February 11, 2009 3:51 PM

Calif. Sues Voting Machine Maker For $15M

(AP)  Secretary of State Debra Bowen sued a major voting machine company Monday, accusing Election Systems & Software of selling unauthorized machines to San Francisco and four counties.

The lawsuit seeks nearly $15 million in penalties and reimbursements. Bowen contends that ES&S sold 972 of its AutoMark A200 voting machines to San Francisco and Colusa, Marin, Merced and Solano counties in 2006 even though the state had not tested and certified the machines.

"ES&S ignored the law over and over again and it got caught," Bowen said in a statement. "California law is very clear on this issue. I am not going to stand on the sidelines and watch a voting system vendor come into this state, ignore the laws and make millions of dollars from California taxpayers in the process."

The suit was filed for Bowen by the attorney general's office in San Francisco Superior Court. It seeks $9.7 million in penalties and asks the court to order ES&S to reimburse San Francisco and the four counties for the nearly $5 million cost of the machines.

Some of the AutoMark A200s apparently were used in the November 2006 election along with a previous version of the machines, Bowen said. Local election officials reported some problems with the AutoMarks, but Bowen said her office had no way of knowing if the problems were with the new machines or the older ones.

Omaha-based ES&S, which bills itself as the "world's largest and most experienced provider of total election management solutions," said the AutoMark A200 included only "minor hardware modifications" from an earlier model that was certified by the state.

The company said it followed an "established practice" in which California relied on federal testing to decide if it would allow minor modifications to existing voting systems without new state certification.

Ken Fields, an ES&S spokesman, said the AutoMark A200 modifications were submitted to federal labs in late 2005, when former Secretary of State Bruce McPherson was in office.

Under established protocol at that time, the state allowed equipment to be modified if the federal labs determined the changes didn't alter the "fit, form or function" of the equipment, he said.

The changes were intended to make the AutoMarks easier to service and manufacture, Fields said.

"The penalties sought by the secretary of state bear no relationship to the claimed violations, particularly given that the claimed violations resulted from ES&S adhering to the state's established practice," the company said in a statement.

But Bowen said it wasn't up to ES&S to determine if the hardware modifications were minor and that the AutoMark A200s had to be submitted to her office as well as to federal labs for testing and certification.

"California law does not ask the manufacturer if the changes to a voting system are big or small or medium size," she said in a conference call with reporters. "That's a matter for California's chief elections officer to decide."

A spokeswoman for Bowen, Nicole Winger, said the independent labs used by the federal government "clearly do not test these systems to the depth and breadth that California expects and the standards that California has."

The AutoMarks are designed to be used by voters with disabilities to mark ballots that are then read by scanners.

Bowen said the secretary of state's office became aware of the sale of the AutoMark A200s to San Francisco and the four counties when an ES&S employee accidentally mentioned the changes in the system during a conference call in July with members of the secretary of state's staff.

But Fields said examiners for the secretary of state's office saw the AutoMark A200 in 2006 as part of testing and certification of voting equipment used by San Francisco.

"I don't know if (the examiner) marked it A200, but that was the equipment that was there," Fields said.

Winger said local election officials were unaware they were getting modified equipment when they bought the AutoMark A200s. State officials also didn't know of any changes until the July conference call, she added.

Bowen said her office is now testing the AutoMark A200s to make sure they work as they should. She hopes to have results by early December.

If her lawsuit is successful, ES&S could be required to reimburse the five local governments for the AutoMark A200s, even if Bowen's office subsequently certifies the machines and they resume using the devices.

© 2009 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Add a Comment
by sageprophet November 23, 2007 5:37 AM EST
YOU LIVE IN INTERESTING TIMES
America is tipping back way too far in her easy chair. Something BIG is about to happen, and I predict this upcoming 2008 Presidential Election will be extremely pivotal. I''m not going to name any candidates. You probably already know who my favorite one is. But let me make my point absolutely clear: If you think times are boring, think again. If you think the future is predictable, think again. My advice to everyone who reads this is to be thoughtful. Trust only that wisdom which is your own. 90% of mainstream media in this country is controlled by fewer than 20 different organizations. Unfortunately, they, like our sold-out political ****** in Washington, were bought and paid for by the military-industrial-pharmacutical complex decades ago. Therefore, they will paint pictures they want to paint, and people will open their minds to pictures they want to see. So, be skeptical. Be wise. Research issues and talking points on your own, and share what you learn with those you love. The future of your family tree may lay in the balance.
Reply to this comment
by sageprophet November 23, 2007 5:09 AM EST
IT''S A PHONY LEFT-RIGHT PARADIGM
People treat party politics like it''s the Super Bowl--their team must win at all costs. Sometimes at the cost of America as a whole. Wake-up folks. For the most part, Those currently in power, and those being groomed to take [major] political power (whether Democrat or Republican), are preselected by a "global elite," and whomever is eventually elected, will ultimately, serve their agenda, and not ours. It''s the person you should be voting for, and for the ideas he or she represents. NOT the party. Unfortunately, in this country, a person has to belong to one party or the other in order to have any hope of winning an election. Actually, it''s all a phony, poorly staged, two-party paradigm. Do yourself and your country a favor. Focus on the candidate, and the ideas and positions that candidate represents, and then look at the candidate''s track record of performance with respect to those positions. That''s all that really matters in the end. Everytime I hear someone say "I hate the Republican Party. Look at what Bush has done.," I think about all of the Democrat enablers in Congress like Clinton, Obama, et. al. who made all of his dastardly deeds possible. Elections are not a contest of two teams. Ultimately, It''s the candidate who will either serve your interests or betray them while in office--not the political party. Would you Democrats have voted for Douglas, who was pro-slavery, against Lincoln simply because he was a Democrat? Anwer that.
Reply to this comment
by sageprophet November 23, 2007 3:30 AM EST
ONLY RON PAUL CAN BEAT CLINTON
Zogby''s Director of Communications Fritz Wenzel said on November 20 that Paul is the strongest of the GOP candidates to run against Clinton. "Among the larger universe of voters," which includes all parties, "yes, Paul would be a much stronger candidate than any of the other three [Romney, Giuliani, Thompson]," Wenzel said. Zogby recently announced that Paul was their winner in a nationwide blind-bio poll which included voters from all parties. "He is anti-war and the majority of Democrats are anti-war, he has some other ideas and policies and stances on issues more attractive to Democrats, particularly conservative Democrats," said Wenzel. "Even among Independents, he is far and away a more attractive candidate," he added. Paul is the only GOP candidate who is not threatening war with Iran, whereas Clinton vowed to keep that option "on the table." Paul also voted against the war in Iraq, which Clinton has supported. Because Democrats outnumber Republicans, none of the other GOP candidates can win against Clinton, because they simply won''t be able to reach across party lines and attract enough Democratic and Independent voters to beat Clinton. Only Paul can do that. "He''s right on schedule," Wenzel said. "He''s making all the right moves, going in the right direction...at a time when other candidates are not moving." Wenzel based his analysis on recent polls that show Paul could win in New Hampshire and that his support nationwide is intensifying.
Reply to this comment
by sageprophet November 23, 2007 3:28 AM EST
RON PAUL WINS BIG IN NATIONAL POLL
The results of a nationwide telephone poll, announced by Zogby on November 19th, reveals that Americans want to vote for a candidate who protects liberty; who wants to shrink government; and who wants to immediately withdraw our troops from Iraq - positions of Congressman Ron Paul. As part of a blind-bio, spread poll, likely voters (from all parties) were provided with descriptions of four different Republican candidates and asked to choose who they would vote for based on each one''s resume and political platform. 33% of pollees chose Ron Paul, 19% chose Rudy Giuliani, 15% chose Mitt Romney and 13% chose Fred Thompson. The results clearly illustrate that the country is crying out for Ron Paul, which is why mainstream media has launched a public relations offensive to marginalize his accomplishments and suppress the Congressman''s name recognition. In a seperate question, over 49% of pollees said they would be more likely to vote for a candidate who would begin an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. In fact, Ron Paul won in every demographic of this poll including, but not limited to, religious voters, NASCAR fans, military families, African-Americans, etc..
Reply to this comment
by prinzowhales November 21, 2007 5:54 PM EST
Note!...these are the NEW machines...just think what the old ones used in 2000 and 2004 were like...and the real problem state that made all the difference--Ohio--the one promised by the head of Diebold to Bush---will, to my knowledge, not make any significant changes.
Reply to this comment
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook