 |
 |
 |
 | ||
                                     |
|
 |
|
Passing the bucks (to Texas) | Follow the money Boulder Weekly flashback | Sold out to the WTO Passing the bucks (to Texas) Lone Star State is city’s partner in democracy by Amy Brouillette
At a press conference outside the Clerk and Recorder’s office, three local activists from Coloradoans for Voting Integrity, a statewide e-voting watchdog group, called on county officials to integrate a verifiable hand-count system into the live election process this November, similar to those required by both California and Nevada state laws. Currently, the county follows a state-mandated "logic and accuracy" standard that requires a sample hand-count of a number of ballots which are then matched against the machine’s tally, before and after an election, but not during. Paul Walmsley, a self-employed computer programmer and outspoken advocate for a verifiable live hand-count since last April, says this is not enough "The problem with this system is that there is no way to tell, during a live election setting, if the machine’s tabulation software is working properly and if it is interpreting the ballot as would a human," he says. He recommends sampling 1 percent, or around 1,000 ballots, rather than the state’s required 25 for each party and jurisdiction, which translates to about 600 ballots. He says a sampling of 1 percent would allow for an accuracy statement of up to 99 percent. "We all want the same thing: a fair and accurate election," said County Clerk Linda Salas, who has spent the past year working with Walmsley and other citizens to ensure the new voting system is as reliable and transparent as possible. In February, Salas brought the idea for a live audit to the Secretary of State’s Elections Director Drew Durham and was rejected. "We were told the state would not support a hand-count except in the case of a recount," she said. Durham could not be reached for comment. In 2003, Boulder county election officials joined a nationwide scramble to upgrade its voting systems in compliance with new state and federal election laws. Following Florida-gate, federal lawmakers passed the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), revising election laws and giving assistance to states and counties to replace punch-ballot systems, illegal under the new law, and to upgrade existing systems with electronic voting machines. Colorado lawmakers followed in 2003 with House Bill 1356, which established a fund for the $43 to $56 million of incoming federal aid over the next three years. In April, the county purchased a paper-based digital ballot-scanning system, BallotNow, from Austin, Texas-based Hart InterCivic Inc., makers of the Direct Recording Electronic voting machines (DREs) used in a widely publicized voter scandal in Orange County, Calif. Boulder County Commissioners voted unanimously to buy Hart’s system, even after sending elections director Tom Halicki to observe the Orange County primary in March, in which 2,000 voters miscast their ballots. County officials there discovered the error after some precincts reported more than 100 percent turnout and voters in other precincts reported receiving the wrong ballots. "We did investigate that, and Hart came back with a lot of information that showed the problems were actually the fault of judges out there," said Boulder County Clerk Linda Salas. She said a review committee also backed the county’s final decision to go with Hart. Walmsley’s plan for a live review requires not only the county’s endorsement and Secretary of State’s approval, but for Hart to create a separate software system to pull sample batches. At a County Commissioners meeting Aug. 3, he urged officials to draft a formal request to Hart for an estimate of how much time and money an additional software system would cost. In a last ditch effort, Walmsley and the Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center’s Carolyn Bninski met with Salas last Friday morning, urging her also to approach Hart for an estimate. "I have not received any official request from Boulder County regarding this matter," said Neil McClure, general manager of Hart’s Colorado office, Monday afternoon. McClure said Hart customizes its voting machines according to each county’s specifications and theoretically is not opposed to configuring a system for a live audit, though he says there are both time and cost considerations. "But our primary concern is with satisfying our customers." With early voting set to begin in late October, Salas said incorporating a new software program is not possible. "Even if we got state approval, we wouldn’t be able to implement this kind of system in time," she said. The Hart of the matter While Boulder citizens and election officials hash out details of its new e-democracy, one clear winner has already emerged: the state of Texas. The Texas Growth Fund, a key financial backer of Hart InterCivic, is a $577-million investment fund collected from public pensions and endowments for private investment. The fund, created by the Texas Legislature in 1986 and approved by the state’s voters in 1987, has come under fire in recent years for its history of poor investment returns. An exception was the fund’s investment into an Arlington, Va., intelligence information start-up, Veridian Inc., which generated a $73.5-million profit for Texans. In 1995, fund managers sank $3 million into Veridian and another $20 million in 1999, taking from the Teachers Retirement System, one the four funds that contributes to Texas Growth Fund coffers. Texans cashed in when, at the height of the homeland security boom in 2003, the company was sold to General Dynamics Inc., a top U.S. defense contractor, for $1.5 billion. While mixing public payrolls with private investment is law in Texas, Boulderites may wonder how their tax dollars got caught up in the mix. When Hart bought Lafayette, Colo.-based World Wide Elections Systems from Neil McClure in 1999, Hart became a local enterprise. Last year, Boulder officials began the process of upgrading its outdated computerized voting system, issuing a request for proposal (RFP) to electronic voting vendors nationwide. With overwhelming public opposition to touch-screen DREs, Boulder officials chose Hart’s paper-based voting system, which scans ballots to create a digital image, which the machine then interprets and tabulates. The 21-member Voter Equipment Review Committee, which eventually picked Hart from an original list of 13 vendors, did not formally review Hart’s investors, which are listed on the company’s website. "The committee reviewed each vendor according to its ability to service disabled voters, which is a new federal election standard," said Halicki, a member of the committee. "We did not look at Hart’s investors or the Texas Growth Fund." Salas, however, says she did review Hart’s company profile. "I haven’t looked at that for a while, but you’re probably right," she said, about Hart’s relationship with the Texas Growth Fund. "But, as I’m sure you’re aware, all companies have investors." She said her office, as well as the review panel, ultimately decided on Hart’s system because of the superior security and equipment it believes Hart provides. "The first I ever heard of the Texas Growth Fund’s affiliation with Hart was in the media," said McClure. "So as far as any influence or contact with anyone at the fund, I’ve had zero." Currently, a representative from the fund, Steve Soileau, sits on Hart’s board at its headquarters in Texas. Boulder and Arapahoe are the only counties in Colorado that will use a version of Hart’s voting software, called eSlate, this November. As one of the nation’s top vendors of electronic voting machines, Hart’s eSlate system will be used by 4,000 precincts–representing about 5 million voters–this election, according to the company. "I am confident the current testing system is enough and that every vote will count in this election," said Salas. She says the county will move toward being an "independent, self-contained" election entity for future elections, including finding ways for the county to print its own ballots. Salas said whatever changes are made to future Boulder elections, the county will continue to use Hart’s electronic tabulation system. As for implementing a verifiable paper audit, Salas said, "This is really a legislative issue." Respond: letters@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
Boulder election officials rejected Monday a final plea from a local
voting watchdog group to conduct an additional accuracy test of county’s
new $1.7-million voter tabulation machine, saying such a test goes against
state law.
© 2003-2004 Boulder Weekly. All Rights Reserved.