Diebold Touchscreen Voting System Keeps 3 Sets of Books

[protect freedom impeach bush now]

from democrats.com

-------------------------------

Exposed: Diebold Touchscreen Voting System Keeps Three Sets of Books!

Bev Harris writes: "Now, think of it like this: You want the report to add up ONLY the ACTUAL votes. But, unbeknownst to the election supervisor, votes can be added and subtracted from vote ledger 2, so that it may or may not match vote ledger 1. Her official report comes from vote ledger 2, which has been disengaged from vote ledger 1 ... From a programming standpoint, there might be reasons to have a special vote ledger that disengages from the real one. From an accounting standpoint, using multiple sets of books is NOT OKAY. From an accounting standpoint, the ONLY thing the totals report should add up is the original votes in vote ledger 1. Proper bookkeeping NEVER allows an extra ledger that can be used to just erase the original information and add your own. And certainly, it is improper to have the official reports come from the second ledger, the one which may or may not have information erased or added."

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0307/S00065.htm

[Philosophy]

1. I think she's jumping the gun

From what I can glean from the story, and from my knowledge of programming MS Access, it looks like the "vote ledger 2" (and likely 3 also) is just a temporary table used to sum records from "vote ledger 1" for display on the report. It's a common practice, although it seems clunky and unnecessary in this case.

[papau]

2. No - Table 2 Summary is not a summary - overrides are not noted

so fraud is a given

Similiar to having correct data

then incorrect data that has some of the correct data.

Then using the second report you must ask, how close to correct data is this.

and, why is any data change from table 1 required (I mean we are just counting votes - it is not tough math).

If I "know" we had more GOP votes than recorded, I change table 2 - and modem it to the vote counting folks - and there is no trail.

Anf "fixes" to program are not documented - so how table 2 relates to table 1 is not certain - as in why do you need fixes.

and why do you need a wireless network connection to each machine, in addition to our very secure modem that we use to transfer data to the vote counting folks.

[Trajan]

3. Well ....

Bev and many other DONT feel they are jumping the gun .... and have investigated these issues and materials thouroughly ...

The issue isnt necessarily that Fraud HAS been perpetrated, but that it CAN be, thereby making the system too insecure as a valid ballot counting system ....

Diebold and ES&S have tried to keep the software and processes secret, and now that their source code has been revealed and is being evaluated, enough has been seen IN that code to recognize the folly of proclaiming that DRE devices used throughout the country, and voting computers in general are secure and reliable in ANY way ...

You have a right to your opinion: .. it is one of billions ....

[madrchsod]

4. you have to

read the entire article about the interesting way the system can be tampered with then you`ll see what`s up....