPherson said Tuesday.

Party Chairman Kevin Akin said the party will either appeal to McPherson's office or file suit to overturn the decision.

McPherson said parties must have at least 77,389 registered voters to participate, which is 1 percent of the total votes cast for governor in the 2002 general election. A party also can qualify by having a candidate receive 2 percent of the total vote in the 2002 election and have 5,160 registered voters. The Peace and Freedom Party did not field any candidates in the 2002 election.

Akin said the number of votes the party gathers in this November's election for governor should determine whether the party gets kicked off the ballot, not the 2002 race. The party has 38 candidates gathering signatures to qualify for every statewide office, along with several congressional and legislative seats, Akin said. His wife, Margie Akin, wants to challenge McPherson."

Posted by Randy Riddle at 8:31 AM | Permalink. . .

syndicate this blog 

© 2010 Randy Riddle

home   postings   resources   about

design: sko media