Re: Any election conducted under these rules will not be secure, accurate, verifiable or transparent

[Kathy Dopp <kathy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

AlKolwicz wrote:

> Hi Len,
>
> The following note from Kathy Dopp refers to new data that calls into
> question the certification of DRE voting equipment.
>  
Len, Al, and others -

Not all DRE voting equipment is incompliant - Accupoll is compliant with 
HAVA laws for the disabled and therefore qualifies for HAVA funding.  
The only other voting machine on the market which VerifiedVoting.org 
says is completely compliant now is the AutoMARK - which gets high 
ratings from the disabled community.  All the other voting machines are 
currently lacking in some way(s).

Remember, this compliance is required by the first federal election in 
2006, or HAVA funding for non-compliant systems may be in question.

Yesterday, California's Secretary of State ruled that all voting 
machines used in CA must comply with the 2002 HAVA standards required 
for meeting HAVA funding requirements. 

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=1623

You might contact VerifiedVoting.org's Pam Smith 
(pam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) who has made a chart comparing voting machines 
for compliance with the disabled provisions of HAVA, but I picked it up 
at the NASS.org conference and have not find it online.

I am unsure which machines are compliant with the error rate maximums.

Best,

Kathy Dopp
http://electionarchive.org
http://utahcountvotes.org