Colo. Bans Most Electronic Voting Machines

Security Risks, Inaccuracy Cited; Federal Certification Process Called "Inadequate"

(AP)  Colorado's top election official decertified electronic voting machines used in many of the state's largest counties Monday, calling into question equipment used in past elections in a move he said could have national implications.

Electronic voting machines used in Denver, Arapahoe, Pueblo, Mesa and Elbert counties cannot be used in the next election because of problems with accuracy or security, Secretary of State Mike Coffman said.

A number of electronic scanners used to count ballots were also decertified, including a type used by Boulder County as well as more than three dozen small to mid-size counties around the state.

His decision affects six of Colorado's 10 most populous counties and three of the four equipment manufacturers allowed in the state.

The manufacturers have 30 days to appeal.

Following a 2006 lawsuit that said electronic voting equipment was vulnerable to tampering and should be banned, Coffman announced in March that he had adopted new rules for testing electronic voting machines.

He required the four electronic voting systems used in all 64 Colorado counties to apply for recertification. The four systems are manufactured by Hart InterCivic, Premier Election Solutions - formerly known as Diebold Election Systems - Sequoia Voting Systems and Election Systems and Software.

Coffman had also put Denver, Pueblo, Douglas, Montrose and Routt counties on an election watch list for problems in the November 2006. Pueblo has since been removed from the list.

"What we have found is that the federal certification process is inadequate," Coffman said, adding, "There are some issues here that need to be addressed."

The secretary said his decisions were based on an exhaustive review of voting equipment. During a news conference to present his findings he stood in front of stacks of boxes and a library of binders he said contained more than 160,000 documents on the state's four election vendors.

Coffman would not comment on what his findings mean for past elections, despite his reports that some equipment had accuracy issues.

"I can only report," he said. "The voters in those respective counties are going to have to interpret" the results.

Two kinds of Sequoia electronic voting machines used in Denver, Arapahoe, Pueblo and Elbert counties, were decertified because of "a variety of security risk factors."

Machines that scan and count ballots made by Hart InterCivic failed because "they could not accurately count ballots."

Hart is used in Boulder, Douglas and more than 40 other counties.

And both optical scanning devices and electronic voting machines made by Election Systems and Software (ES&S) did not pass muster. ES&S is used by Jefferson and Mesa counties.

Sequoia in a statement said it was reviewing the 175-page report on its system. Ken Fields, spokesman for ES&S, said the decertification was based on additional requirements recently imposed.

Peter Lichtenheld, a spokesman for Hart, said they planned to appeal based on how the state conducted its tests and maintenance of its machine. He said it appeared state testers ran the same stack of ballots through the machine several times, which could punch holes in the paper ballots and skew the results.

"Hopefully, we have a leg to stand on there," Lichtenheld said. "Our systems are used nationwide and they've been proven reliable and accurate across the country, so there's no reason why it should be any different in Colorado."

Sequoia and ES&S also said their systems had previously been tested for accuracy, reliablity, and security and would work with Coffman's office to meet requirements.

Only Premier Election Solutions, formerly named Diebold Elections Systems, had all its equipment pass the recertification.

Former District Court Judge Larry Manzanares, who handled the lawsuit seeking electronic voting machines' ban, chastised state officials for a sloppy certification process. He allowed the machines' use in the November 2006 election on the condition the state recertified the machines.

Opponents of the machines said they should not have been certified by former Secretary of State Gigi Dennis' office.

Coffman, a Republican, was narrowly elected last November.

Several county clerk and recorders said they were digesting the findings Monday evening.

"This report is really just part of the larger equation for us," Denver Clerk and Recorder Stephanie O'Malley said in a statement. "Once we feel we have the full picture of what the Secretary of State's report means, we can move forward with choosing our systems and preparing for the 2008 election season."

Denver used a $1.4 million federal grant to buy 240 Sequoia electronic voting machines last year.

Jefferson County's clerk and recorder, Pam Anderson, said "we will listen to (Coffman's) - perspective, then work to adjust our election procedures accordingly in order to ensure that the conduct of the 2008 elections is successful and every eligible voter has the right to vote."

The news comes days after Ohio's Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner urged Cuyahoga County to switch to the optical scan system - ballots filled out by hand and read by computer - in time for the state's March 4 presidential primary. She cited security flaws that make the electronic ballots vulnerable to tampering and the county's past problems with voting technology.

[rowdytexan2]

Ban every *** one of the voting machines...there''s nothing better than the human eye. It''s not like there are so many voters that the election officials shouldn''t be able to count them.

[shanev137]

gee, maybe a democrat will actually have a chance to win this time.

[johngoodnews]

I''m with RowdyTexan2--Ban ''em.

[farmerbb]

When and why was the switch made from paper ballots ? I once had the opportunity to observe voting in Canada, which uses paper ballots....voters names appear on a list at each polling station. Advance notice is sent to all voters, to help ensure that all eligible residents are on the list, and if you do not receive such a notice, you can apply to be registered, in plenty of time to have this fixed. Within each polling station there will be one or more geographic areas of potential voters, each at a desk with a list of names. If your name does not appear on the list for YOUR area, you have to provide proof of residency right at the registration desks, and your name will then appear on the voters list next time. There is NO party affiliation against your name, you are just a voter. You are given a ballot, with the names of the candidates, and their party affiliation (if any). Your name is then stroked off, so multiple votes are eliminated. You take it behind a screen, mark your vote with an X (or spoil the ballot, if you wish) then bring it, folded over, back to the desk where you were given it. You or the desk person then place the folded ballot in a slot in a large box. You observe this personally. No chance for a lost vote. (Continued in next comment)

[farmerbb]

(Continued from last comment) When the poll closes, the doors are closed, and the various boxes for each geographic area in that poll are opened. Two members of the staff for each area desk then count the ballots, and report to the polling station "captain". The totals are then reported to higher and higher levels until an overall or national total is available. The key thing in all of this is that a small number of representatives of any political party can be nominated to attend the entire voting time period, and observe every detail at each polling station, except of course the individual voter marking the ballot. The vote count is done right in front of the representatives (if any are present) making voting fraud extremely difficult, if not impossible. The only reason I can think of for going to a machine of some type, is to shorten the time required to report the voting totals. Given the recent problems, maybe the U.S. should return to paper ballots. The accuracy and trust in such a system would improve, and if it takes a bit longer to find out who won, so what ?

[realpatriot1]

The manufacturers claim the machines have been tested for reliability-by who?

There was nothing wrong with the optical scan equipment being used prviously and there was never any reason to convert.

The problems in Florida in 2000 had to do with the ballots themselves, not with the vote recording equipment.

Sec. of State Brunner needs to order Cuyahoga County to switch back to optical equipment rather than suggesting it. She should follow Colorado & California''s lead and decertify the equipment.

[goldesprit]

Yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WE THE ...PEOPLE!

Tired of fixwd elections.

FIGHT.

[goldesprit]

Never listen to fools who try to tell you there was no machine problem.

And I do mean fools.

[cfin5]

The manufacturers claim the machines have been tested for reliability-by who?.---posted by realpatriot1.....................................Why of course, the only ones that really matter are the ones that "count the votes". Same dudes who own the money.

[carlylaine]

gee, maybe a democrat will actually have a chance to win this time.

Posted by shanev137 at 04:15 AM : Dec 18, 2007
********************************
Yessireebob!!! Democrats have really shown bright and twinkling at what they can and will do once they ''get in'' and run CONGRESS!

VOTE ANY WAY BUT DEMOCRAT. THESE GUYS ARE NUTS!

[antoniof123]

Yessireebob!!! Democrats have really shown bright and twinkling at what they can and will do once they ''''get in'''' and run CONGRESS!

VOTE ANY WAY BUT DEMOCRAT. THESE GUYS ARE NUTS!

Posted by CarlyLaine at 07:27 AM : Dec 18, 2007

Spoken like a true Republican too bad that we swing voters don''t listen to the Republicans or for that matter the Democrats if we did this country would be in worst shape. The Republicans are out they refuse to listen to America and so will not get too many votes or power for a while sorry to burst your bubble.

[extremophil]

I guess all those big dials and buttons can be pretty confusing for people who barely made it through sixth grade. Better hand out some crayons and posterboard.

[cfin5]

I want a legal receipt for my vote to keep. Heck, I can get one at Walmart for buying a pack of gum for crying out loud.

[antizion]

1988=BUSH
1992=CLINTON
1996=CLINTON
2000=BUSH
2004=BUSH
2008=CLINTON
2012=CLINTON

Skill and Bones - and you think your votes are counted? Your votes have not been counted since GHW Bush ran the assasination of the Kennedys.

Kennedy, just like Ron Paul said he would scatter the CIA (cocaine import agency) and the Federal Reserve to the four winds. Kennedy also opposed the illegal Israeli nuclear program and that is who was really behind the Kennedy murders just like 911.

[antizion]

The guy that patented a voting system where you got a receipt and could check your vote on the web was murdered. It was fool proof so they killed him.

Nothing in the corporate media about that or the recent CIA drug plane that crashed in Mexico. Go figure since a former director of CIA stated "there is not a single major media person we do not own".

http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1272

[antizion]

Speaking of voting... Ron Paul just broke the record of raising money in a 24 hour period of over 6 million. Not a peep from the Jewish press...

Join the Ron Paul revolution now and restore democracy to America.

[jn122736]

I find it curious that the ONLY voting machine supplier that has been Re-certified is %u201CDiebold Election Systems%u201C, the supplier alleged to have been corrupt in the first place.

Why did they change their name to %u201CPremier Election Solutions%u201D, and even more curious is the fact that the politician/official requiring EVERY supplier pass re-certification, is a republican.

If they manage to keep voting machines, with no paper backup in place (Especially with Diebold as the ONLY supplier), they will have a death hold on ALL elections.

We the people will have finally lost the last shred of actual freedom and self-government granted by the constitution.

It would be easy to blame the %u201Cnew republican party%u201D along with corporate power for this, but alas, the blame must go to those responsible for protecting our constitutional rights, and those people, my friends, are we the voting citizens.

Voters, over the last three decades have stood by and/or continued to re-elect the same corrupting politicians year after year while our system has corrupted from within.

It is amazing that after thousands of years, people are still so easily deceived and manipulated by power hungry/greedy Preachers/Ministers and corrupt politicians.

You would think that, by now, we would have gained enough courage to think and act for ourselves instead of being so weak and cowardly.

It is easier to blame others (dems vs reps) than ourselves.

[gunownerdan]

"It''s not who votes that counts, it''s who counts the votes."
Joseph Stalin

[jn122736]

Re. Post by king77shaw at 10:12 AM : Dec 18, 2007
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I agree those are important steps But I believe a more positive and effective action would be:

Become active in LOCAL politics, at least to the point of knowing the background and intentions of EVERY person running for office in your voting area, from city to county to state to congress as well as president of the United States. And vote in EVERY election you possibly can.

%u201CPolitics begin at home%u201D is not just a clichi it is an axiom.

Almost every politician in government got their start in local, hometown, elections/politics.
Staying informed on how the politicians in office perform and voting for or against them in PRIMARY elections will allow voters to continue to support the party of their choice and keep Good government at the same time.

Unfortunately, Most people only get involved after they have been betrayed and made angry and until then, it is much easier, as my dad was fond of saying, to just %u201Clet George do it%u201D.

[mudrose-2009]

NO MORE CHADS!

[rf35]

Ron Paul? Are you serious? A better choice would be RuPaul!

[alphaa10-2009]

The 2000 Florida election fiasco demonstrates the need for verification through an auditable paper trail. Amazingly enough, many states STILL lack such verification-- although some claim their shiny new voting machines are "ready" for 2008.

Ready, by what standard? When congress passed the 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA), it gave billions in new business to voting machine makers (all of them run by Republicans). The original legislation provided for an auditable and consistent voting process in place by 2004.

However, instead of the built-in audit measures required by HAVA, the nation got only an unseemly feeding frenzy by the GOP voting machine makers over HAVA money. These voting machine makers, like Diebold, "forgot" to provide for critical audit features-- the part of HAVA that was its very reason for being.

HAVA spending has been so poorly managed, so inconsistent in meeting its stated goals, we can surmise only that HAVA''s billions were fresh pork for major GOP contributors, first and foremost.

While Bush can harangue other nations about failure to observe democratic principles, democracy must start at home-- no gerrymandered electoral districts, no hacked electronic voting machines, no mockery of due process with people with Padilla, no NSA warrantless spying on Americans, and most important of all, no more lies to the American people and their congress about Iraq.

For further information--
www.votetrustusa.org/
www.blackboxvoting.org

[gunownerdan]

If you love big government, high taxes, and the destruction of our constitutional rights, then Dr. Ron Paul is not for you.

[mudrose-2009]

Oh, excuse me, NO MORE HANGING CHADS!

[lochlan-2009]

To make a flawless voting system:

1: People go and vote. They get back a paper receipt showing what they voted for and a spontaneous number (1234wxyz, no names) to verify their vote later, at any time on, the internet. The voting office gets a receipt with the same number and information. (Both are signed by the voter before the office receipt is dropped into a secure collection box).

2: That number goes on one of several servers that shows every number in the country (no names) and what those numbers voted for. (Now anyone can tally the total votes live on the web).

3: Anyone can go and check that their vote was counted accurately by going to one of these sites, and checking that the number and information on their receipt match correctly with the number and information on the internet.

4: If the information is incorrect they can file a complaint that checks the voters receipt and the one at the voting office. (Errors are recorded and corrected).

*All votes are viewable by number (no names) at any time on the web as public record.

**The back-up receipts are at the offices and with the voters for any technical errors, and I would also dedicate a server "off-line" to prevent worms or viruses.

[udecker--2008]

He said it appeared state testers ran the same stack of ballots through the machine several times, which could punch holes in the paper ballots and skew the results.
---

And why, may I ask, would the "counting" machines ever be punching holes in the ballots?

[lorinkundert]

About time a State had the stones to stand up to the Federal Government and demand accurate voting.

[neobrian-2009]

GOOD For Colorado !!
OUTSTANDING WORK! VERY GOOD!!!!!

[cbs_oliver]

Wasn''t it Premier Election Solutions - formerly known as Diebold Election Systems - which was found to have numerous back doors for vote tampering and was alligned with Republican interests?

Why would they be the only company acceptable for Colorado?

Hmmm.

[cbs_oliver]

Further to the comment about Diebold - which now calls itself Premier Election Solutions - here is what the story "New Questions over Electronic Voting" from Oct 2006 has to say:

"...a Princeton University study published in September (2006) demonstrated how at least one version of Diebold''s electronic voting machines could be easily hacked to switch votes without leaving any trace of the corrupting software. A virus could also be spread from machine to machine via the memory cards used to tabulate votes. Diebold claims that the machine software studied is no longer in use.

In other developments:

# A Denver judge has required Colorado''s Secretary of State to work with county election boards to implement minimum security standards %u2014 developed with the help of voters who sued to stop the use of new voting machines %u2014 to ensure that machines are closely monitored before and during voting, and also required that machines be recertified and new standards developed following the election."

[Syndicate]

We vote using a scantron like form. Just fill in the bubble next to the name. So simple if you can''t figure it out then you shouldn''t be voting anyway. It provides a paper trail and it can be read by machine for quick tallies. This is the same technology they teach you in second grade for test tacking. Then you get to practice several times a year until you graduate. This seems like such a no brainer.

[cbs_oliver]

This may be a decisive defeat for voting integrity in Colorado.

[alphaa10-2009]

lochlan said, "... That number goes on one of several servers that shows every number in the country (no names) and what those numbers voted for... Anyone can go and check that their vote was counted accurately by going to one of these (web)sites... The back-up receipts are at the offices and with the voters for any technical errors, and I would also dedicate a server "off-line" to prevent worms or viruses.
---
Good try with existing levels of web security, but that is not comparable with the sturdier security of a simple paper receipt and paper master audit system. As web users know all too well, the day has not arrived when web access and transactions occur with near perfection.

Protection against worms and viruses is still largely reactive (IDS), and a thriving (black hat) hacker community is always for sale to the highest bidder. (Just ask the Russian mafia.) This means no server, on or off-line, is safe enough in such a high-stakes operation as a change of government.

Executive summary-- stay with paper ballots!

[mudrose-2009]

I think when the time comes to vote everybody should just raise hands. Left for the Lefties, right for the righties. Independents can use their pinkies.

[gunownerdan]

If you support big government, high taxes, and the destruction of our Constitutional rights, then Ron Paul is not for you.
Vote for any of the other "front runners".