From: "VoteTrustUSA" <contact@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: March 21, 2006 10:57:09 AM MST
To: jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: California Voters File Lawsuit Against Secretary of State
California Voters File Lawsuit to Halt Use or Purchase of Diebold  
Electronic Voting System
Illegal Computer Code, Security and Disability Access Problems Cited
Plaintiffs Include Dolores Huerta, Avi Rubin, Doug Jones,  
Disability Advocates
A group of 24 California voters, including Dolores Huerta, social  
justice activist and co-founder of the United Farm Workers of  
America, announced at a news conference today that they have filed  
a lawsuit against California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson to  
nullify his “conditional” certification of the Diebold TSx  
electronic voting system and to block purchase or use of the TSx in  
California due to serious security, verifiability and disability  
access problems.
“The right to a secure vote, which is recorded and counted as  
intended, is a basic tenet of our democracy, and Californians  
deserve no less,” said Dolores Huerta, social activist and  
Plaintiff in the California voters’ lawsuit. “Diebold systems have  
failed in security tests and in communities around the country.  In  
certifying the Diebold machines, the Secretary has sidestepped his  
duty to deny certification to voting systems that violate state and  
federal standards.”
 “A crisis is brewing in California when computerized slot machines  
used by gamblers in the state are more secure and auditable than  
the electronic voting systems used by California voters to decide  
the future direction of their government,” said Lowell Finley,  
Esq., counsel for the plaintiffs and co-director of Voter Action.  
“Expert testing has confirmed that the Diebold system contains  
“interpreted” code --programming that is vulnerable to malicious  
hacking, and prohibited by the California Elections Code.  The  
Diebold touch screen voting system is a severe security risk, and  
does not accommodate all disabled voters as required by law.”
“California voters have the right to vote and to have their votes  
counted correctly.  The last thing we need is to start using voting  
machines that deny access to disabled voters and create an  
unacceptable risk of fraud and vote manipulation," said John  
Eichhorst, co-counsel for the voter plaintiffs, and a partner with  
Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk & Rabkin.
“People with low vision want meaningful access, not token access,  
in our voting experience,” said Bernice Kandarian, President of the  
Council of Citizens with Low Vision International. “Just because I  
need an accessible voting system does not mean that I believe that  
it is acceptable to vote on a system that is not trustworthy and  
hard to recount or audit. I too want to know that my vote will be  
counted by the most secure method. The Diebold machines are not  
only insecure and hard to recount or audit, but they also fail to  
provide meaningful access for many disabled voters.”
The lawsuit also challenges the Secretary of State's imposition of  
"conditions" to the certification which seek to impose new physical  
security requirements and liability responsibility upon County  
Election Officials.
“The Secretary of State's conditions are new, untested, regulations  
that were adopted without the benefit of appropriate expert  
analysis and public hearing.  These new regulations are not the  
cure for the acknowledged vulnerabilities built into this voting  
system," said Mr. Eichhorst.
As part of their case, the plaintiffs will present the expert  
testimony of computer security experts Douglas W. Jones of the  
University of Iowa and Dr. Aviel D. Rubin of Johns Hopkins  
University concerning the serious security problems inherent in the  
Diebold TSx technology.
 “Voter Action is pleased to support this important lawsuit, which  
will be watched closely by states across the country facing or soon  
to face similar voting security issues and rushed purchasing  
decisions.  We know from the research of independent experts that  
Diebold technology is not the answer. There are better, less  
expensive and secure options that do meet the needs of those with a  
wide range of disabilities, ”says Holly Jacobson, co-director of  
Voter Action.
The lawsuit was filed with support from Voter Action, a non-profit  
organization providing legal, research, and logistical support for  
grassroots efforts to ensure the integrity of elections in the  
United States. The action was filed in the Superior Court of the  
State of California in San Francisco, prior to the Voter Action  
news conference at the offices of the Howard Rice law firm in San  
Francisco.
Voter Action, with members across the country, recently led  
successful litigation in New Mexico to block purchase and use of  
the types of voting machines that are most error prone and  
vulnerable to tampering.  In addition to California, Voter Action  
is currently supporting similar efforts in New York, Pennsylvania  
and other states.
Unsubscribe: http://ymlp.com/u.php?vtusa+jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx
Hosting by YourMailingListProvider