I have written about this twice before. This is an update on what may be the most critical issue of our lifetime–the preservation of our vote. Once again, what I am presenting is largely derived from the newsletter of a non-blogging friend of mine who is working hard on this issue in New York City. Anyone in NYC who wants to spend some time educating voters and politicians on this issue, contact me and I can put you in touch with the indefatigable Marjorie Gersten, the original author of what I adapted for this diary. All mojo really should go to her. I merely adapted her NYC-based comments to a more general audience.
Our nation is being swept with a drive for “election reform”. Sadly, too often this is used as an excuse for companies to try and sell expensive and unreliable eVoting machines and this is what we have to fight against. Old style machines, no matter how reliable, are being discarded for new technology. This comes down to a choice between to technologies: electronic voting (DRE for Direct Recording), or Paper Ballot Precinct-Based Optical Scanner (PBOS). This is a battle that will be fought state by state and county by county and we must go to all our state and county politicians and compete with misleading salesmen who are selling equipment that is double the cost and a disaster for elections. We have our work cut out for us.
The Help America Vote Act (HAVA) requires accessibility of voting machines for voters with special needs and for large language minorities. This means that voters with disabilities must have reasonable access to a private and independent vote. The PBOS solution would require each polling place to have an Automark ballot-marking machine, complete with headphones and gadgets, currently approved by the disability community.
You can find a thorough and easy to understand explanation of the need for paper ballots voters can verify before they leave the polls, the difference between REAL paper ballots and the insufficient “paper trails” offered by DRE machines, and the vulnerabilities of electronic voting and wisdom of paper ballots given where we are in development of the technology at the Verified Voting Foundation website. Please check out this site to familiarize yourself with the issue, then endorse the resolution on voter-verified paper ballots sponsored by Verified Voting at the end of the article.
While someday viable, electronic voting is still in its infancy. Manufacturers are spending all their money on lobbyists and public relations disguising a poor product, rather than on design. Why do they block any public examination of the tabulation system responsible for the counting of the votes, and at the core of anomalies difficult to explain? We still don’t have discovery on the machines in Ohio, and we are rightfully suspicious.
CHOOSE PBOS
We expect transparent, simple and uniform systems that are verifiable and secure if we want to consider this a Democracy. Paper ballots marked by hand, plus precinct-count optical scanners (PBOS), alert voters to errors on the ballot before it is cast, and accessible ballot-marking machines, like the Automark, for voters with disabilities. Voters do their own verifiable recording of their votes rather than relying on black box voting machines.
Optical scan voting systems are a reliable, mature, auditable and cost effective technology used successfully in elections around the United States for over 20 years. Our choice of PBOS has the fewest problems, and highest level of confidence, of any system currently used. It is also a mature, verifiable system, at half the cost and lasts three as long as direct voting eVote machines (DREs).
Currently used in nearly 30% of all the precincts in the US, the states of Arizona, Michigan, Ohio, Rhode Island and West Virginia have decided to use optical scanners to comply with the Help America Vote Act, which has mandated the new voting machines for New York. Precincts CAN still commit fraud, as may have happened in Ohio in 2004, but such fraud can be caught if an audit is done. The problem remains a traditional one of needing an honest election board rather than a new one of having machines that are unreliable and unverifiable.
PBOS offer the lowest rates of invalid ballots, and easy to add voting booths at low cost. For New York State, for example, replacement is one optical scanner per five traditional lever machines, another cost saving and contrary to the myth eVote machine vendors claim that that both systems replace at a one to one ratio.
Election integrity is a nonpartisan issue, if such a thing is possible. Both Republicans and Democrats in Congress have called for voter-verified paper ballots to enable verification of election results. It isn’t a matter of Democrats vs. Republicans, it is a matter of preserving our democracy.
CAN’T TRUST E-VOTING MACHINES
The DRE eVote machines do the recording and counting of the votes in secret, and voters can’t see if their votes are correctly cast inside the computer. Election observers can’t witness the storage, handling, and counting of votes if inside the computer. The counting is done using proprietary software, so the actual algorithm used cannot be checked. The very basis of our Democracy is citizen-observed elections with transparency and accuracy. The DRE e Vote machines violate this basis of Democracy.
The image on the touch-screen, as well as the paper trail receipt ballot, can be different from the actual vote cast by the machine, or counted by the central tabulator off-site. Without voter-verified paper ballots and a 100% audit, the final tallies can never be assumed correct. Neither of these guarantees are offered by the vendors.
The paper trail so often mentioned as a cure-all, is all but meaningless. With only a 3% requirement for verification, that means 97% of the votes are not considered. The laws don’t require a count, don’t require machine-recorded numbers match hand counted audits, and the voters have long since left the polls when verification is considered. The often-faded paper receipt is kept on record in case someone asks for an audit rather than being provided to the voter for immediate verification.
While we enjoy our computers, palm pilots, and all the bells and whistles, the electronic voting systems are error prone, inappropriate technology, unreliable, unverifiable, easy to hack, and cost twice as much as the PBOS. They are also slower, taking 8-12 minutes for each voter in Florida.
The manufacturer’s proprietary software makes a meaningful audit or recount absolutely impossible. The last election also saw a flat-out refusal by the vendors to produce a voter verifiable paper trail. Thousands, and maybe millions, of votes were lost. This is NOT democracy.
Systems have broken down, lost as many as 25% of the ballots, created extra ballots, switched votes from one candidate to the other, didn’t show all races, and are very error prone. Yet the companies have blocked all attempts at any public examination of their systems. If they have nothing to hide, why do they block public examination? Why would any government accept technology from a company that is anything less than 100% transparent?
There are well-documented examples of eVote errors and possibly even fraud. Examples that have been recorded are: Pressing a touch screen machine nine times for Kerry but seeing Bush, before finally seeing Kerry; Machines counting backwards, or not counting above 1,000; Diebold programming with an option to count all but president on Democratic line, but all selections for the GOP. Mostly, it’s not being able to determine the results to a reasonable certainty, and that is a bi-partisan concern. When confronted by people who claim that fraud was never proven in 2004 I counter by saying that Bush’ victory was never proven either. The necessary scrutiny was never done, never allowed.
THE COST
Another big reason to buy the PBOS the DRE electronic, full-face machines, is the expense. For New York State, the initial acquisition cost for DREs is $100 million more statewide for PBOS, and that doesn’t include maintenance, climate controlled storage, special handling, replacement costs after 5-8 years, or vendor contracts during the election because of the secrecy and complexity of the DRE eVote machines. Continuing costs have been as much as $5.6 million more per year, per county in other states. E-voting costs more than the federal money that is offered through HAVA. In other words, states will LOSE money going for the eVote machines rather than PBOS.
For example, New York City will get $72 million for new voting technology. E-voting costs $100 million for purchase alone. PBOS costs $45 million, and replacement is in 15-20 years rather than the 5-8 years for DRE machines. With PBOS, there will be money remaining for poll training, and other intended needs. Paper ballots cost only $.10-$29 each rather than the supposed $.75 each claimed by eVote machine vendors.
Miami-Dade just threw out their e-voting machines because of lost votes in six elections, and costs. They estimate that in five years they will make back the purchase price and savings from not using the electronic machines. This is how bad the eVote machines are.
WHAT DO WE DO??
We might be able to stop the entrenched interests and lobbyists’ steamroller by appealing to our State and local officials. All around the nation, each state and local rep HAS to receive multiple calls on this issue from their constituents. This isn’t just a simple sign a petition and hope for the best. This will take a concerted effort by you and all your friends who are interested in having their votes fairly and accurately counted.
Here is a sample message, designed for NYC, but easily adapted for any community:
We are concerned citizens. We don’t want electronic voting, and we’d appreciate your using all your power and influence to keep electronic voting out of our community.
To comply with Federal HAVA requirements, please work for transition to the “PBOS” solution with paper ballots, precinct-based optical scanners, and Automark ballot-marking machines for voters with disabilities and non-English languages. These precinct-based optical scanners are more reliable and cheaper than the fancier alternative.
We believe that computers are the wrong technology for elections because (1) observers cannot observe the storage, handling and counting of votes, and (2) voters themselves cannot observe their ballot being recorded and cast electronically. Both of these are necessary parts of a working democracy.
The electronic voting systems are error prone, inappropriate technology, unreliable, unverifiable, easy to hack, and cost twice as much as the PBOS. Furthermore, electronic voting machines last one 5-8 years, while PBOS and optical scanners last 15-20 years. Continuing costs of evoting are also much higher. We would be wasting money by buying electronic voting machines!
I don’t trust electronic voting because no one can observe the recording, casting, storage, handling and counting of votes. Please pass a new law to ban electronic voting machines in our community and to require the use of Paper Ballots, precinct-based Optical Scanners, and the Automark ballot-marking machine for voters with special needs.
Send this message to your state and local politicians, and to the media. You might also need to spread this message to your friends, church/mosque/synagogue/etc. groups, local political clubs, etc.
The vote you are defending is your own!
