[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Fwd: HAVA Error Rate Info




For people who are supposedly such great experts on HAVA and election law, it sure is convenient how they can forget the details when on the record...

See 301(a)(5) of HAVA and Section 3.2.1 of the voting system standards (referenced below).

Boulder County's existing system produced an error rate of 1.6% in testing (7 in 429 ballots, 7 in 5,577 ballot positions bad, orders of magnitude off of the legal requirements).

Sad how you can pick and choose which parts of the law you all decide to enforce, no wonder more and more people are losing faith in the system.

I'm afraid your decision today will further damage voter confidence in Boulder County.

You should be demanding a refund from Hart for the misrepresentations they've made here and the false bill of goods they sold us on the paper ballot system. That you would vote to give them another penny of our money is extremely disappointing.

Joe





Joe Pezzillo
PO Box J
Boulder, CO 80306 USA
303-938-8850



Begin forwarded message:

From: Joe Pezzillo <jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: October 31, 2005 3:26:58 PM MST
Subject: HAVA Error Rate Info



HAVA Error Rate Requirement:
HAVA 301(a)(5)
(5) Error rates.--The error rate of the voting system in counting ballots (determined by taking into
account only those errors which are attributable to the voting system and not attributable to an act
of the voter) shall comply with the error rate standards established under section 3.2.1 of the voting
systems standards issued by the Federal Election Commission which are in effect on the date of the
enactment of this Act.

Section 3.2.1 of the Voting System Standards
"For each processing function indicated above, the system shall achieve a target error rate of no more than one in 10,000,000 ballot positions, with a maximum acceptable error rate in the test process of one in 500,000 ballot positions."


[Note that the pre-election testing found that the system Boulder County purchased with HAVA funding has a demonstrated and documented error rate of 7 in 5,577 (seven in five thousand five hundred seventy seven) ballot positions, orders of magnitude worse than the HAVA mandated legal requirement.]