Statesman article RE: Keller resolution against paperless voting systems

["Pete Klammer" <pklammer@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Version submitted to The Colorado Statesman
Printed in April 9 issue (misprinted with "March 26" in page headings), top
of page 5 as Guest Column with very slight edits (Moe is from Wheat Ridge,
not Thornton).

"""

Elections must be verifiable
Support SJR04-010

By Al Kolwicz and Pete Klammer

There is something deeply troubling about the way that Colorado is racing to
ravage its election laws.  Who is going to benefit from the elimination of
the audit trail and independent overseers?  Who will benefit from a system
that lacks measurable criteria?  Why would any freedom-loving official
support these changes?  Is it due to irresponsible ignorance of the facts,
or something more sinister?

	All across the nation, a battle is being waged to protect verifiable
voting and counting.  On the "for" side are top computer researchers,
quality consultants, and voting system specialists who have documented
reasons for rejecting the proposed shift to paperless, untrustworthy
elections.  On the "against" side are the hardware vendors and election
officials who wish to replace traditional paper ballots with untrustworthy
paperless voting equipment.  

	Votes marked on a paper ballot can be verified by the voter.
Sighted voters can see that their votes are correctly recorded.  Blind
voters insert their ballot into a scanner that privately announces the votes
marked on the ballot.  (Disabled voters use specially equipped vote marking
machines to record their votes.)  If there is an error, the voter can get a
replacement ballot.

	Votes marked on paper ballots can be counted by hand or using
optical scan equipment.  Using the proper process, one can verify that each
vote is correctly understood and counted. 

	With the proposed paperless voting machines there can be no
verification.  The voter cannot verify that the machine correctly recorded
their vote.  Officials and overseers cannot verify that the vote was
correctly understood and counted.

Paperless voting was "sold" to the Federal government and is permitted by
Federal legislation called the Help American Vote Act - HAVA.  Notice, the
word is "permitted".  Paperless Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting
machine vendors and election officials are attempting to create the
impression that paperless voting machines are "required" by HAVA.  This is
not true.

Senator Moe Keller has asked her colleagues in the Colorado Legislature to
jointly resolve that Colorado wants to preserve its paper-based, verifiable
voting system.  Senate Joint Resolution, SJR04-010 "Concerning Paperless
Voting Systems" which: (1) identifies the threat to election security and
accuracy from paperless voting systems, (2) establishes that elections must
be credible, auditable, recountable, and beyond all possible doubt, (3)
requires that voter-verifiable paper ballots be the official ballots, and
(4) urges our Federal representatives to proceed with great caution before
adopting paperless voting in preference over voter-verified paper ballots.

Secretary of State Donetta Davidson wrote a March 25th six-page memorandum
attacking SJR04-010.  In it she makes many false assertions and avoids the
real questions. 

Davidson writes that the resolution was made "without careful consideration
of any voting system improvements."   This is not true.  The resolution
specifically addresses "voting system improvements ."

Davidson writes that the resolution requires "repeal of certain provisions
of HAVA."  This is not true.  Colorado's own HAVA director has written that
paper ballots do comply with HAVA.   

Davidson writes that "there has not been a single voter verifiable voting
system tested or certified at either the national or state level."  This
doesn't even make sense.  For years now Colorado has been using voter
verifiable paper ballots, and the Secretary of State and Clerks have
vigorously stood behind paper ballots.

Davidson writes that "the statutory requirements regarding disability and
language minority access would be particularly impacted."  This is not true.
Davidson's office is fully aware of voting equipment for the disabled that
prints votes on paper ballots rather than recording them in unverifiable
computer memory.  

Davidson praises her own HB-1227 and its promise of "valuable testing and
certification infrastructure."   Is the Secretary of State's office
irresponsibly ignorant about testing or attempting to deceive the
legislators and the people?  HB-1227 fails to define any criteria for
testing voting systems; it makes independent oversight impossible; and it
throws open the door to abuse by insiders.

One place where we agree with Davidson is when she writes, "Merely adding a
printer to a voting system in order to print a ballot for purposes of
recount does not make the system secure."  The printed vote can be different
than the vote recorded in computer memory and would rarely be counted.

The real questions are these: (1) how do voters and election officials
verify that a paperless vote that the voter thought they cast is the vote
that actually gets counted, and (2) what can possibly be recounted when
there is no physical record of the voter's intent?

SJR04-010 lets the Secretary of State know that the legislators and the
people want to protect Colorado elections from reckless vendors and
uninformed officials.  Paperless voting systems must be rejected until they
are as reliable, secure, and accurate as our current paper ballot system.  

Voters who care about their vote need to contact their representatives and
ask them to support SJR04-010. 

Al Kolwicz and Pete Klammer are bi-partisan members of the IEEE National
Committee on Voting Equipment Standards - P1583.  Email: alkolwicz@xxxxxxxxx
pklammer@xxxxxxx 

--
Pete Klammer, P.E. / ACM(1970), IEEE, ICCP(CCP), NSPE(PE), NACSE(NSNE)
   3200 Routt Street / Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033-5452
 (303)233-9485 / Fax:(303)274-6182 / Mailto:PKlammer@xxxxxxx
   "Either Be Good, or Else Be Careful, but Do Have Fun! "

-----Original Message-----
From: Dr. Charles E. Corry [mailto:ccorry@xxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 4:08 PM
To: pklammer@xxxxxxx; Al Kolwicz
Subject: Re: Keller resolution against paperless voting systems

>The latest issue of "The Colorado Statesman" (capitol-hill weekly paper)
>publishes a guest column written jointly by Al Kolwicz and Pete Klammer
>urging support for Sen. Moe Keller's resolution SJR04-010 (or just "SJR
10")
>against paperless voting systems and in favor of voter-verified paper
>ballots.
>
>Please call any legislator you can, and urge them to read and heed page 5
of
>this issue (mine in the mail is strangely marked "March 20, 2004" (!), but
>this is the issue published last Friday, April 9, in any case).
>
>  --
>Pete Klammer / ACM(1970), IEEE, ICCP(CCP), NSPE(PE), NACSE(NSNE)
>     3200 Routt Street / Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033-5452
>   (303)233-9485 / Fax:(303)274-6182 / Mailto:PKlammer@xxxxxxx
>  Idealism may not win every contest, but that's not what I choose it for!
>

Pete and Al,
      So how about posting a copy of the article so the rest of the 
world can see it?
                 Chuck
-- 
Charles E. Corry, Ph.D., F.G.S.A.
President, Equal Justice Foundation http://www.ejfi.org/
455 Bear Creek Road
Colorado Springs, Colorado 80906-5820
Telephone: (719) 520-1089
Domestic violence against men in Colorado: http://www.dvmen.org
Personal home page: http://corry.ws
Curriculum vitae:
http://www.marquiswhoswho.net/charleselmocorry/Default.aspx

The Equal Justice Foundation is a member-supported, non-profit 
501(c)(3) corporation.
Contributions are tax deductible and can be made on the Web at 
http://www.ejfi.org/Join.htm

The good men may do separately is small compared with what they may 
do collectively.
Benjamin Franklin