BBV: great message from Marion County Fla. Election Comm.!

a friend of mine sent this message to the Election Commissioner of Marion County, Florida, through their web site--his response follows:

Dear Commissioner Payton--
I went to the State of Florida web site that listed which counties use what type of voting system. I was relieved to find that Marion County still does not use the touch-screen machines (as they did not in the last election). I realize some counties have already committed funds to their purchase, but this method is fraught with potential fraud, error, and embarrassment for the State of Florida. A voter should at least get a receipt after using such a machine, just as people do at ATM machines; thereby an inaccuracy can be brought to the attention of authorities before the voter leaves the premises. The machines our county uses are quite good, combining ease and speed in reading the votes yet providing verifiable score cards in case of questions.
I urge you to vote against the expenditure of our tax dollars on
touch-screen machines, should the question ever be put before the
commission.
Thank you,


Subject: Re: WebSite Feedback

Ms. -----, The county commission agrees with your point of view, ever to the point of refusing the supervisor of election funding for those types of devices. There will still be a few touch screen machines in the system to accommodate the severely handicapped. But there is no
motivation to change or current system of Optical Scanners.
I wish all citizens were as concerned as you.

Best regards,

Jim Payton

for participating and assisting in this.

Bev

I'm impressed.

:toast:

I wonder if we can target some of the county officials? You know, a lot of states cannot afford to do all touch screen.

Makes you kind of wonder why some states are so gung ho for statewide buys? If you made a list of those states and their Secretaries of State, would you have the principle, "vote blind, democracy be damned," individuals?

.. more counties with this attitude. It could be worth getting out a good news story about them so that the prop-agenda of Diebold (that the BBV is kooky and fringe) is proven to be false. People are a bit like sheep. They see what others are doing and then do the same... it's safer.

al

"This is a cornerstone of Democracy, Perdue spokesman Dan McLagan said of the voting system. If there are any allegations of vulnerability of the system, they should be looked at."

http://www.accessnorthga.com/news/ap_newfullstory.asp?ID=17306

Georgia to continue review of voting system security

The Associated Press - ATLANTA

The state said Wednesday it will continue reviewing its voting system security despite an admission by a researcher who was critical of Georgias touch-screen machines that he had a conflict of interest.

The study released last month found that the Diebold Election Systems machines used in several states, including Georgia, are vulnerable to tampering by unscrupulous voters, poll workers, software developers and even janitors.

On Tuesday, Avi Rubin, a Johns Hopkins University instructor and lead researcher on the study, said he failed to disclose his financial ties to a Diebold competitor, raising questions about the studys conclusions.

Even so, a spokesmen for Gov. Sonny Perdue said Wednesday that Georgias $54 million voting machine system should be investigated to make sure it is as secure as possible.

This is a cornerstone of Democracy, Perdue spokesman Dan McLagan said of the voting system. If there are any allegations of vulnerability of the system, they should be looked at.

McLagan said questions about the studys conclusions based on Rubins admission should be considered, but the study cant be ignored outright.

-----

Comment: A good straight Wire Service peice which should set our minds at rest at least on this point. "the study cant be ignored outright".... damn right it can't. And because it is AP it is likely to appear everywhere.... for lots of papers this is likely to be the first time they report that GA is even having an inquiry.

you will need to follow the link..

including...


Secretary of State Cathy Cox, who oversaw Georgias transition to touch-screen voting, said Johns Hopkins should not have allowed the research to be published under its name without reviewing potential conflicts of interest. Coxs office had questioned the study since its release.

Cox spokesman Chris Riggall said Wednesday his office will continue to review the system to make sure it is secure.

....

Translation: It seems Cox's troubleshooter is not quite as outraged as his boss.

Wired - New E-Voting Machine Furor

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,60116,00.html


Secretary of State Cathy Cox, who oversaw Georgias transition to touch-screen voting, said Johns Hopkins should not have allowed the research to be published under its name without reviewing potential conflicts of interest. Coxs office had questioned the study since its release.

Cox spokesman Chris Riggall said Wednesday his office will continue to review the system to make sure it is secure.

In the spring, Kennesaw State University developed a program that helps the state ensure the computer servers in election offices in Georgias 159 counties have not been tampered with, he said.

The state is looking to expand that program to Georgias 22,000 voting terminals, Riggall said.



What on earth are they talking about? It sounds like some sort of utility that detects tampering. They already talked about something like that, which was pretty bogus as I remember. Wasn't it even stolen?

Boy these guys are slippery.

(Looking for DEMActivits to come weigh in on this crap.)

Eloriel

Isn't citizen participation in democracy grand (When they listen, and actually respond AND even better, agree)?

One point, just in case there's any confusion (and so you know if you don't alraeady). While optical scan are far superior to touch screen, since they START with a paper trail, there is still potential for possible (probable?) fraud because they too are computerized. In fact, I was just a little while ago re-reading that GEMS (now DIEBOLD) software handled 40% of the vote in FL in 2000. Our attention was deflected by the hanging chads, but it's my understanding that there were problems noted with some of the results from these machines.

Too, some states are passing laws that (if you can believe this) make the "electronic vote" the only LEGAL vote. That would render any paper, whether the ballot before scanning or any voter-verified ballot from Touch Screens, unusable for recounts. Do you happen to know where FL stands on that issue?

Way to go on taking care of your county! Woohoo!

Eloriel

other election officials as smart as these?

have been written by a DUer.
Title: Check, double-check security of voting machines

http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=58584&ran=155975

the closing paragraphs:

That's true. New technology is often about getting around old technlology. And it's why localities that have invested millions of taxpayer dollars, along with voters' trust, have a duty to ensure that touch-screen voting computers are as secure as advertised.

Norfolk has had several scrapes with exceedingly close elections in the past. The city can't afford to be dismissive of voting-machine security. It should make certain before 2004 that the touch-screen remedy isn't likely to become the problem

The whole article is worth reading.