New Yorkers: Don't Buy New Machines and Dump the Old! (X)

[kster]

November 25, 2007

by Sheila Parks

http://www.opednews.com

In USA v. New York State Board of Elections, et al. (US District Court,Northern District of NY, Civil Action No. 06-CV-0263) Department of Justice (DOJ) Attorney Brian Heffernan argues that even though no electronic voting systems exist that meet NY's voting technology standards, NY must use the faulty technology.

The right to vote, as well as the principle of “one person, one vote,” are cornerstones of our democracy. The anti-slavery, women’s suffrage, and civil rights movements as well as the expansion of voting to young people are all part of the history of voting rights in this country. Equally fundamental is the assurance that each voter knows that her or his vote counts and is counted as intended. At this time in our history, many have lost confidence in our voting system. This confidence must be restored.

Last year, I observed five hand-counted paper ballots (HCPB) elections: three in Massachusetts, one in Vermont and one in Maine. All five hand-countings of the paper ballots were conducted smoothly, without any hassles and were finished in a timely manner. Although HCPB do not address the egregious suppression of the vote, coupling the elimination of this suppression with HCPB is the only way we will have fair, honest, transparent elections.

In Acton, Maine, in the General Election on November 7, 2006, I observed six teams of two counters each, hand-count paper ballots. Each team was made up of a Republican and a Democrat. Not only did each team hand-count the paper ballots, but also they immediately audited the hand-count. That is, they did a second hand-count immediately after the first hand-count. With seven races and two initiatives, the six teams of two people each were able to hand-count twice 944 ballots in four hours.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_sheila_p_071125_new_yorkers_3a__dump_t.htm

(X)... http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x486477

[kster]

1. knt

[TreasonousBastard]

2. 4 hours? 12 people? OK, our polls are open until 9 PM...

we have maybe a thousand people registered in each ED with well over 50% turnout, and 6 people work an ED.

Last time, it took us a little under an hour to close up, what with all the other things we had to do besides count. Counting took maybe fifteen minutes on the ancient lever machines.

With paper ballots it looks like we'd be there until around 1 AM after getting there at 5:30 AM-- that's getting awfully close to a 20 hour day. Besides, paper ballots not only have to be counted, but many are discarded because of unclear marks, kinda like the chad problems. These have been a source of fraud since paper ballots were invented, with crooked inspectors having way to discard ballots.

Suffolk County has a tough enough time getting election inspectors, and this ain't gonna make it any easier. So, you can take your paper ballots and shove them.

[kster]

3. Not in my America,

mechanical/electronic secret counting game is all but over, No, I do not trust you nor do I expect that you should trust me.

I demand Hand Counted Paper Ballots, for democracy's sake, and security for your family and mine. Whether you work a 20 hr day is not a concern to me HIRE MORE PEOPLE!!!

Oh and YOUR FIRED!!!

[TreasonousBastard]

4. It's not that I don't trust you, it's that...

your arguments are idiotic and devoid of any sense of reality.

You go find people who want to sit for 20 hours counting ballots, big shot.

[kster]

5. So we shouldn't secure the vote count because it is to hard

and you have nerve to call my argument idiotic?

[TreasonousBastard]

6. Paper ballots are NOT the only way to sedire the vote. n/t

[kster]

7. TreasonousBastard and Kster run for office

how do want the ballots to be counted, BE HONEST.

[NuttyFluffers]

8. laughably false. i already have real world experience that paper ballots are excellent.

i worked the polls well over 5 years now in alameda (over 5 elections, because of all the crazy special elections). i saw it from punch cards to electronic touch screens to paper ballots w/ optical scanner. i can tell you hands down, without a doubt, by far, and any other exclamation you ever need the fastest method was paper ballots with optical scanner. the second fastest was punch cards. the most cumbersome, glitchy, questionable, and laborious to pack up method was the electronic touch screens -- by far.

you just simply have no experience of what you're talking about. i do. you're wrong. welcome paper ballots, they'll save you HOURS of headache.

you may continue your baseless speculation if you so wish now...

[kster]

9. Your daughter/son decides to run for president against my daughter/son

How do you want the votes to be counted in their race?

BE HONEST. :)

[NuttyFluffers]

12. paper ballots w/ optiscan. no question about it.

you can do an actual recount with that. i have some horror stories for you about them evil touch screens... :o

that and i want a tactile sensation to ad to my enjoyment of my child beating your child in a popularity contest. :P just kidding! :hug:

[kster]

10. Do you want optiscan paper ballots, in OUR kids election?

You either are confident that optiscan is "without a doubt, by far, and any other exclamation you ever need the fastest method was paper ballots with optical scanner".

Come on, I need some expert advice, should, my kid be running against your kid, is optiscaned paper ballots NOT ONLY the FASTEST way to count the ballots, I need to know if OPTISCAN is the most SECURE way to count the ballots?

[NuttyFluffers]

14. my my, we are eager! :D i had to get ready for school yesterday.

early to bed early to rise and all that jazz... :(

outside of gigantor punch levers, which i have no experience in, i will easily put my confidence in optiscan paper ballots. they are easier to read, process, and secure than punch cards and are lightyears more secure, tangible, and stable than touch screens.

basically, unlike punch cards, we get 2 numbers: 1 for the amount of poll votes read my the reader and 1 for the tangible paper ballots that were read. punch cards just got 1 for the number of punch cards we got. touch screens just got 1 number for the votes we got -- but on a receipt! both are scary, because you can physically throw away punch card votes, and the other because you can just fix the machine. the optiscan has 2 numbers on the sealed bag, the counting is done isolated (like all of them), written in indelible ink (sharpies! :D), and then the pysical ballots and the machine receipt tally are both handed in sealed envelops. outside these sealed envelopes we rewrite the tallies, sign them, and put them in a locked bag (1-use zip tie, so don't screw up!). these are then delivered to the precinct HQ.

you'd have to tamper with both the optiscan's electronics, which would be like tampering with a shredder machine covered in security tape. the electronics are so simple there's little to tamper with. there's no ports to the outside, unlike our touch screens (they had wifi for god's sake!, AND USBs AND serial ports AND card ports!). then you'd have to convince the other workers (whom you don't really get to meet except in 1 training session) to look the other way while discarding selected votes. that's 2 really annoying fail-safes to work against compared to the 1 each for punch ballot and touch screen WITH the added security of real recountability available to punch ballots. that's pretty secure i think. if there's a better way currently on the market i'm all ears!
:D

[TreasonousBastard]

11. Did you hand count any of them? That's the question. We...

use ancient lever machines here, and they work at least as well as optical scan machines. I would imagine there are fewer disputed ballots because there is no writing involved.

I have no argument with any system that accurately counts, totals the votes, and has something like an audit trail to allow for recounts.

[NuttyFluffers]

13. oh yeah, they have to be taken out and counted before sealed away.

we cannot have discrepancies between the optiscan machine's count and the actual hard count of ballots put in envelops. the elections in which i was polling place judge it was my ass on the line with my signature making sure, along with the poll 'leader' (whose official name escapes me at the moment), that both counts are correct. for touch screen all there is is a single receipt per macine and we both just sign that one thing off and take it on faith. no hard copy... rather scary.

and another thing, the optiscan notes if someone screwed up their ballot. so we take it out, ask if the person wants to review it and get another ballot to correct any errors (we don't look at the thing). if they choose not to then we reinsert it with the error and override and the voter knows there's an error likely to invalidate something. very easy and secure. all you gotta do is grab a pen and mark your answer -- it's pretty wonderful.

never got a chance to work a poll with the gigantic punch levers, so i do envy your experience there. if they are that reliable no sense messing with a good thing, eh?

(p.s. i never had to work as an examiner in a recount. so i got no "hanging chad" experience. but we haven't had many recount challenges in the state of california, let alone in my county.)

[TreasonousBastard]

15. We just got a reprieve on having to get new...

machines over here-- seems the state/feds ordered us to replace the beasts before they certified the new machines.

The gears on these things do wear out, most are at least 40 years old, and it is possible for a crooked mechanic to file a gear, making one line lose every tenth vote. These are insignificant problems, although replacement parts are getting impossible to find.

It seems the touch screens are inevitable, but there is no reason that they shouldn't work perfectly. I spent a couple of years designing cash registers, and billions financial transactions from cash registers to ATM's to stock and cash transfers are performed flawlessly every day. There's no reason electronic voting can't be as accurate.

No good reason, anyway.

FWIW, if you franchise an IHOP and want to use your own cash register, not the company-approved setup, you have to jump through a lot more hoops and go through a tougher certification than many voting machines have to go through. That's just nuts.

[NuttyFluffers]

16. there's no reason it can't be accurate, true... if there was interest in it.

but those machines are far too easily tamperable. too many access points, too many loopholes in the software, and too little fail-safes.

remember POS machines offer soft copy to register, soft copy which must be immediately verified to CC/Bank company machine (who have BIG LAWYERS! :D), hard copy customer who must view and sign, a second hard copy for the customer to keep for their records, and a hard copy printed and verified by CC/Bank later in the form of a statement.

that's a minimum of 3 hard copies, and 2 soft copies and often more depending on POS 3rd party servers -- which in turn are often saved on massive storage devices and can be retrieved to verify tampering.

if only touch screens were even remotely as secure... ;) you get 1 hard copy, that's it. want to print it out again? :D also you have 1 server system. wanna attempt to access it? it'll take you an army of lawyers and you'll never get to look at any hard drives in time... if there's hard drives. yeah, let's stick with the simple sharpies and scanner. ;)