|
New York State is about to undergo an enormous change in the way our elections are conducted. Soon all our lever machines will be replaced with a new way to cast our ballots.
Tell The Governor: NY Voters Deserve the Best.
It is crucial that the State get the choice of voting systems right the first time. Adopting flawed electronic touch screen voting machines (DREs) would be a mistake we cannot afford to make, and there's a better choice: paper ballots counted with ballot-scanners, with accessible ballot-marking devices to make sure everyone can vote independently and privately.
The current plan allows each New York State county to choose its own voting system. This will lead to a disastrous patchwork of expensive touch screen DREs administered by under-trained staff and elderly poll workers. We'll see long lines at the polls, frustrated voters, questionable results and subsequent legal challenges -- and confusion resulting from a mix of different systems around the state. Don't let this happen in New York State!
Send a fax to Governor Spitzer -- Tell him there is only one choice for New York - a single statewide voting system using paper ballots, precinct based optical scanners, and accessible ballot marking devices [Click here to send a FAX via VerifiedVoting.org – It's a FREE service! Do it now!].
New Yorkers for Verified Voting has joined a coalition of voting integrity organizations calling attention to the shortcomings of the "Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007," HR 811. The groups represent a broad cross section of the grassroots voting integrity movement working on the ground in states all over the United States. They have released a statement listing areas where the bill needs improvement, and urge that specific amendments be made to the bill before it is brought up for a vote.
"While well intentioned, HR 811 has enough holes to drive a truck full of DREs through," said Bo Lipari, Executive Director of NYVV. "It will encourage states to throw good money after bad as they move to modify failed touch screen voting machines. Congress needs to wake up and smell the coffee — DREs can't be 'fixed'."
Read the coalition statement here:
http://www.votersunite.org/info/HR811EssentialRevisions.htm
On February 6, 2007 the Board of Trustees of the Village of Altamont in Albany County passed a resolution calling for adoption of paper ballots, precinct count scanners and accessible ballot markers as the county’s voting system.
—More—
For people who say, "What does a PBOS poll site look like?", here's a picture that's worth at least a thousand words. Our thanks to the combined efforts of Robert Millman, Rick Schwab, and Teresa Hommel. Please note that while this illustration includes two ballot marking devices (BMDs), only one would be required for most locations.
Poll Site with a Paper Ballot, Optical Scan Voting System [~212kb PDF]
In November 2006, Albany County Election Commissioners Graziano and Clancy released a paper entitled "The County Dilemma". However, the paper contains many misstatements and misinterpretations about HAVA, voting machines, and the choices available to New York State. Wanda Warren Berry has written an open letter to the Albany County commissioners correcting the factual errors in their report.
—More—
A coalition of the State’s leading election reform groups called on Governor Spitzer to follow the lead of Florida’s newly elected Governor Charlie Crist by ruling out the use of computerized Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines in New York State. The Florida Governor announced that the state intends to replace all of the computerized DREs in the state at a cost of more than $32 million dollars. The state of Florida will move to an optical scan voting system where voters complete their ballots by hand or with the assistance of a ballot marking device.
"New York State has not yet made a choice of new voting systems - but that decision lies ahead. We have the opportunity to avoid the expensive mistakes made by other states who have invested millions in failed touch screen voting technology," said Bo Lipari, Executive Director of New Yorkers for Verified Voting. "Governor Spitzer should join the Governors from New Mexico, Maryland, and Florida in calling for adoption of paper ballots and optical scanners. It is the only choice that makes sense for New York".
—More—
NYVV has submitted a proposal to the New York State Board estimating the number of new voting machines that will be required in New York’s polling places. Based on an NYVV analysis using computer simulations and the mathematics of queuing theory, our calculations indicate that 1 DRE can handle, at a maximum, only 200 registered voters. By comparison, a single precinct based ballot scanner, with sufficient numbers of inexpensive marking booths, can serve up to 4000 registered voters."
—More—
Adequately tested voting systems are a prerequisite for well run elections and to ensure public confidence in election results. When it is completed, the current process of testing voting systems will culminate in New York State's four Election Commissioners deciding to approve, or "certify" those systems which meet the State's regulations. Certification testing is ongoing and is proving to be a mixture of good and bad news.
Read the NYVV report [~32kb PDF]
December 14, 2006 - The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, League of Women Voters of New York State, New Yorkers for Verified Voting, New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG) NEWS RELEASE: The State Board of Elections must Consider all factors when determining voting machine capacity, but the SBOE commissioned study fails to consider peak voting times, machine failures and other critical factors in timing study. The American Institute for Research (AIR) has submitted a User Rate Assessment Study to the State Board of Elections. This report will be one factor in a decision to be made in January determining the minimum number of new voting machines needed to be purchased for each election district or polling place across the state.
Read the joint press release [~16kb PDF]
As New York decides on new voting systems, a key question is how many voters can reasonably be served by each voting machine? This number is essential to estimate costs and avoid excessively long lines for voters. To provide a better answer to this question, NYVV Board Member William Edelstein, PhD, has applied queuing theory, the mathematical study of waiting lines, to carry out computer simulations of realistic elections.
Read the NYVV report
A ten minute clip from the DVD "Bought and Sold-- Electronic Voting in New York" is now posted on YouTube, but you can view it here too: View the clip here, along with additional information on the new edition of the DVD that includes both the original 45 minute and the 10 minute version.
The report makes policy proposals
on the performance of voting systems, to comply with HAVA,
and their ability to allow voters to cast valid ballots that
reflect their intended choices, in a timely manner, and with
confidence that their vote will not be lost. According
to the Brennan Center, "this
system quality is known as 'usability'. Following several high-profile
controversies in the last few elections – including
most notoriously, the 2000 controversy over the 'butterfly
ballot' in Palm Beach – voting system usability
is a subject of utmost concern to voters and election officials"
[italics ours].
The residual or lost vote rate is defined as, "the
difference between the number of ballots cast and the number
of valid votes cast in a particular contest", and Full-face
direct recording electronic (DRE) systems, as required for
NYS, were found to produce more lost votes than precinct count optical scan (PCOS)
systems (page u-5).
The report goes on to say that the performance of full-face
DRE systems is even worse for minorities and as
the income level of the voters declines (page u-6). The specific voting systems that the report found,
"produced the lowest residual vote rate in the country in
2004 – both
at 0.6% – were the AccuVote-OS and ES&S
M100 precinct count optical scan systems" (Table U4, page u-6).
Continuing, "In addition, the nationwide average residual
vote rate for PCOS systems
was lower in 2004 than the average rate for either type of
DRE system.
Brennan Center Voting
Technology Initiative
The usability report, Usability
of Voting Systems [~1mb
PDF draft]
In New York State, the law requires that ballots have tear-off stubs with printed consecutive numbers. This report describes how the tear off stubs defeats chain voting schemes. Read the NYVV report [~13 kb PDF].
Given the chaos and delays in selecting new voting technology for New York State, many voters wonder why we can’t just keep the mechanical lever machines which have been used in New York elections for generations. But, in the view of the State and County Boards of Elections, state legislators, and citizen advocacy organizations, this is legally out of the question. Read the NYVV report [~33 kb PDF].
Paper Ballot Optical Scanners (PBOS's) may have problems, any technology does, but they pale by comparison to the magnitude of problems experienced and threatened by Direct Recording electronic voting machines (DRE's). NYVV has researched and analyzed the evidence and offers a summary report on this subject. Read the NYVV report [~26 kb PDF].
"The Charade of Voting Machine Demonstrations" by Wanda Warren Berry. Voting machine demonstrations are eagerly anticipated both by voters and election workers, but many citizens leave them with real disappointment.
—more— [PDF ~16kb]
September 19, 2006: Albany Times Union reports that New York
State tells counties to decide which devices they want before
certification process is finished.
An Albany
Times Union article, by Rick Karlin, Capital Bureau,
reports that Bo Lipari, Executive Director of New Yorkers for
Verified Voting, said that "the state Board of Elections
is now telling counties to choose which machines they want
before they are even certified for use." The article also
said that State Board of Elections spokesman Lee Daghlian
added that "purchase decisions aren't final contracts, and
that counties also have to list backup choices, should some
of the 11 different machines, offered by six manufacturers,
fail the tests."
July
25, 2006: A Key Win for NY Activists
In a key win for New York State verifiable voting advocates,
four companies have submitted precinct ballot scanners for
certification testing.
For years voting machine vendors have tried to keep ballot
scanners unavailable to New York. A comment in 2004 to Assembly
woman Sandy Galef from the president of ES&S - "New
York is a DRE state" shows the presumption that electronic
touch screen voting was to be the only alternative for New
Yorkers.
But ongoing advocacy by citizens calling for paper ballot
systems forced voting machine vendors to begin demonstrating
paper ballot scanners in New York. But until this week, there
was no guarantee that any vendor would actually submit a scanner
system for certification. If no vendor submitted a system,
there would be no paper based system available for counties
to choose as an alternative to DREs.
But yesterday, the State Board of Elections announced that
four vendors had submitted precinct based ballot scanners for
certification testing. The growing citizen demand for adoption
of paper ballot systems has won another key victory, and an
essential step in the battle for paper ballots.
The State Board reports that the following companies have
submitted systems for certification:
Avante - One DRE system; One ballot scanner system
ES&S - One DRE system; One ballot scanner system
Diebold - One DRE system; One ballot scanner system
Sequoia - Two DRE systems; One ballot scanner system
Liberty - One DRE system
Populex - One ballot marking system
We are still a long, long way from adopting paper ballot based
voting in New York. But this was an essential step along the
path.
Congratulations to verifiable voting advocates around New
York State, this win belongs to you!
-Bo Lipari
"New York: First in Election Integrity, or Muddled Like Everybody Else?" A response by NYVV Board Member, William A. Edelstein, to a recent article posted on VoteTrustUSA.org and in Election Integrity ("New York: last in HAVA Compliance or First in Election Integrity?", 6/27/06), which argues that things are going well in New York, because we have "transparent" mechanical lever voting machines that we can continue to use indefinitely.
—more— [PDF ~296kb]
June 27, 2006, Brennen Center Reports
on Electronic Voting Systems: A task force of government,
academic and non-profit experts convened by the Brennan Center
for Justice at NYU has today released the first comprehensive
threat analysis of three of the most popular types of electronic
voting systems.
Here's a quick quote from MIT professor Ron Rivest from the
press release: "I see this as an historic report because
it's the first time we've systematically examined security
concerns presented by all of the electronic voting systems
in use. The report will be invaluable for any election official
grappling with electronic security and, hopefully, will pave
the way for widespread adoption of better safeguards."
Here's the press release, executive summary and full report:
http://brennancenter.org/presscenter/releases_2006/pressrelease_2006_0627.html
http://www.brennancenter.org/programs/downloads/Executive%20Summary.pdf
http://www.brennancenter.org/programs/downloads/Full%20Report.pdf
Here is USA Today's and Reuter's coverage:
Analysis finds e-voting machines vulnerable
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-06-26-e-voting_x.htm
Study shows US electronic voting machines vulnerable
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyID=200
6-06-27T130232Z_01_N26181575_RTRUKOC_0_US-VOTINGMACHINES.xml
NYVV
Archive of Older Articles
|
