California Sued Over Diebold Voting Systems
Spoilt Ballot-Paper | 22.03.2006 10:49 | Repression
San Francisco - Some California voters and activist groups sued the state's top election official on Tuesday in an effort to reverse the certification of certain electronic voting machines made by Diebold Inc.
California Sued Over Diebold Voting Systems
source: Reuters
Tuesday 21 March 2006
San Francisco - Some California voters and activist groups sued the state's top election official on Tuesday in an effort to reverse the certification of certain electronic voting machines made by Diebold Inc.
The suit, filed in Superior Court in San Francisco, is the latest salvo in an ongoing dispute about the security of Diebold electronic voting machines, focused on Diebold's TSX touch-screen system.
A month ago, Secretary of State Bruce McPherson certified Diebold Election System's TSX and Optical Scan products for use in this year's elections after a review of their security. An earlier, slightly modified version of the TSX was used in California's November 2005 special election.
"In certifying the Diebold machines, the secretary has sidestepped his duty to deny certification to voting systems that violate state and federal standards," Dolores Huerta, a co-founder of the United Farm Workers of America and plaintiff in the case, said in a statement. "Diebold systems have failed in security tests and in communities around the country."
The lawsuit seeks to block the purchase of the TSX systems and a reversal of the secretary of state's certification.
Jennifer Kerns, a spokeswoman for McPherson, said her office had not seen the lawsuit, but she said the Diebold systems were safe and reliable.
"The Diebold systems that we have certified have passed the most stringent requirements really in the nation," she said. "In fact we've actually been criticized about how stringent our process has been."
Diebold came under file in California after the state's March 2004 primary election for glitches at polling places attributed to its voting systems. Some activists have questioned their vulnerability to hacking and manipulation.
In 2004, Diebold paid $2.6 million to settle a lawsuit alleging it had provided false information about security and certification to obtain payments for its electronic voting equipment in California.
Election officials say 21 of California's 58 counties have used Diebold electronic voting systems for recent voting, and at least seven counties are slated to use the new TSX system this year.
source: Reuters
Tuesday 21 March 2006
San Francisco - Some California voters and activist groups sued the state's top election official on Tuesday in an effort to reverse the certification of certain electronic voting machines made by Diebold Inc.
The suit, filed in Superior Court in San Francisco, is the latest salvo in an ongoing dispute about the security of Diebold electronic voting machines, focused on Diebold's TSX touch-screen system.
A month ago, Secretary of State Bruce McPherson certified Diebold Election System's TSX and Optical Scan products for use in this year's elections after a review of their security. An earlier, slightly modified version of the TSX was used in California's November 2005 special election.
"In certifying the Diebold machines, the secretary has sidestepped his duty to deny certification to voting systems that violate state and federal standards," Dolores Huerta, a co-founder of the United Farm Workers of America and plaintiff in the case, said in a statement. "Diebold systems have failed in security tests and in communities around the country."
The lawsuit seeks to block the purchase of the TSX systems and a reversal of the secretary of state's certification.
Jennifer Kerns, a spokeswoman for McPherson, said her office had not seen the lawsuit, but she said the Diebold systems were safe and reliable.
"The Diebold systems that we have certified have passed the most stringent requirements really in the nation," she said. "In fact we've actually been criticized about how stringent our process has been."
Diebold came under file in California after the state's March 2004 primary election for glitches at polling places attributed to its voting systems. Some activists have questioned their vulnerability to hacking and manipulation.
In 2004, Diebold paid $2.6 million to settle a lawsuit alleging it had provided false information about security and certification to obtain payments for its electronic voting equipment in California.
Election officials say 21 of California's 58 counties have used Diebold electronic voting systems for recent voting, and at least seven counties are slated to use the new TSX system this year.
Spoilt Ballot-Paper
Comments
Hide the following comment
Gerrymandering For Dummies
22.03.2006 13:32
During the first Bush election fraud the Diebold machines were unpatched, unsecured Windows systems hooked up to modems. They couldn't have been made more hackable - even Microsoft should decry this. If I had only known this in advance then I'd be President by now.
Now, imagine I ran a poll on my PC asking who should be the next president or primeminister, and eveyone who cared to vote could do so, and I'd announce the results in a week or so.
And then I announce I'm the winner. Hopefully a few of you might be suspicious. Not so in the US seemingly. Black-box voting is just 'Gerrymandering For Dummies'. There can never be electronic voting worthy of trust, certainly not when it is obvious the most basic security precautions are ignored. Us technical smartie-pants don't really respect the opinion of lesser minds.
Now, while even Microsoft should be slanging these faked procedures, they are accepted as 'on-the-ground' 'de facto' realities. Gore didn't dare complain, which only proves his complicity. Diebold voting machines are used in 37 states. Thats enough. There is another corporate electronic voting system too in the US, both companies are owned by Republicans.
Black-box in general terms means any system whose workings are hidden - these systems can still be tested externally. For instance, noone really knows what is inside an atom, but we can infer certain things about subatomic particles from reasoned tests. White box, in comparison, is any system whose workings are obvious and visible. I'm all for white-box voting.
"and we hold these truths to be self evident:
#1 george w. bush is not president
#2 america is not a true democracy
#3 the media is not fooling me"
stoop ID