Re: [Fwd: Why we can't trust vote counting computers or mail in balloting]

[Ralph Shnelvar <ralphs@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Commissioners,

I agree with Mary's statement, below.

A large and loose consortium of citizens have banded together to correct
problems with voting.  We are all asking you for one thing: hand counted
paper ballots.

I am a computer programmer by profession.  I've been doing it for more than
40 years.  My areas of expertise are disaster recovery, backup software, and
system security.  For instance, in the early 1980's I was involved with the
NSA to provide voice encryption using (now primitive) PCs.  In 1994, PC
Computing magazine named my product, TAPEDISK, as one of the best 115
products of the year.

My years of expertise tell me (and I am telling you) that no computer or
computer system can provide the level of transparency and security that hand
counted paper ballots can provide.  That hand counting is also cheaper
should make the decision to not fund the clerk's request for new and very
expensive hardware utterly obvious.

Please, please, please, let us not use these machines in any way other than
as a tool to do independent audits of the hand count.

I ask you to follow Mary's advice.  I ask you to use Neal McBurnett's
multiple insights into the audit process to insure that Boulder has fair and
accurate elections.

Ralph Shnelvar
Boulder Citizen


On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 06:36:21 -0700, you wrote:

>Dear Commissioners,
>
>The Denver Post article below may interest you as you contemplate 
>spending millions for scanning devices for voting in Boulder County. 
>We could use the Swiss Ballot System for much less cost but with much 
>higher accuracy.
>
>Sincerely,
>Mary
>
>Mary C. Eberle
>1520 Cress Court
>Boulder, CO 80304, USA
>(303) 442-2164
>
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: Why we can't trust vote counting computers or mail in balloting
>Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 21:43:39 -0700 (MST)
>From: Evan Daniel Ravitz <evan@xxxxxxxx>
>To: cvv-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 19:58:14 -0700
>From: Dr. Charles E. Corry <ccorry@xxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Why we can't trust vote counting computers or mail in balloting
>
>Article Launched: 12/05/2005 01:00:00 AM
>State's eye on vote scanners
>Colorado Secretary of State Gigi Dennis might seek new machines in 10
>counties after hand recounts changed two results last month.
>By Karen E. Crummy and Michael McCollum
>Denver Post Staff Writers
>http://www.denverpost.com/frontpage/ci_3279155
>
>After a hand recount changed the outcome of two elections last month,
>the Colorado secretary of state may order 10 counties to get new
>voting machines before next year's high-stakes gubernatorial
>election. [EJF note: Why not just do hand counts from the beginning?
>Cheaper, more accurate and reliable.]
>
>Secretary of State Gigi Dennis wants "assurances from the
>manufacturers that there won't be any problems next year," said Dana
>Williams, a spokeswoman for Dennis.
>
>The state will "then decide if we should continue using the
>machines," Williams said.
>
>At issue are the Optech III-P Eagle machines, sold by Election
>Systems & Software and Sequoia Voting Systems.
>
>A post-election audit in November led Dennis to order a hand recount
>in the 10 counties that use the machine. In at least two counties -
>Clear Creek and Chaffee - the recount changed the outcome of races.
>
>Election officials around the country have reported problems with the 
>machines.
>
>On Friday, Detroit officials ordered a recount of about 230,000
>ballots cast in the Nov. 8 election. Allegations of voter fraud and
>procedural mismanagement, including the operation of the Optech
>machines, have been cited.
>
>"The machines have a history of significant problems," said Bev
>Harris, director of blackboxvoting.org, a nonpartisan, nonprofit
>group dedicated to tracking voter problems.
>
>Michelle Shafer, spokeswoman for Sequoia, said many of the problems
>occur when mail ballots are fed into the machines.
>
>"They are meant to be used in a controlled environment, like in a
>precinct, where people use the right pencils and pens," she said.
>
>When voters mail ballots, they often use a different color of ink or
>circle names, she said, leaving the machine unable to read them.
>
>Megan Tauton, the elections clerk in Elbert County, said that's what
>happened with the few discrepancies she found between her county's
>hand count and the automatic tabulations.
>
>During the manual count, the county was able to discern voter intent,
>something the machines can't do.
>
>"The computer only reads properly filled out ballots," she said.
>
>The majority of the 10 Colorado counties said they had faith in their
>voting machines and that the difference between the hand count and
>the scanning was insignificant.
>
>"We just had a few differences, mainly with people not following
>directions," Huerfano County Clerk and Recorder Judy Benine said.
>"We've used them for seven years, and we haven't ever had a problem
>with them."
>
>But election officials in other counties said they had no confidence
>in their machines.
>
>In Chaffee County, Hugh Young was declared the winner of a Salida
>City Council seat after the hand recount determined he beat incumbent
>Ron Stowell by three votes. Stowell had been declared the winner by
>three votes.
>
>Clear Creek County found 97 votes that had not been included in the
>initial machine vote. A ballot question regarding a local school
>district initially won by six votes but after the hand recount lost
>by 18 votes.
>
>"I have no confidence in the machines, and we're looking to have them
>replaced," Clear Creek County Clerk and Recorder Pam Phipps said.
>
>In Park County, the outcomes remained the same, but "quite a few"
>undervotes appeared during the recount, Clerk and Recorder Debra
>Green said.
>
>The 13-year-old machines, she said, are worn out.
>
>The secretary of state's office says it understands the concerns,
>which is why it is looking into the matter.
>
>"We would rather be safe than sorry," Williams said.
>
>The 10 counties that had hand recounts are Bent, Chaffee, Clear
>Creek, Custer, Elbert, Fremont, Huerfano, Park, Pueblo and Sedgwick.
>
>Staff writer Karen E. Crummy can be reached at 303-820-1594 or
>kcrummy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>.
>