Coastal Post Online
MARIN COUNTY'S NEWS
MONTHLY - FREE PRESS
(415)868-1600 -
(415)868-0502(fax) - P.O. Box 31, Bolinas, CA, 94924
|
|
Bolinas Voters Sue To Halt Use of Diebold
Voting Machines
Illegal Computer Code, Security and Disability Access Problems Cited
The suit, trumpeted by the Washington Post on March 21 states the machines are not secure and can easily be made to alter votes.
"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.
The West Marin Diebold Connection
Charles Fox, resident of Bolinas, joined as plaintiff in a lawsuit filed against California's Secretary of State in the Diebold certification on Tuesday, March 21st, alongside famed labor organizer Dolores Huerta and 22 other voters of California. They are represented by another Bolinas resident, John Eichhorst of the SF law firm Howard Rice, in partnership with election law attorney Lowell Finley's VoterAction.org.
In late January, a group of election integrity activists including the Mainstreet Moms were at yet another hearing in Sacramento against the certification of blatantly inferior electronic voting machine technology. During the hearing, one of the more recalcitrant Registrars of Voters said of the machines purchasing process, "It's coming down to just a question of who you want to get sued by." The lightbulb went off for Bolinas residents Jim Heddle, Mary Beth Brangan, and Megan Matson: "WE need to be suing them, now!"
A few days later, the law firm of Howard Rice with John Eichhorst had agreed to take a case against Diebold's certification pro bono. Then Lowell Finley of VoterAction.org, the team that succeeded in turning New Mexico around, agreed to lead the legal action. The roots of the case against Diebold condemn touchscreen DRE (Direct Record Electronic) voting machines outright. These machines have been resoundingly condemned in one government report after another, from the General Accounting Office, to the Carter/Baker Commission, to the Conyers Report. Governors on both sides of the aisle have issued blistering attacks on touchscreen DREs for their utter lack of security or reliability, and as Republican Governor Ehrlich of Maryland said, for the "1000% increases in maintenance cost estimates" since contracts were signed with Diebold.
He joins Democratic Governor Richardson in committing to paper ballots optically scanned for their states. Finally, every computer security expert and state-commissioned security test has failed the machines, including recent tests conducted by the California Secretary of State himself. The general consensus among activisits and computer security experts alike is that at the end of the day, you need a paper ballot optically scanned or hand counted. No other system allows for meaningful audits or recounts, both of which are essential to restoring trust and sturdiness to our democracy.