MrDave
April 30th, 2004, 7:05pm
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=internetNews&storyID=5005731§ion=news
Calif. Bars Use of Some Electronic Voting Machines
Fri Apr 30, 2004 06:01 PM ET
By Adam Tanner
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Worried about security and possible fraud, California's top election official on Friday barred some electronic voting machines purchased for use in the 2004 presidential election and called for a criminal investigation of its manufacturer.
California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley said that he would decertify the model most widespread in the state, Ohio-based Diebold Incorporated's (DBD.N: Quote, Profile, Research) AcuVote-TSx Voting System. That machine accounts for a third of all of the state's electronic voting machines.
He also said he would ask the state's attorney general to look into Diebold over possible fraud in relation to their electronic voting machines in California. He did not mince words in describing the firm.
"They broke the law," Shelley said. "Their conduct was absolutely reprehensible. The evidence within the report is absolutely damning.... They lied."
Shelley said he nearly acted to bar all electronic voting machines, but then said it would give all but four counties including San Diego the chance to use them if they can provide a paper receipt and fulfill other conditions.
"I came pretty close to issuing that directive today," he said of an overall ban. "But I think that would be an imprudent move."
Shelley's decision, in the state that is home to Silicon Valley, could cause other sections of the country to temper or rethink their introduction to electronic voting systems.
California has already invested more than $139 million to update its voting system with electronic touch screen technology. Shelley estimated the cost of adding capabilities to print a paper trail receipt from existing voting machines outside the four excluded counties at $1 million.
Diebold, which makes automated teller machines and other products in addition to electronic voting machines, will not be able to recertify its AcuVote-TSx Voting System in the four counties that use them, Shelley said.
For the March 2004 primary election, California counties fielded 42,714 electronic voting machines, in theory allowing 42 percent of the state's voters to vote on touch-screens or on paper ballots scanned into computers.
Supporters say electronic voting will help overcome the punch-card irregularities that dogged the last presidential vote in Florida in an outcome ultimately decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Yet some experts fear electronic voting machines that do not have a paper trail that would facilitate a recount in the case of a disputed election.
Calif. Bars Use of Some Electronic Voting Machines
Fri Apr 30, 2004 06:01 PM ET
By Adam Tanner
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Worried about security and possible fraud, California's top election official on Friday barred some electronic voting machines purchased for use in the 2004 presidential election and called for a criminal investigation of its manufacturer.
California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley said that he would decertify the model most widespread in the state, Ohio-based Diebold Incorporated's (DBD.N: Quote, Profile, Research) AcuVote-TSx Voting System. That machine accounts for a third of all of the state's electronic voting machines.
He also said he would ask the state's attorney general to look into Diebold over possible fraud in relation to their electronic voting machines in California. He did not mince words in describing the firm.
"They broke the law," Shelley said. "Their conduct was absolutely reprehensible. The evidence within the report is absolutely damning.... They lied."
Shelley said he nearly acted to bar all electronic voting machines, but then said it would give all but four counties including San Diego the chance to use them if they can provide a paper receipt and fulfill other conditions.
"I came pretty close to issuing that directive today," he said of an overall ban. "But I think that would be an imprudent move."
Shelley's decision, in the state that is home to Silicon Valley, could cause other sections of the country to temper or rethink their introduction to electronic voting systems.
California has already invested more than $139 million to update its voting system with electronic touch screen technology. Shelley estimated the cost of adding capabilities to print a paper trail receipt from existing voting machines outside the four excluded counties at $1 million.
Diebold, which makes automated teller machines and other products in addition to electronic voting machines, will not be able to recertify its AcuVote-TSx Voting System in the four counties that use them, Shelley said.
For the March 2004 primary election, California counties fielded 42,714 electronic voting machines, in theory allowing 42 percent of the state's voters to vote on touch-screens or on paper ballots scanned into computers.
Supporters say electronic voting will help overcome the punch-card irregularities that dogged the last presidential vote in Florida in an outcome ultimately decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Yet some experts fear electronic voting machines that do not have a paper trail that would facilitate a recount in the case of a disputed election.