No Doctored DRE

BOSTON--You don't have to go far here to find a Democrat who says the 2000 election was stolen. John Kerry is one of them. He claims a million African-Americans nationwide had their votes stolen and he won't let it happen again.

On Sunday, he followed that up by saying that his legal SWAT team is looking at "each and every district" with possible voting problems: "We may or may not be bringing challenges publicly in the course of the next few weeks," he said in Ohio. He mentioned that in Florida some voters are being removed from the rolls if they didn't respond to a letter from election officials. Since many states routinely send such mailings to those who haven't voted in years, we are in for an avalanche of litigation if that's the level of scrutiny Mr. Kerry is applying. He might even have to ask former trial lawyer John Edwards to lend a hand.

Many delegates here buy into a more bizarre conspiracy theory: that unscrupulous "Manchurian Programmers" could manipulate the new electronic voting machines that 35 million Americans will use in November. They note that Walden O'Dell, the CEO of Diebold Election Systems, sent a personal fund-raising letter last year to Republicans stating his goal was "helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president." This month, Moveon.org held rallies in 19 states to demand that new electronic machines print paper receipts to ensure an accurate count, something only Nevada will be able to implement by November. Democratic State Rep. Chris Smith of Florida says he is using concerns that votes will be lost or manipulated as a get-out-the-vote tool for John Kerry: "I tell them to bring an extra person to the polls."

It's true some states have moved too quickly using new federal money to buy Direct Recording Electronic voting machines (DREs), which work like an ATM. Several states have reported software failures, and California officials have accused Diebold of using uncertified software and misleading them. But exaggerating the problems with DREs will only fuel a litigation mindset that could make Florida 2000 look like a moot court.

Not just the absence of the "disenfranchised" but the timing of these complaints and actions. They wait until we are in the shadow of the looming election as if they didn't have 3.5 years to agitate for some changes. The recent protests about the felon scrub lists in FL were carefully timed so that the alternative to using the lists was nothing - enhancing the chances that felons will vote in FL and dilute the vote of legitimate voters.

I want to see a concerted action by GOP lawyers there to assert that one-man = one-vote does not mean one-man = .99987 vote courtesy of felons and non citizens voting.

i sent a letter to diebold and this was the response i received

Thank you for the note. We share your concern about some of the things that have been circulated about Diebold Election Systems. Frankly, there's a lot of misinformation and fear-mongering that's being disseminated in the media. Many computer scientists with an agenda, and conspiracy theorists trying to sell books, are drawing some far-flung conclusions based on what little they know. I don't know of many successful companies who have been in business for 145 years that would risk failure, public criticism, not to mention legal prosecution, by purchasing a small voting systems company (that makes up less than 5% of its global revenue) in order to sabotage elections.

In regards to his personal fundraising activity for the GOP, our chairman, Wally O'Dell publicly, and thoroughly, apologized in the Sept. 16 edition of the Cleveland Plain Dealer.

http://www.diebold.com/whatsnews/inthenews/executive.htm

Electronic elections auditing and security is a complex, extensive, and multi-layered process which is often not well understood by individuals with little real-world experience in developing or implementing such a process. Procedures to safeguard against voting inaccuracy at the state and county levels have been in existence much longer than electronic voting, and today are even tougher and more stringent due to the availability of modern electronics -- as well as the scrutiny of the 2000 election. Unfortunately, there are some who would prefer that our nation's voting processes not move to a more progressive level, and have chosen to engage in a campaign of allegations of negligence or malfeasance against Diebold and other election system companies providing the new technology. Diebold entered the election systems business knowing that its technology and 144 years of broad experience in security would help ensure the integrity of the vote and accuracy of the election process.

The elections business is very different from our traditional business, and any election official will tell you that no voting process is perfect. But, basically, Diebold Election Systems is working hard to go about doing things the right way. Below is a link to our web site that refers to other articles and our responses to some of the criticism. I hope this helps explain where we're coming from. Thanks again for the message.

http://www.diebold.com/dieboldes/top_stories.htm

Mike Jacobsen
Diebold, Incorporated
Director, Corporate and Marketing Communications
Ofc.: +1 (330) 490-3796
Mobile: +1 (330) 806-7593

www.diebold.com

-----Original Message-----
From:

Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 3:34 PM
To: 'pressinfo@diebold.com'
Subject:

Dear Sir or Madam, a co-worker of mine is insisting that Diebold is in cahoots with President Bush to guarantee his re-election in 04. Nothing I say seems to change his mind. If you have received any similar questions, I would be grateful to know what your response was, I'd really like to silence his argument. Thanks in advance for your time.

"How to cheat with a lever machine: Like the new touch-screen DRE voting machines, lever machines left no audit trail. And like the touch-screens, they also have the highest error rates (M.I.T./CalTech study rates error rates for hand-counting at 3.3%, optical scan 3.5%, punch card 4.7%, touch screen machines around 6% and lever machines around 7%. Uh, we're spending $3.9 billion to switch from an error-prone punch card system to the only modern system with a HIGHER error rate?)"

I found that here. Fox News and Newsmax had lower numbers. What's interesting is that for these voting systems to be verifiable, it's virtually impossible to have the anonymity of the Australian ballot system.

Electronic elections auditing and security is a complex, extensive, and multi-layered process which is often not well understood by individuals with little real-world experience in developing or implementing such a process

The foxes in charge of the henhouse are there because foxes are experts on chickens?

Comes to mind the French proverb "s'excuse, s'accuse" (whoever excuses himself accuses himself) funny that you never asked Diebold about voting software accuracy per se but only about stumping for Bush, and yet Diebold felt compelled to raise the issue.

I'm sorry, but America's voting systems do not need to be so arcane that you need a PhD in computer science (or mechanical engineering) to know whether or not they are right. People need something physical to work with. We need better chads (I'd want them to be big enough to punch out with the finger), but not to move chads into the virtual realm.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.