Voting News 8/6 TN County missing a voting machine, 3 card readers, PA group needs audit help, Voting Rights Act needed, Diebold Certified

The sour economy is impacting election administration. WVa approved early voting but provided no funding to pay for it. PA activists need volunteers to audit their paperless elections. Woodbury County, Iowa dropped plans for Vote Centers when Sioux City threatened to sue. A Tennessee County took inventory and learned they were missing 1 voting machine and 3 card readers. Knox Co TN officials not likely to approve Vote Center Pilots which would eliminate neighborhood polls. *Vote Centers are being mislabeled as "convenience voting". Tennessee still fighting over their paper ballot law. Oregon ok's online registration. An Arizona lawmaker who broke AZ's powerful clean elections act sues to keep job.

The EAC certified a Diebold/Premier system. 44 Years After Landmark Act, Voting Rights Still Needed says the Brennan Center for Justice. A report analyses the US election process. As early voting spreads in the US, how does it impact GOTV efforts?
India's struggle against electronic voting heats up: India panel to hear debate on paperless voting machines. As her party boycotts the election, India's AIADMK general secretary Jayalalithaa says: "In a democracy, every voter should know whether the vote cast has gone to the candidate or party it was meant for. In the absence of such certainty, the entire democratic process would be rendered a mockery." Jayalalithaa also quotes Rice University associate professor Dan Wallach regarding problems with voting machines.

AZ. Arizona Legislator Sues to Retain Seat
August 6th, 2009 On August 6, Arizona Representative Doug Quelland filed a lawsuit in state court to retain his seat in the legislature. The Clean Elections Commission had voted 4-1 to remove him from office, back on May 15, 2009.
http://www.ballot-access.org/2009/08/06/arizona-legislator-sues-to-retain-seat/

CA. Election delays won't save a dime
08/05/2009 OUR VIEW: Attempts to save money on 2010 elections show some didn't do their homework. The San Bernardino County Board of Education set things right this week when it backed away from a foolhardy proposal to postpone its 2010 election.
...But when word spread that delaying the election until November 2011 would actually cost the district more - more than $1 million more - the movement quickly lost steam. The board voted Monday against rescheduling the election.
http://www.sbsun.com/editorial/ci_13000318

CA. Proposed Legislation: Post Canvass Audit Bill Language
04 Aug 2009 A bill proposal to move the Post Election Manual Tally (PEMT) to after the canvass period and rename it the "Post Canvass Audit."
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ccrov/pdf/2009/august/09128jb.pdf

CO. Aspen mayor campaigning for two more years
Changing the term of mayor and the timing of the election would require an amendment to the charter, and a public vote. That could occur this fall or next spring. Voters will likely be asked an advisory question this November if Aspen should continue with IRV or have city officials find an alternative.
http://www.postindependent.com/article/20090806/VALLEYNEWS/908059987/1074

FL. Whopping cost increase could end early voting
August 5, 2009 PLANT CITY - Early voting in Plant City municipal elections could become the latest victim of the economic crisis.
http://plantcity2.tbo.com/content/2009/aug/05/pc-whopping-cost-increase-could-end-early-voting/


IA. Voter centers plan scrapped after city considers lawsuit
Aug 04, 2009 SIOUX CITY, Iowa (KTIV) - The Woodbury County Auditor has dropped plans to replace polling places with a handful voting centers...Fearing that voters would be disenfranchised in the upcoming city council election, City Attorney Andrew Mai says they considered suing the county.
http://www.ktiv.com/Global/story.asp?S=10847742

PA. PA Verified Voting needs volunteers for election integrity actions (Pittsburgh) http://pittsburgh.craigslist.org/vol/1276537489.html

NC. Elections board ouster JOURNAL EDITORIAL STAFF
August 7, 2009 ...Elliott apparently ran afoul of the state board because he disobeyed two of its directives in the days leading up to the November election... The state board supervises local election boards, including by appointing their members. That's the law that the local boards must accept.
http://www2.journalnow.com/content/2009/aug/07/elections-board-ouster/opinion/

NC. Forsyth elections chairman removed by state board
http://www2.journalnow.com/content/2009/aug/05/forsyth-elections-chairman-removed-by-state-board/

NJ. Law makes it simple for anyone in N.J. to vote by mail
06 August 2009
http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/state/law-makes-it-simple-for-anyone-in-nj-to-vote-by-mail

NY. Finally, new voting machines
It took a lawsuit and federal court order to do it, but Delaware, Chenango and parts of Otsego counties are finally being dragged into the 21st century world of voting
http://www.thedailystar.com/opinion/local_story_217040104.html

NY. Another New York City Councilmember Off Ballot for Cover Sheet Error
August 6th, 2009 New York city councilmember Alan Gerson is running for re-election in the September 2009 Democratic primary. He is currently off the ballot. He needed 900 valid signatures and he submitted 7,000.
http://www.ballot-access.org/2009/08/06/another-new-york-city-councilmember-off-ballot-for-cover-sheet-error/

OR. Oregon To Offer Online Voter Registration
August 6, 2009 4:34 p.m.Oregonians will soon have the chance to register to vote online. Governor Ted Kulongoski Thursday signed a bill that will allow people to sign up in time for next spring's primaries.
http://news.opb.org/article/5573-oregon-offer-online-voter-registration/

TN. Election commission to move voting machines to main office
The Cumberland County Election Commission appointed a new machine technician Tuesday evening and in a 3-2 vote decided to move all of its voting machines from the Community Complex to its office on Main St...Smart reported that after inventory was taken on the equipment it revealed that one machine was missing, three card readers were missing and 12 tally cards were missing.
http://www.crossville-chronicle.com/local/local_story_216230638.html

TN. Poll Workers Are Not Equipped to Reconcile or Verify Precinct Election Results
August 6, 2009 Mary Mancini... Although we may know, because of the systems in place that you describe, that the number of votes cast match the number of people who came in to vote, we don't know how each of those votes is being counted.
http://www.liberadio.com/2009/08/06/poll-workers-are-not-equipped-to-reconcile-or-verify-precinct-election-results/

TN. There's nothing wrong with voting machines (defense of paperless voting)
August 5, 2009
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20090805/OPINION02/90804055/1008/OPINION01/There%E2%80%99s+nothing+wrong+with+voting+machines

TN. With support lacking, Knox County convenience voting in jeopardy
Aug 6. ..The approach would eschew the city's 52 precinct polls by allowing city voters to cast ballots at any one of 10 centrally located voting centers during a 20-day window culminating on Sept. 22 and Nov. 3 election days
http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2009/aug/06/with-support-lacking-knox-convenience-voting-in/

WI. City will help voters clear up registration records
8/05/2009 Staff from the city clerk's office will assist city voters who've received notice from the state that their registration records don't jibe with motor vehicle or Social Security information.
http://www.madison.com/tct/news/stories/460894

WV. Satellite voting encourages wider participation
A money crunch may deter some counties from enjoying the added convenience of satellite voting. This year, West Virginia lawmakers passed a law allowing counties to establish early voting at locations throughout the state. However, no money was appropriated, so counties have to pay for it.
http://www.timeswv.com/editorials/local_story_216010753.html

US. What Will GOTV Look Like Ten Years From Now?
...But if campaigns are going to devote time and energy to such a "Get-Out-the-Early-Vote" operation, what will that look like?
http://whatareyoulookingatpolitics.blogspot.com/2009/08/what-will-gotv-look-like-ten-years-from.html

US. 44 Years After Landmark Act, Voting Rights Still Needed
Aug 6. Brennan Center for Justice.
Today marks the 44th anniversary of the landmark Voting Rights Act, passed to reverse the Jim Crow laws, which effectively denied African Americans the right to vote for decades.
http://www.brennancenter.org/blog/archives/44_years_after_landmark_act_voting_rights_still_needed/#When:14:00:00Z


US. Progress Reports on Election Reform and Voter Registration
Two reports review the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993 and state-level election reform across the United States. The first report, released by Project Vote, examines the implementation of the NVRA, focusing on registration methods and the progress that has yet to be made.I n the second report, from the Center for Democracy and Election Management at American University, researchers review the election process across the United States.
http://www.electionreformproject.org/Features/77f88e39-01ee-4b39-99fa-507f12b9b9ba/r1/Detail.aspx

US. EAC Certifies Premier Assure 1.2 Voting System
WASHINGTON- The U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) today certified the Assure 1.2 voting system by Premier Election Solutions, which includes optical-scan and direct recording electronic device (DRE) technology, to the 2002 Voting System Standards. It is the third voting system to achieve federal certification under the EAC Voting System Testing and Certification Program....Six voting systems remain in EAC's Testing and Certification Program.
http://www.eac.gov/News/press/eac-certifies-premier-assure-1-2-voting-system/base_view

India. Poll panel convenes all-party meeting on voting machine
New Delhi, Aug 6 The Election Commission has convened an all-party meeting Friday to discuss the issue of the effectiveness of the electronic voting machines (EVMs) following doubts about their credibility from various quarters.
http://www.prokerala.com/news/articles/a70179.html

Jaya quotes US expert, wants EVMs scrapped
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_jaya-quotes-us-expert-wants-evms-scrapped_1280008

Jaya blames EVMs for poll boycott
06 Aug 2009 CHENNAI: AIADMK general secretary Jayalalithaa on Wednesday observed that her party's boycott of the coming by-elections was``to ensure that democracy in its true sense is brought back to the State."
In a statement, the former chief minister, reiterated that the electronic voting machines could be tampered with. ``In a democracy, every voter should know whether the vote cast has gone to the candidate or party it was meant for. In the absence of such certainty, the entire democratic process would be rendered a mockery. It is to ensure that democracy in its true sense is brought back that AIADMK decided to boycott the by-polls.'' http://shrinkurl.com/IndiaEVMs

Regarding the New York Times article, "States' Actions to Block Voters Appear Illegal"  http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/09/us/politics/09voting.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&ref=politics&pagewanted=print

I am an e-voting activist in North Carolina, and I can tell you that the NY Times article is misleading and inaccurate.   Your first tip should have been all of the parsing of verbs and failure to state any proof. I wrote to Ian Urbina, and here is his reply:

From: Ian Urbina  

To: joyce@ncvoter.net

Subject: RE: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/09/us/politics/09voting.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin

Date: Oct 9, 2008 9:03 AM

From what we can see in the data, NC does not seem to have any major red flags. Best we can tell, it looks like the number of people coming off the rolls would roughly correspond with the number of people leaving the state or dying during that period (both of which are legitimate reasons to remove people within 90 days before an election).

Ian

-----Original Message-----

From: joyce@ncvoter.net [mailto:joyce@ncvoter.net]

Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 8:54 AM

To: URBINA@nytimes.com

Subject: FW:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/09/us/politics/09voting.html?_r=1&ref=politic

s&oref=slogin

The NC Coalition for Verified Voting successfully worked to eliminate the matching requirement in North Carolina in August 2007.

If a voter doesn't match, they just show some ID when they come to the polls.  ID includes  a utility bill or something like that. Not too hard. 

Ohio's Soon to Be Infamous Butterfly Ballot in Nov 2008 Election

Ohio-duh steals Flori-duh's Butterfly Ballot Design.  Ohio may go down in history this November when 12 counties use a butterfly ballot.  The design is hauntingly similar to the one that made Florida notorious in November 2000.  Recently the Brennan Center for Justice urged Ohio election officials to redesign a ballot planned for 12 counties. The problem - the design is a modern day butterfly ballot, splitting the presidential contest over two columns on their paper ballots for this November's election. The difference between the Ohio butterfly ballot and the Florida butterfly ballot is that Ohio is using optical scanners, and Florida was using punch card. I guess this proves that there is more than one way to spoil an election.

Potential Ballot Trouble In OH: Split Contests

By Lawrence Norden – 10/01/08

By our count, at least twelve Ohio counties have split the presidential contest over two columns on their paper ballots for this November's election. This "column split" often confuses voters and results in double voting in the presidential race — and an uncounted vote. Today the Brennan Center urged election officials and advocates in Ohio to make sure that voters are aware of the split, and to make sure they vote only once for president. Unfortunately, the design meets legal guidelines and a directive issued by the Secretary of State.

The twelve Ohio counties whose ballots spilt the presidential race over two columns are: Ashtabula, Athens, Auglaize, Champaign, Delaware, Lawrence, Logan, Madison, Ottawa, Seneca, Shelby, and Wyandot.

A picture of the butterfly ballot and some further comments after the jump

Continue reading "Ohio's Soon to Be Infamous Butterfly Ballot in Nov 2008 Election"

Florida's last minute and selective enforcement of Florida's "No Match No Vote" law §97.053(6) F.S  violates the Equal Protection clause of the 14th amendment.  The law is only being applied to a certain class of voters - the newest voters - only those registering after Sept 8.  The 10.7 million voters who registered before September 8 will not have to leap the arbitrary hurdles and barriers to voting. More than 7000 would-be voters have now been snared by Florida's decision to start enforcement of the controversial "no-match" voter ID law last month.

Florida is throwing up every barrier they can for the newly engaged voters.  Unlike 45 other states, Florida won't let you clear up the matching problem ON election day, by simply showing your ID. Voter ID is required in order to vote, yet Florida won't let you use it to prove your identity on election day! Florida says you have to either miss work or make a special trip before the election, or get stuck with a crappy provisional ballot and clear up the problem AFTER the election. 

A recent report by the Advancement Project outlines how states like Florida and Ohio had disenfranchised voters by over using provisional ballots, ballots which often don't count! Provisional ballots are not counted on election night, but for many, the election is considered over. Further, at least 30% of provisional ballots end up being rejected. 

The problem - The "No Match No Vote" law orders that a registrant provide either a drivers license or the last four digits of their social security number, and then the Elections dept tries to match that against the DMV or the Social Security databases. Often as high as 20% fail to match using their social security number.  45 other states wisely either never adopted the "no match no vote" law, or abandoned it. 

In his Oped Even the unverified can vote Florida SOS Kurt Browning misleads the public into thinking that enforcing Florida's "No Match No Vote" law will not disenfranchise any voters. Many through no fault of their own will fail to match. 

Reference: Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868.

Continue reading "Florida's No Match No Vote Law Violates Equal Protection Clause of Constitution"

Voter Registration Shut Down? Bad Timing for Social Security Maintenance

Bad timing or last ditch effort to supress new voters? A recent alert by the Social Security Administration announces that the agency plans to shut down its databases for maintenance from October 11 through October 13. How will this hurt new voters?  Election officials would lose 4 days of processing time needed to handle new registrants.  Elections staff are already overworked at this time of the year and this is another straw on the camel's back.

This 4 day shutdown occurs at a critical time for most states - it is just past the average cutoff date to turn in new voter registrations. (25 days before the election). Thanks to the "Help America Vote Act" passed in 2002, officials now must check either the registrant's last 4 digits of their social security number against the government database, or the voters drivers license number against the DMV. This shut down would mostly hurt voters who do not have a car or drive.

Voter Registration Shut Down? By Wendy R. Weiser – 09/24/08

Updated (5:30pm): Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) writes to Social Security Administration seeking delay of shutdown. A copy of the letter is here. 

A recent alert by the Social Security Administration announces that the agency plans to shut down its databases for maintenance from October 11 through October 13. While this might not sound like an election issue, it turns out that this could significantly impede registration of first-time voters as well as the re-registration of eligible citizens.

Continue reading "Voter Registration Shut Down? Bad Timing for Social Security Maintenance"

Bill Bucolo in Florida received a phony voter registration letter. The purpose of this letter was to confuse voters, not cage them, as the envelope did not say "do not forward".

The Obama campaign will have to take action themselves, no one else is going to act swiftly enough. They MUST launch a vigorous phone call campaign to counter the mis-information that is being mass mailed to voters in Florida. We can't wait for Rep Conyers to launch an investigation that will go nowhere. When we had misleading robo calls in North Carolina during the primary, the Obama campaign set the record straight by giving many voters correct information by phone. The Obama calls prevented the fake robo calls from working. *

Here is Bill's email sent far and wide:

Subject: Tell me- did you get a fake vote registration letter too?

My Friends (as John McCain would say), I just received a genuine collector's item... one of the phony voter registration letters the GOP is sending to hundreds of thousands of voters throughout the swing states. See it below.

Let me know if you got one too.

The cheaters who send these want to trick people into screwing up their status with local Supervisors of Elections (images attached). With the encouragement of our Republican owned Secretary of State Kurt Browning, most of these SOEs would probably be only too happy to knock you or me off their books should we make a mistake on the form... or provide information a little differently from what they now have.

My letter supposed to come from the "Department of Children and Families," and was mailed to me with an E middle initial... mine's an F. It was mailed out of the Miami Cuban-Republican stronghold of Hialeah, FL. It arrived in a somewhat official looking slightly oversized window envelope with an official looking return address with the word "Circuit," and the letters DCF.
In addition to a wrong initial in my name... enough to knock me off the polls if anyone sends it in, much less me, the poorly copied registration form also says I don't have to show an ID if I'm over 65. (that part was real clear). I'm pretty sure that's not true also. I believe everyone has to show ID if they appear at the polls... but of course I went to the state's Election's web site and the link to those rules comes up black... a convenient "glitch."

But of course voters don't need to show any ID if they just mail their ballots in. That's another illogical rationale of the ID law. If I were going to be a phony voter with a slightly different name than the SOE has on their records, I'd just vote by mail. Any court that blesses this stupidity has to be complicit in the fraud- and it certainly seems like intent to fraud by the people who foisted this law. What are the odds that judge is a Republican and/or a fool?

Some people think these letters have "do not forward, return to sender" messages which, if returned tell the GOP who to challenge at the polls. Personally I think that's an unlikely strategy because it's so labor intensive. I don't think they have enough people to do that sort of thing effectively. Letting unsuspecting voters screw up their own registration or show up without ID would be far more efficient for these scum.

Now since this is an obvious vote fraud on a state-wide level, any self respecting state law enforcement agency should be onto this immediately... checking out the commercial mail houses to see exactly who the customer is, etc. But no... on local television today Florida Sec'y State Kurt Browning said the state police were overloaded with too many other kinds of criminals to chase. I guess felony vote fraud for a national election comes after whatever else they do. So we can expect the criminals to avoid repercussions for now... but there's always later. And a lot of us have a long memory.

Just make sure all of you and your friends and family members verify your registration records carefully. It's a shame most voters won't, and a real shame that this plan, along with whatever else the cheaters try may, little slice by little slice, cost us the state... and the other states where ID laws are now in effect. For now.

So, the letter's a keeper for sure because eventually we're going to nail these slug perpetrators for the treasonous unAmerican vote suppressors and vote thieves that they are. When this wave of vote stealing and fraud is put in the history books for the social sciences classes that will someday be reinstated in our schools, evidence like my letter will surely be an item worth showing off.

One last thing... If the State and National Dems don't fight this stuff with prominent advertising, multiple news releases, calls and letters to authorities and media, and in the courts with everything they have, they are flat out incompetent fools, and deserve what ever happens with this latest GOP trick.

Copies of the letter portions I described are below.

(Click on this link to see the letter)

# # # # # # # # #

Comment: Activists in Florida say they have determined that this mailer is outdated with incorrect instructions regarding permissible ID's. (But) Also under some circumstances people over 65 are in fact exempt from needing to show an ID... we trying to figure out if that's for mail-in ballots or at the polling place. The law seems ambiguous to us so were asking others.

I have sent this to the Brennan Center for Justice asking them for an investigation or clarification of the law. Millions of dollars are being spent on sending these confusing mailers out.

McCain's Absentee Ballot Mailer Fiasco Spreads - Could Disqualify Some VotersReports from around the country advise that John McCain's campaign has sent confusing or incorrect absentee ballot request forms to voters in ten states at least. Affected so far are Florida, Iowa, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon (reported by blogger, not confirmed) Minnesota, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.

In each state, the mailers have a different error, in any of these cases, the voter could be disenfranchised by the error. In at least one state a voter could disqualify themselves or be vulnerable to election challenges if they mailed these forms in. Mailers sent to Wisconsin voters are encouraging voters to send their applications to clerks in communities where they do not live. If you receive an absentee ballot request form from the McCain campaign ( or any private entity) and you do want to vote absentee, then instead check with your County Board of Elections to get the correct information.

...more at the link

Letter from San Francisco: Politicos turning against Instant Runoff and Politics are nasty as ever

Yep, one of the "progressives" who pushed for IRV no longer believes in it. Here's a letter from a blogger who lives in San Francisco, the largest IRV jurisdiction in the country. Supervisor. Daly is one of the "progressives" who pushed for IRV. Blogger H. Brown says now Daly is against IRV because he wants to try and control votes. He even advocated "bullet voting" - something you CAN'T DO under IRV.

From: "h. brown"
Date: September 5, 2008 5:36:55 AM PDT
To: h@ludd.net
Subject: Tenants Union stabs Sanchez

Morning boys and girls,

Ed Jew won his seat in D-4 by telling all Chinese
voters to ONLY vote for Chinese candidates. Ugly and
racist it is true. But, it worked.

It worked because Jew realized that in a tight
race no candidate was likely to get 50% of the vote
and second and third choices allowed under the City's
IRV (Ranked Choice) system ...

the system could help
elect a member of a 3-slate card while leaving lone
wolves to die in the snow a few percentage points
from the finish line (you hear me, Ron Dudum?). This
morning Fog City Journal reported that the Tenants
Union will not take advantage of IRV.

Chris Daly and Ted Gullickson do not understand
this. Daly, in fact, has gone so far as to pressure
the top ranked Progressive in the D-9 race (Mark
Sanchez) to drop out of the race entirely so that
Chris' choice (Eric Quezada) will (by Daly's
reasoning) have the Progressive voter block to
himself.

What Daly's tactics will do however is to insure
that 'astro-turf' faux progressive David Campos will
be elected. And, immediately vote for Bevan Dufty
for Board President.

Daly has bragged that he controls the coveted
endorsements of both the Bay Guardian and the Tenants
Union. And, that he doesn't believe in Ranked
Choice voting. Ted Gullickson has joined him and
the results could be disastrous for both the local
Progressive movement and Daly's own shot at the
Board presidency.

This is one of those 'I told you so' moments in
the making. Come January if Daly's tact fails and
David Campos makes Daly the permanent Board rep to
the SFUSD, I'll be saying it. "I told you so."

h.

This email from the Secretary of State of Washington outlines another bug in the new IRV voting system for Pierce County. It affects "rank choice voting" (IRV/Instant Runoff) only. Pierce County Washington adopted "instant runoff voting" in November 2006. In May 2008, officials were backed into a corner and ended up getting permission to use uncertified IRV software, violating their own state's laws.

Pierce county has Sequoia "Insight" optical scanners and DREs. The tabulating software, WinEDS 4.0.34 is still under test by iBeta. There is not even a test plan presented to the EAC for this system at this time. Washington State provisionally certified this software for use even after finding that there were problems with the use of the Insight machines when used in the RCV process. San Francisco is also using this system, and currently it is not certified in California to count IRV. San Francisco officials still don't know how they will count their "ranked choice" voting in November 2008.


Here's the email (Thanks to John Gideon of www.VotersUnite.org for sharing)

Dear Team,

It has come to our attention that there is a very rare occurrence of a problem with the Rank Choice Voting results loading with Pierce County’s provisionally certified software.
This occurrence is very rare, and did not present itself with the election definition we tested during the Emergency Certification testing at Pierce County. It does not affect the reporting of Election Night results including both Ranked and non-Ranked Choice contests. Should this condition occur with the General Election, it would only affect the Ranked Choice Voting reduction algorithm, and would be easily caught during normal results checking procedures at the time the Ranked Choice contests are processed.

However, if this condition occurs, the recovery process would be an extremely time consuming manual process. Given the nature of the problem, our preferred approach for ensuring the successful and efficient processing of Ranked Choice results is to apply a minor coding change to a single, isolated component of the election software. A detailed description of the problem is below.

Our office has instructed Sequoia to apply the fix to Pierce County’s provisionally certified software so that we can test it. We have also instructed iBeta, a nationally certified Voting System Test Laboratory(VSTL), to review the modification to the source code and verify that the minor change required, and only the change required, is applied to the provisionally certified code used for build 108 presently installed at Pierce County. We have also instructed iBeta to witness a new build of the software with the change applied. This new build will be installed at Pierce County after we test it here at our office.

We will be testing the modified software at our office on Wednesday,September 17th at 10 AM. We have posted a public notice of this testing.Since you were present during the initial testing, we wanted to alert you to this modification in case you wanted to be present at this test.The county will also be thoroughly pre-testing the General Election results, and we will be present during the Logic and Accuracy test,currently scheduled for October 13, 1:00 PM.

Bob – I’d like to respectfully request your presence at this test, if possible. Any other members of the public are welcome also. I’d like Bob to be present because of his experience with the Provisional Certification, his knowledge of technical issues, and his ability to explain technical processes in user friendly terms. Bob – please let me know if this is possible.

I will keep this group informed of the results of the test, and be happy to answer any questions you may have.

*_DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM_*

During additional testing of Sequoia Voting System v 4.0, including Rank Choice Voting, Sequoia Voting Systems’ testing engineers found a discrepancy in the Rank Choice Voting module results. After careful examination, it was determined that a field in the Preferential Data File was not initialized before loading data into this from Edge results cartridges. This file is used by the Rank Choice Voting module. Because this field was not initialized, errant data present in computer memory was introduced into the Preferential Data File. If the errant data included certain characters, i.e. carriage return, the carriage return would cause incomplete loading of Edge results into the Rank Choice Voting module. This incomplete load results in missing data from the Rank Choice Voting module.

This condition does not affect the loading of results into WinEDS for the purpose of Election Night summary reporting for any contest including the first rank choices for Ranked Choice Voting contests. Furthermore, this condition has no affect on individual Edge machine results reports.

The modification involves a coding change to initialize the field to clear out any errant characters so that they do not get introduced into the preferential data file before results are loaded into the RCV module.

iBeta will verify the following source code changes:

avcedge.rc: OCX file version is updated from 1.2.56.0 to 1.2.57.0.
preftally.cpp Initialization added to the write-in field.

Our office will observe the software behavior before the modification and identify the errant characters. If possible we will witness the effect of the carriage return character on the loading of results into the RCV module.

After the update is applied we will verify that the errant characters are no longer present, and that the RCV module is fully functional.

Once this update is installed at Pierce County, the county will verify that RCV results have fully loaded in both their pre-testing and official Logic and Accuracy test with the state.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

**Patty Murphy****
Voting Systems Support
Office of the Secretary of State
(360) 902-4188
Fax (360) 664-4619
PO Box 40229
520 Union Ave NE Olympia, WA 98504
pmurphy@secstate.wa.gov mailto:pmurphy@secstate.wa.gov

#

related stories:

July 9, 2008 Instant runoff update for San Francisco: federal agency unlikely to certify any voting systems before November
June 27, 2008 Instant runoff forces Pierce County Washington to use uncertified voting systems

Read More...

Is Broward County Elections Supervisor Brenda Snipes afraid for citizens to see what goes on in their county? If Ms. Snipes is proud of how she runs elections, why the need to have 4 policemen follow a reputable observer and candidate for SoE around? Is the real truth so awful that citizen observation must be discouraged in any way possible? Is the truth as disgusting as finding dead rats and cockroaches behind the counter of a restaurant? Is something very very rotten in Broward? Today Ellen Brodsky, voting advocate leader and candidate for elections supervisor tells what when on when she tried to observe the August 26 election, the August 31st count of overvotes and undervotes and the Sept 3 post election audit. Broward apparently is so afraid of what Ellen might witness on election night, that they had 4 policemen to watch every move she made. Broward officials also made Ellen wait 1 1/2 hours before finally admitting Ellen - only to seat her far enough away that she could see very little of what was going on. Ellen was also blocked from witnessing the August 31st manual recount of the over votes and undervotes that was conducted at the warehouse. The election was certified on Sept. 1 at 4:30 PM without NO PUBLIC NOTICE. Proper notice was not given for the post election audits either. Only one reporter made it for the last 30 minutes of the audit and no members of the public were present to witness the post election audit. Continue reading "Broward County Elections- a Black Hole in the Sunshine State" http://blackboxvoting.com/s9/index.php?/archives/260-Broward-County-Elections-a-Black-Hole-in-the-Sunshine-State.html

I'm mad and I'm not taking it anymore. When that happens, I trot out the awards. (Maryland got it in 2006) Broward County earns the title of recidivist Banana Republic. Officials in this county barred election integrity activist Ellen Brodsky from witnessing a recount. 

For crying out loud what the hell heck do they have to hide in Broward?   Ellen is running for election supervisor in Broward, and the fact that she was barred from this recount stinks to high heaven. This is further reason to kick out incumbent Elections Supervisor Brenda Snipes and bring in THE non partisan candidate.  Now for the story about Broward County's apparent fear of transparency in elections..... 

CANDIDATE BARRED FROM OBSERVING RECOUNT Sun-Sentinel - Sept. 1, 2008, by Akilah Johnson

Continue reading "Broward County still a Banana Republic, blocks candidate from observing recount"

Third party members and alot of people have just been seriously punked by Instant Runoff Voting.  It may take them a few years to figure it out, but it will be too late then.  IRV hurts third parties and solidifies two party domination.

Just look at the history of IRV in real life:

In the US, IRV produces the same results of a winner take all election.  In every single IRV election held in the U.S.,all thirty-two, the winner of the election has been the candidate who got the most votes in the first round, i.e., the first preference of more voters than any other.

In San Francisco, elections have many, many candidates and thus majority failure in the first round is common.  In no case did the vote transfers change the preference order affecting the top two candidates in the first round; i.e., the leader in the first round won the election, and the runner-up in the first round remained the runner-up.  This, then, can be expected generally in IRV elections.  Australian experience with IRV shows that this is what it normally does.

Here are some more observations about IRV's hamr to third parties.

The Libertarian Reform Caucus writes:  "Anyone for a Bullet in the Foot?  Instant Runoff!"

IRV can be trusted to maintain a two-party system. When lawmakers on the hill realize this, what's to stop them from building whole-hearted bipartisan suport for IRV? Some in Congress already say they like it! If nothing is said against IRV, one day we'll all be worse off than we were with Plurality Voting! IRV lovers don't know where they're pointing their pistol!

...in ordinary scenarios, if a group of major party supporters conspires to rank their favorite candidate lower they can push up that candidates chances of a win! And vice-versa. Ranking lacks meaning in IRV.

IRV Promotes a Two Party System in Australia

Australian Politics  - in Australia, they call the ranked type voting for single contests - Preferential voting.  According to the analysts at  Australian Politics, the "Disadvantages of the Preferential [IRV] System" are:

1. It is more complicated to administer and count.
2. It can produce a higher level of informal voting.
3. It promotes a two-party system to the detriment of minor parties and independents.
4. Voters are forced to express a preference for candidates they may not wish to support in any way. (The use of optional preferential voting, as used in New South Wales State elections, is a solution to this problem.)

The researchers at the Center for Range Voting  says that there are other voting methods that actually DO help third parties gain strength, but IRV is not one of them.

Take a look at IRV reality, Not theory

The facts are there are three IRV countries: Ireland (mandated in their 1937 constitution), Australia (adopted STV in the early 1900s, but in 1949 added "reweighting" to STV in their multi-winner elections, a change which does not matter for us since we are only considering single-winner elections – Australia and Ireland have both kinds of elections), and Malta. (Later note: a recent addition is Fiji, but it unfortunately then got subtracted due to a 2006 coup.)

All three became 2-party dominated in their IRV seats.  And this is despite the fact that in addition to IRV single-winner elections, they all also have multi-winner STV "proportional representation" (PR) elections, and they are parliamentary rather than presidential.  Both of these two factors mitigate toward having more than two parties (the parliamentary countries with PR essentially all have many more than two vibrant political parties).  But despite those multiparty-genic factors, the effect of IRV in these countries has been enough to drag them back down to two-party domination status!

So given that, you can bet your bottom dollar that the USA, were it to adopt IRV but still to remain presidential and without multiwinner PR elections (i.e. wholy with single-winner elections), will definitely stay two-party dominated.

According to Wikipedia, the minor parties (e.g. The Australian Democrats, Greens, One Nation, Family First, Christian Democrats) are often able to hold Senate seats thanks to the multiwinner PR system used to elect it, but have usually been unable to hold House seats thanks to the fact that they are elected using IRV.  As I write this in 2004-2007 the total number of House seats owned by these parties is zero out of 150.  (There is a seat owned by CLP member Dave Tollner, but the County Liberal Party is really the Liberal/National party branch in the Northern Territories.)

Has IRV helped third parties anywhere?

Progressive States Report on Voting Machine Mess - Says We Were Right All Along - Congress Are You Listening?

Progressive States has a report out today on the efforts by state activists to restore integrity to our elections.  The conclusion - we were right all along. Are you listening, Congress? State legislatures?  At issue, how we lost election integrity, steps states are taking to get it back, protecting ballot integrity, obtaining post election audits, and stopping the privatization of elections.

The report includes:

Election Integrity – How We Lost It and How States are Getting It Back

- Protecting Ballot Integrity

- Post-Election Audits that Work

- Stopping the Privatization of Elections

- Conclusion

This Stateside Dispatch will highlight how state leaders have sought to protect ballot integrity, create post-election audits that work to protect voters rights, and have fought the privatization of elections into the hands of potentially partisan and often incompetent corporations.

Bottom line - it has been up to the states to undo the mess that congress created.

Stateside shows that the e-voting movement was right all along 

Critics Proven Right as Voting Problems Accumulate: The problems encountered and uncovered regarding electronic voting are legion, the following are just a few recent examples:

• In Arkansas during an election this spring 45 votes cast in one race were added to the totals of an entirely different race that wasn’t even on the same ballot.
• Last year, Volusia County Florida was forced to replace over 300 memory cards on their voting machines due to manufacturing defects.
• Last year, Lawrence County Ohio had one race where the voting machines flipped the results between two candidates due to a programming error.

Aint that a kick in the ----!

Conclusion

A series of election “reforms” advanced after the fiasco of Florida's 2000 election have had the consequence of acutely undermining the integrity and security of our voting processes.  Seeking usable voting systems, states embraced electronic voting machines while dismissing critics who questioned the wisdom of using computers for such a sensitive application.  However, after a multitude of failures in practice and a series of negative assessments from computer scientists, many states are scrapping the electronic machines in favor of paper ballots.

Even as states belatedly embrace paper balloting, most still do not have the post-election audits necessary to ensure election results are accurate.  In addition, the privatization of our voting systems continues and is the primary emerging threat to the freedom and fairness of our elections.  Lawmakers and the public must demand that the public maintain control over the voting process, because without transparent elections, democracy is truly imperiled.

Go to Stateside's report for some validation of our years of hard work.

More information about voting machine messes at David Allen's at www.blackboxvoting.com

Paper or Plastic: What will your state be voting on in November? One of the most commonly fielded questions to e-voting experts buzzing around the internet - Does anyone know which of the 50 states still does not have verified paper trails to computer voting machines?? We checked with Pam Smith, President of Verified Voting, the national organization founded by computer scientist Dr. David Dill.....
One of the most commonly fielded questions to e-voting experts buzzing around the internet - Does anyone know which of the 50 states still does not have verified paper trails to computer voting machines?? We checked with Pam Smith, President of Verified Voting, the national organization founded by computer scientist Dr. David Dill.....

From Pam's answer, I have summarized the answer:

The short answer: 100% paperless statewide:  DE, LA, SC, GA, NY, NJ, MD, TN Mostly or partially paperless:  PA, IN, KY, KS, TX and VA   We have some states that have paper requirements that haven't gone into effect. What equipment will Americans use to cast our ballots in 2008? See the Verifier Map for detailed information on voting systems used in each state and county in 2008 and recent elections.

The other map about half way down on Verified Voting's front page http://www.verifiedvoting.org/  tells what states have taken action with respect to paper/audit provisions.   Some have passed requirements that do not yet take effect. States which are mostly or partially paperless and have not passed a requirement are: PA, IN, KY, KS, TX.   No paper and no requirement. The states which have no paper statewide and have not passed a requirement yet are: DE, LA, SC, GA.   States with no requirement by law but have paper anyway. OK, MA, RI, WY...   Passed a law, but left a few counties out. AR   Which have no paper now but legislation that sets a date to require paper? NY, NJ, MD, TN   State that is partially paperless that has requirement to replace paperless through attrition. Paperless touchscreens that wear out are to be replaced with optical scan VA

We regularly blog about voting machine news at David Allen's site www.blackboxvoting.com