I just received a phone call from Holly Jacobson of VoterAction.org, the group that has supported voter lawsuits attempting to decertify e-voting machines in Colorado, California, Arizona, Pennsylvania and elsewhere.
She called us from Colorado just after leaving the courtroom, where the case in that state against the use and purchase of e-voting systems made by Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia and Hart InterCivic was being heard yesterday. She called and said: “We won!”
That call came moments after I’d received a report that CNN’s Lou Dobbs had reported an hour or so ago that they had lost the case…
I didn’t see Dobbs yet tonight, and the transcript isn’t available yet, so we’ll have to check exactly what it was that they said. But Jacobson explained that, though the judge allowed the state of Colorado to use the machines for this November, they would have to do so with new strict security guidelines to be written by the VoterAction folks.
She explained that they had expected something like that since the case was being heard just weeks from the November elections, without enough time for a complete overhaul to be made to the system now in place in Colorado.
Nonetheless, they are all “popping champagne and celebrating,” according to Jacobson because the biggest victory, apparently, comes in that the Judge has found that Colorado must completely start over in their certification process for these systems immediately after the upcoming election. Apparently, she says, he found that the state’s process for certifying the systems was enormously flawed. (See our previous report about the “expert” in charge of certifying voting systems for the state, who was revealed during his deposition to have had no formal computer science education, and to have not even bothered to have performed any actual tests of the systems before certifying them!)
Jacobson also reports that Lowell Finley, the group’s lead attorney, has characterized the Judge’s mandate for new certification procedures to be so strict the state simply “won’t be able to certify any DRE [touch-screen] voting systems” under the new procedures.
Sounds good to us.
The VoterAction suit in Colorado was filed in June.
UPDATE 6:36pm PT: Jacobson has sent us VoterAction’s official media release on this. It’s posted in full below…
UPDATE 6:49pm PT: As requested in comments, here are some of the materials I’ve been sent from the case:
— Digested Deposition of John Gardner (The not-expert “Expert” who certified systems for Colorado) [PDF] — Excerpts of trial testimony, Mike Williams questions Noel Runyan (9/21/06) [WORD] — Trasncript of Judge’s Complete Ruling: PDF Version…, WORD Version…
UPDATE 7:12pm PT: We reported previously that someone had mentioned CNN’s Lou Dobbs might have misreported the verdict. In fact, it looks as if they got it just about right as this segment from the transcript of tonight’s show reveals:
DOBBS: Yet ruled that they can still proceed.
PILGRIM: Yes, but tighten up every rule and have them tested.
DOBBS: Amazing judgment …
PILGRIM: Amazing.
DOBBS: …or lack of it on the part of the judge.
We’ll have the full transcript posted shortly as a separate item. Here now, the VoterAction statement…
Court Upholds Colorado Voters Challenge to Electronic Voting System Certification – New Standards, Testing for Security to be Required Post-November
Judge orders Secretary of State to produce and implement voting security plan for all counties
For Immediate Release: Denver, CO, September 22, 2006 – In a legal victory this afternoon in the Colorado voters’ lawsuit challenging Secretary of State’s Gigi Dennis’ cursory certification of electronic voting systems manufactured by Diebold, Sequoia, ES & S, and Hart, the District Court in Denver decided that it will not permit the use of these systems post November 7th until real security standards are adopted and the machines are retested to meet these standards. In his ruling, Judge Lawrence Manzanares said the Secretary of state had failed to create minimum security standards, as required by state law, and did an “abysmal” job of documenting the testing during its certification process. He also ordered the Secretary of State to adopt state-wide security standards before the November 2006 election, and ensure compliance from all Colorado counties using the machines.
“The Colorado voter plaintiffs are extremely pleased with this victory. The Court’s decision upholds our challenge to the reliability of the certification process as well as the security of the vote when electronic voting systems are in use,” said Paul Hultin, Counsel for the plaintiffs, who led the litigation team at Wheeler Trigg & Kennedy LLP, in Denver, which is providing pro bono legal services in the case.
“The Court’s ruling is a victory for the plaintiffs and for all voters in Colorado who are concerned about upholding the integrity of the vote. The Court’s decision is tantamount to de-certification of the electronic voting systems of the four major electronic voting machines, which is what the Colorado voter plaintiffs have been fighting for.The stakes are too high, and elections too critical to turn them over to private vendors with troubled histories and no accountability,” said Lowell Finley, co-director of Voter Action and co-counsel in the Colorado case and in similar voters lawsuits in California, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and New Mexico.
“Electronic voting machine breakdowns have wreaked havoc in recent state primaries, disenfranchising thousands of voters and calling into question election results, ” said Holly Jacobson co-director of Voter Action. “While we are pleased with today’s verdict, the serious security flaws inherent in electronic voting technology – confirmed in a new study by Princeton University experts last week, underscore the need for more secure and verifiable voting systems. Paper ballots do not fail to boot up and can be reliably counted, audited and recounted. This is why half the counties in the country are using them. Maryland’s Governor Ehrlich announced his support for returning his state to paper ballots earlier this week”.
The lawsuit was filed on June 1st by a diverse group of Colorado voters, among them Democrat, Republican, Independent, and Green Party members, as well disabled voters. The plaintiffs are represented pro bono by the law firm of Wheeler Trigg Kennedy, LLP, and was supported by Voter Action, www.voteraction.org, a non-profit organization dedicated to ensuring election integrity in the US.
Voter Action is a project of the International Humanities Center, a 501(c) (3) organization.
###
Do we know if Dr. Richard Lee testified or any testimony regarding Windows CE/Diebold was brought up, and what effect it might have had?
Well if electronic voting machines are still going to be used then far as im concerned they LOST.
Paper Ballots and Hand counting is the only way to go
I’ve got a few pieces of testimony that have been sent to me, Jim, but haven’t had time to review them yet. I’ll try post them as an update on this item shortly and you can have at it!
Can this be overturned on appeal? Will there be an appeal? We know the Rove election-stealing machine suffers no losses, ever.
I too think hand-counted paper ballots are the only way to go. But I think this is a win: the companies won’t be able to get REAL experts to certify their buggy products built on notoriously insecure and nontransparent Windows.
And, the machines will likely cause major problems this Nov. 7 AGAIN, which will further turn Americans against them.
We all owe Wheeler Trigg & Kennedy LLP, who argued the case pro bono (that means for free) a big thank you.
So does this mean that the election in November is a throw away. Like the people can take another election cycle with these criminals in charge. I say this is not a solution for this election it is just postponing the fight for accountability. What are the citizens to do?
If you’re worried about E-Voting and your vote not counting, or being counted the way the Republicans want it counted, then vote absentee?
Dave absentee is not a guarantee that your vote will be counted either. Read this article by Greg Palast
http://www.yesmagazine.org/article.asp?ID=1511
can anybody comment on this site?
http://www.votingmachinesprocon.org./
Don’t they need to repeal or amend the HAVA Act? Shouldn’t we be contacting our legislators to repeal this legislation?
I live in Ohio. My husband had the radio on, he said there was a steady run of Blackwell commercials telling us to vote using absentee ballots. WHY ? And NO mention of how we have to have ID in Nov.
Donna –
NOTE that Absentee ballots are scanned straight into the central tabulator. No record is kept throughout the day (as it would be at the precint-based op scan systems) of what’s going on and what’s coming in. Absentee can be the easiest way to game the system.
PLUS no Photo ID required for Absentee (or military) balloting now is there?
Funny how the GOP wants Photo ID ONLY for those that show up to vote at the polls, then tells their voters to vote by Photo-ID-less absentee. Go figure…
GWN: Gov. Richardson was able to be shamed. I doubt it would work on Sec. of State Blackwell in Ohio, who the evidence proves is shameless.
I remain gravely concerned about getting true vote count in Nov. election.You can not throw the bums out as long as criminals control the machines and news media looks the other way.What has this country became? (DICATORSHIP?}
(dictatorship} corrected it still stinks anyway you spell it.
Brad #12 I was told by our DNC before May primary “You do know that in Nov. we all have to have identification in order to vote, don’t you?” (Well no, I didn’t know that til she told me.) She said “for Nov anything that has our name and address on it will do.” Now I’m wondering if it’s changed to state ID of some sort that’s required? We’re going into the DNC office to get some Brown & Strickland signs, I’m gonna ask for all Ohio’s “NEW RULES” as Bill Mahers would say. I knew Blackwell was pushing absentees for a reason. I’m sending your response to Dobbs as he keeps pushing for them. As always, thank you Brad. You’re the pit bull for clean election !
If the machines end up tied to the “system” and it’s been shown that a virus can be put on the system and infect other machines on the system, this does no good.
It also does no good knowing that ONE person can rig the entire election from one machine, it only takes one person to destroy the integrity of the entire Colorado vote.
And I saw on the news last night that the Governor of Colorado said “he’d bet good money” on the Republican who is trailing in the polls wining in November. Wonder why..
Paper, pen, hand-counting. If we settle for anything less, we’re giving up our Democracy.
I’m a Software Engineer. I see scams every day online. I see viruses bring entire industries to their knees. I have NO FAITH in using machines with NO VERIFIABLE TRAIL to determine real life situations. Balance your checkbook, put pretty pictures on the screen, get your porn to your living room.. sure.. but handle the process that determines who lives and who dies? who makes a living and who starves to death? who gets free rides and who can’t pay for baby food? NO! Computers aren’t needed, can’t be trusted, and put way too much risk into something that doesn’t need it.
No.. we LOST here in Colorado! Letting those machines be used is promising complete chaos in the election. Allowing the election to decend into chaos is to affirm a lack of concern with our Democracy.
Couple that with the FACT that the States have no jurisdiction once the Senate or House “swears in” their guy and we’re totally screwed. Any place the Repukes think then can dismiss Dem votes and make it look like “they won” will be attacked early and hard. Then Congress will swear in the Rethug.. then the courts will say “oh well… too late”.
“lost for 2006, won for 2008”. I think that’s a fair description.
Hello all: Sequoia Voting Systems lost my vote and dumped almost ten thousand registered voters from the November 2, 2004 grand total of registered voters for Washoe County, Nevada, wherein I reside and vote. In 2005 I sued the Nevada Secretary of State (Dean Heller) and won access to the public records/files surrouding the 2004 election. As a consequence, I am in possession of hard evidence of Sequoia product defect developed in the course of Wyle Laboratory testing of the AVC EDGE with Verivote printer. I have filed a personal injury/property damage insurance claim against Sequoia with their insurer Zurich Insurance Company.
For more information: Call Patricia Axelrod, 775-787-1909 or email me at paxelrod1675@yahoo.com