The image “http://www.votetrustusa.org/images/votetrust-small2.jpg” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

 

The nation's clearinghouse for election audit information!
State and Local Election Integrity Organizations
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Maryland
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Montana
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
Ohio
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Vermont
Virginia
Wisconsin
VoteTrustUSA does not speak on behalf of any of the listed organizations.
: mosShowVIMenu( $params ); break; } ?>

   
Around the States

 

Colorado: Boulder County GOP Sues Elections Officials PDF  | Print |  Email
Colorado
By Al Kolwicz, CAMBER   
October 31, 2006
The Boulder County Republican Party has filed a complaint with the Colorado Secretary of State alleging three county elections officials failed to publicly test election equipment before voting started this fall.

The complaint also claims the officials have been operating in secret and withholding elections materials from the county’s vote Canvass Board, which is responsible for auditing elections and reporting to the Secretary of State.

"This election may have been indelibly contaminated by this failure to comply with these election statutes," the complaint states.

Josh Liss, Boulder County elections coordinator and one of those named in the complaint, said Monday the allegations are false. "We are preparing a response to the Secretary of State’s Office to this complaint."
Read more...
Ohio Voter ID Rules Change For A Third Time in Four Days PDF  | Print |  Email
Ohio
By Warren Stewart, VoteTrustUSA   
October 30, 2006

Download Today's Revised Order

 

The confusing back and forth continues in Ohio. On Sunday evening October 29, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued a stay of the last week's order blocking enforcement of Ohio's voter ID on absentee ballots. As a result, voter ID is once again required for absentee ballots in the state. It is not clear at this point what will happen to any absentee ballots that were mailed by voters without ID in reliance on the lower court's order.

 

According to the Columbus Dispatch, Subodh Chandra, a Cleveland lawyer representing one of the groups that sued to challenge the ID requirement, has said he plans to appeal the 6th Circuit ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Chandra, representing Service Employees International Union 1199, said last night's court action guarantees more confusion among voters and poll workers and puts votes at risk of not being counted.

 

"We hope that the 6th Circuit is not taking the position that one must permit an election to be a train wreck before one tries to stop the wreck," Chandra said. "That's what appears to be happening."

Matthew Damschroder, director of the Franklin County Board of Elections, said that no matter what happens, there's time before the Nov. 7 election to ensure that absentee votes cast properly are counted. "We'll bend over backward to make sure votes count," he said.


Read more...
Stay Application in Ohio Voter ID Case PDF  | Print |  Email
Ohio
By Dan Tokaji, Moritz College of Law, Ohio State University   
October 28, 2006

This aricle was posted at the Equal Vote Blog. It is reposted with permission of the author.

 

Click here for documents and information related to this case

 

The Ohio Attorney General's office has filed this emergency motion for a stay in NEOCH v. Blackwell, the case in which Judge Marbley on Thursday issued a TRO against the identification requirements for absentee voters. Plaintiffs have been ordered to file a responsive brief by 5:00 pm today. Here are my initial reactions to the State's brief:

- The Attorney General has filed this brief against the wishes of his nominal client, Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, claiming "separate litigation authority" to defend the State of Ohio and its officers (p. 1, fn. 1). While I don't doubt that this is true, the party on whose behalf this brief is filed is not, precisely speaking, the State of Ohio or its General Assembly but rather the Secretary of State -- or even more precisely, the office of the Secretary of State, since this is an official capacity suit. This is effectively acknowledged in the State of Ohio's motion to intervene, also filed by the Attorney General's office and denied yesterday, which asserted that the interests of the State of Ohio (including the General Assembly which passed HB 3) differ from those of the Secretary of State. If that's true, then it seems odd for the Attorney General to be filing a stay application on behalf of the Secretary of State's office, which has a contrary position. It also seems to me (and on this point I emphasize "seems") that the Attorney General's office has a conflict between representing the interests of the Secretary of State on the one hand and the General Assembly on the other. Although the stay application asserts the Attorney General's authority to appeal the TRO "in the Secretary of State's name" (p. 9), apparently even against his wishes, the Attorney General cites no authority for this proposition.

- The Attorney General's brief relies heavily on the Supreme Court's ruling in Purcell v. Gonzalez and, specifically, on its statement that pre-election court orders "can result in voter confusion and consequent incentive to stay away from the polls" (quoted on p. 14). The key word here, however, is "can." The Court was undoubtedly right to say that pre-election court orders can result in confusion; but it did not say that such orders always create more confusion than they dispel. In this case, plaintiffs' main argument is that the new ID rules in Ohio have themselves generated considerable confusion, which the actions of the Secretary of State have failed to alleviate, resulting in different standards being applied from county to county.

Read more...
Tennessee: Documented Election Law and Security Violations in Shelby County PDF  | Print |  Email
Tennessee
By Joe Irrera   
October 28, 2006
Shelby County’s conduct of the August primary election may have violated basic election system security procedures. Documents released earlier this month reveal multiple breaches of security and cast doubt on the legality of the election process.

As part of a lawsuit alleging illegal voting brought by four unsuccessful candidates for clerk positions, election officials’ declarations and discovery documents call into question the election results. Although their case was dismissed October 5, Shep Wilbun, Sondra Becton, Vernon Johnson and Otis Jackson have performed a valuable service. Jim March, a computer professional who examined the county’s Diebold voting systems as part of this legal case, calls his findings “some of the most irregular procedures in America today. Nobody else in the Tennessee elections process did their jobs except for these four candidates and a handful of citizen supporters and researchers.” 
Read more...
Keeping an Eye on the Machines That Count Minnesotans' Votes PDF  | Print |  Email
Minnesota
By St. Paul Pioneer Press   
October 25, 2006
This article appeared in the St. Paul Pioneer Press on October 24, 2006. It is reposted with permission.

When Minnesotans are asked to raise their hands if they think our electronic voting machines accurately count their votes, almost all hands go up. However, when asked if they think votes in other states are counted accurately, only a few hands go up. Voters in our state have confidence in our voting machines.

But relying on a voting machine to electronically count ballots without a meaningful audit is like making bank deposits without receiving monthly statements to verify the balance. Thanks to a new, groundbreaking state law requiring a post-election review, we will have a way to help verify the accuracy of our voting machines. This review is possible because all Minnesotans will cast their ballots on paper
that are counted by optical scanners.
Read more...
Arizona: Count the Votes - But Don’t Close the Courts or Get Rid of the Lawyers PDF  | Print |  Email
Arizona
By Bob Bauer   
October 25, 2006

This article appeared on Bob Bauer's Blog. It is reposted here with permission of the author.

 

Additional views continue to emerge in the discussion of the Supreme Court’s decision in Purcell v. Gonzalez, and two, in the last day, consider more generally the timing of judicial intervention in elections. The Court did note that "Court orders affecting elections, especially conflicting orders, can themselves result in voter confusion and consequent incentive to remain away from the polls," and that "as an election draws closer, that risk will increase." So Rick Hasen, who has written previously on the subject, restates his view that pre-election litigation is to be preferred over post-election litigation lest partisans await the outcome before deciding, on the basis of the vote count, to press their claim. At the Moritz College of Law site, Professor Steven Huefner examines the varieties of and justifications for pre-election litigation, concluding that courts should not hesitate to grant final relief on a full record in the pre-election record or preliminary relief tending to limit election day confusion. 

 

These views are united around the objectives of protecting confidence in the electoral process and defending against political gamesmanship by partisans pursuing victories in court that could not be won at the polls. But are such concerns overrated? 

Read more...
Voting Irregularities Discovered in Ward 5 Primary Election Results in Washington, D.C. PDF  | Print |  Email
District of Columbia
By DC Statehood Green Party   
October 23, 2006
DC Statehood Green candidate, in routine review of votes after primary, uncovers discrepancy: only 89 votes recorded for 140 Statehood Green voters, with 51 votes apparently 'lost' - Reliability of certified results in Statehood Green primary for Ward 5 seat on City Council in question - 40% of Republican votes apparently lost from the Ward 5 vote count; Statehood Greens urge investigation by D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics


An investigation of voter rolls and votes in the September 12 primary election in Washington, D.C.'s Ward 5 has revealed unexplained irregularities in the race for the DC Statehood Green Party's nomination for the Ward 5 seat on City Council.

Philip Blair examined the primary results after he apparently lost the primary race to Carolyn Steptoe in a close 40-33 vote.

"In an effort to see if I had grounds for a challenge, I began the process of checking the pollbooks to see who actually signed in as a Statehood Green voter on election day," wrote Mr. Blair in an October 13, 2006 letter to the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics (BOEE). Links to Philip Blair's letters to the BOEE are appended below.


Read more...
Chicago Voter Registration Database Flawed PDF  | Print |  Email
Illinois
By Illinois Ballot Integrity Project   
October 23, 2006
Voters' Key Personal Information Available on the Internet 

 

A serious security vulnerability was discovered in the City of Chicago online voter registration database that would allow an identity pirate to obtain the names, addresses, birth dates and Social Security numbers of more than 1.5 million Chicago voters.

 

According to Bob Wilson, Cook County chair of Illinois Ballot Integrity Project, a malicious hacker could have readily change the voter registration status of individual voters or groups of voters. "For example, you could change the status of all the voters in a precinct to inactive after the registration deadline so that when one of those voters checked their online status they might believe they were ineligible and wouldn't attempt to vote," said Wilson. "Or, you could change their polling place information so they would show up at the wrong precinct on election day…the possibilities are nearly endless and could cause election day havoc," he added.

 

IBIP notified staff at the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners several weeks ago about the vulnerability but no action was taken. "We had hoped that the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners would take quick action to plug this hole, but apparently that's not the case," said Illinois Ballot Integrity Project member, Peter Zelchenko. He estimates it would take little more than five minutes to fix the problem. Late last week, IBIP and Zelchenko became aware that the security breach was significantly more severe than first thought. The Board was immediately notified and began taking action to alleviate the threat last Friday and began installing a new web interface over the weeekend.

Read more...
Alaska: Struggle For 2004 Election Data Continues PDF  | Print |  Email
Alaska
By Jake Metcalfe, Alaska Democratic Party   
October 17, 2006

The Alaska Democratic Party recently obtained the electronic General Election Management System (GEMS) database for the 2004 elections by suing the state's Division of Elections in State Superior Court. The Division of Elections had refused for more than nine months to release the public records, but did so late last month just before a hearing was scheduled to begin in the case. An examination of the database reveal that modifications were made to the database on July 12 and July 13, 2006. On October 6, the Democratic Party filed new public records requests asking for a copy of the GEMS database as it existed before the changes made in July, 2006, and for the name and affiliation of each person who did any manual modification to the 2004 General Election GEMS database at any time, what data that person entered manually, and why those changes were made or those data were entered manually. The Division of Elections responded that they would not meet the Democratic Party's request. The following letter was sent to the Whitney Brewster, Director of the Alaska Division of Elections on October 12, 2006.

 

Dear Ms. Brewster:

 

I have received your letter of Oct. 10 denying the Alaska Democratic Party's request for public records, in which you state that you are unable to provide a copy of the 2004 GEMS General Election database as it existed before July 2006. Your letter further states that no public records exist, other than the audit log already produced, that would show the name and affiliation of each person who did any manual modification to the 2004 General Election GEMS database at any time, what data that person entered manually, and why those changes were made or those data were entered manually. You state that the request for public records is denied because the "requested records have either already been produced or do not exist."

Your response raises a lot of questions and indicates serious security breeches. Concerning the 2004 GEMS database as it existed before July 12, 2006, are you saying that you have only one copy of this database, which was subject to entry and potentially to manipulation by Division employees, and that no separate copy was kept in archives in a secure location? Why was an accurate, unmodified copy of the database not retained as a record of the election? Were any prior copies of this database destroyed?

Read more...
Voter ID: The Missouri Supreme Court Evaluates Legislative "Foresight" PDF  | Print |  Email
Missouri
By Bob Bauer   
October 17, 2006

This commentary was posted on Bob Bauer's Blog. It is reposted here with permission of the author.

 

The Supreme Court of Missouri yesterday invalidated, on state constitutional grounds, a voter identification law, and the power of the analysis lay in its simplicity and clarity. Weinschenk v. Missouri, Case No. SC88039. Approved government identifications, if not already (as in the case of a driver’s license) possessed, may be acquired only with effort and expense that fall proportionately on those least able to bear them. The Missouri legislature was prepared to put people to this trouble for no well documented reason. Any fraud reasonably anticipated, such as absentee vote fraud, would be unaddressed by the ID requirement; and there was indeed no proof that voter impersonation, the only justification for this requirement, had become a problem in the State of Missouri.

    

The dissent was provided by a judge named Limbaugh, and its clarity was no less telling.  His primary complaint was that the law provided a transitional period when voters without ID could still vote provisionally, so long as they had could provide of one of the more numerous types of ID permissible under the predecessor statute. Only with the passage of the transitional period, he ruled, would the new ID requirements be ripe for review. 

Read more...
Dealing With Failure PDF  | Print |  Email
Maryland
By Avi Rubin, Johns Hopkins University   
October 16, 2006

This article appeared on Avi Rubin's Blog. It is reposted here with permission of the author.

 

An important sub-area of Computer Science is fault tolerance. In a nutshell, fault tolerance is the ability of a system to continue to function in spite of a failure of one or more of its components. A system that can continue to work even if many parts fail in unexpected ways is said to be more fault tolerant than one that does not.

 

It seems to me that one of the unheralded problems with the Diebold system, and with DREs in general is that it is extremely fault in-tolerant. Consider a few simple examples from the September 12 Maryland primary:
• In Prince George's County memory cards were accidentally left in the voting machines, causing votes not to be counted initially, and at the very least losing track of the chain of custody of those votes. 
Read more...
California: Secretary of State Sets Stage for a Repeat of June's Election Disaster in Kern County PDF  | Print |  Email
California
By Debra Bowen, California State Senator Press Release   
October 16, 2006
Just four months after as many as 500 Kern County voters were prevented from casting ballots in the June primary election thanks to the Secretary of State’s failure to prepare for an electronic voting machine meltdown, the Secretary of State has laid the ground work for a repeat performance of the June disaster.

"It’s clear the Secretary of State didn’t learn a thing from what happened in Kern County during the primary," said Debra Bowen (D-Redondo Beach), the chairwoman of the Senate Elections, Reapportionment & Constitutional Amendments Committee and the Democratic Party nominee for Secretary of State.

"It’s pretty astonishing to see him re-issue the very same directive that prevented as many as 500 voters in Kern County from being able to vote in the June primary election," continued Bowen. "Not only is the Secretary refusing to show any leadership to ensure that voters have the ability to cast a ballot when they show up at their polling place, he’s also refusing to learn from the mistake he made four months ago."
Read more...
Maryland: Diebold E-Poll Book Modifications Come Into Question PDF  | Print |  Email
Maryland
By John Gideon, VotersUnite.org   
October 15, 2006

Diebold's new ExpressPoll 2000/4000 electronic poll book failed miserably in the September Maryland primary election. The poll book is separate from the Diebold TS voting machines used in the state. It contains all of the information on registered voters that was contained in the old paper poll books and it is used to check in voters. The failure of the e-poll books in Maryland, as well as the manner in which the problems have been “fixed” raises serious concern about whether they can legally be used in November’s elections.

 

According to the Associated Press a software patch produced by Diebold fixed one problem that plagued the equipment in Maryland's primary. Another problem, reported by the Baltimore Sun (article in archives) required a software patch that was produced by a Diebold sub-contractor, Advantech Co., Ltd., who was responsible for the e-poll books "losing synch".

Read more...
Illinois: Fidlar Fired? DuPage Watchdog Group Says "No" PDF  | Print |  Email
Illinois
By Illinois Ballot Integrity Project   
October 15, 2006
Recent public remarks by DuPage County Election Commission Chairman J.P. "Rick" Carney attempting to deflect criticism of cronyism in the selection of election vendors has led to yet another discovery of favoritism, according to the DuPage Chapter of the Illinois Ballot Integrity Project. IBIP recently revealed that Carney had received $12,500 in campaign contributions from Fidlar Doubleday, the "premier dealer" for Diebold Election Systems, Inc., prior to voting for the highly controversial touch screen machines in December 2005. Fidlar had supplied voting machines, technical assistance and election materials to the Commission for years. The new revelations concern Carney's remarks published by The Daily Herald.

 

Carney's response to this finding were published in a front page article in The Daily Herald on Oct. 5, 2006. Robert Sanchez wrote, quoting Carney, “'All I know is they (Fidlar) no longer represent Diebold at the election commission,' Carney said. 'That’s a fact.'” Carney explained that the $500,000 contract with Fidlar for the printing of ballots had been given to another company.

Read more...
California: Problems with The Alameda County Report PDF  | Print |  Email
California
By Joseph Hall, Univeristy of California, Berkeley   
October 14, 2006

An anlysis of the recent security vulnerability assessment of the Sequoia Voting System, conducted by a firm called Pacific Design Engineering and released by Alameda County, California released on October 12, was posted on Joe Hall's Blog. The following article was adapted from his post with the author's permission.

. analysis It is reposted here with permission of the author. Professor Doug Jones of the University of Iowa has some draft comments on this report here: "Critique of the Alameda County Report".

 

Alameda County should be given a great deal of credit for commissioning this report. This report should be required reading for all election officials (and their technical staff) that use these Sequoia systems, especially those that don't have robust auditing procedures including a random manual audit of voter-verified paper records of each vote. A close reading of the report shows that the investigation revealed a number of new security vulnerabilities. The good thing is that Alameda county has procedural mitigations that help to reduce the risk that these vulnerabilities pose.

 

I believe this report provides us with more evidence -- this time in voting technology provided by a vendor other than Diebold -- that the current ITA process overseen by NASED is completely broken. The report reveals that Sequoia isn't the only vendor that has equipment with significant and avoidable vulnerabilities associated with secure systems design and poor use of cryptography.

Read more...
More...
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Results 391 - 455 of 1006
State Resources
Election Law @ Moritz
Electionline
National Conference of State Legislatures
Verified Voting
Model Legislation
: mosShowVIMenu( $params ); break; } ?>
State Pages
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Jersey
New Hampshire
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Guam
Puerto Rico
: mosShowVIMenu( $params ); break; } ?>