There are two important election verification developments to report this week. As was reported by the AP yesterday, Connecticut's Secretary of State, Susan Bysiewicz announced that she has "pulled the plug" on that state's plans to buy electronic voting machines and is planning to stick with mechanical lever machines for now.
According to the AP story, Danaher Controls was the finalist in Connecticut's bid process but had "misled the state and had not yet sought proper certification to meet state and federal requirements. Bysiewicz's office made the discovery during final negotiations with the company." Other voting machine companies also failed to meet the state's needs, and no company could provide a certified electronic machine that displays a voter's entire ballot and provides a voter-verified paper trail as required by state law.
In Wisconsin, the Associated Press reported that Governor Jim Doyle signed legislation to require electronic voting machines to produce a voter-verified paper trail. As Mike McCabe, executive director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign told reporters, "This is important to democracy, because if voters can't trust that their votes are being counted and election officials don't have a paper record that they can go back and review during recounts, then we're lost."
According to Verified Voting, there are now 26 states that have enacted voter-verified paper trail requirements, either through regulation or legislation.
Friday, January 6, 2006
Tuesday, January 3, 2006
CA Voting tech updates in the Los Angeles Times, Sacramento Bee
Happy new year everyone! The first week of 2006 features a couple of articles that provide a good overview of the situation California is facing with voting technology changes. Noam Levey wrote this article in Today's Los Angeles Times, and yesterday's Sacramento Bee featured this story by Kevin Yamamura. Excerpts are featured below.
-------------
(LA Times)
In California, counties have lurched from one voting system to another as the state has written and rewritten standards. Several counties are scrambling to redo their June election plans after the state's top elections official raised new questions last month about an electronic voting machine in use for years.
Miami officials talk of scrapping their 3-year-old electronic machines, while Mercer County, Pa., officials want to keep theirs but were ordered by state authorities to take them out of service after glitches during the 2004 presidential election.
"It pretty much left the county up a tree," said Tom Rookey, elections chief of the Steel Belt county on the Ohio border.
In Connecticut, the secretary of state is tussling with the federal government over how quickly the state must replace its decades-old lever-style voting machines with electronic machines.
Indiana's largest county has sued the company that sold it electronic voting machines. Across the border in Ohio, the same company has sued the state.
"It's been crazy," said San Diego County Registrar of Voters Mikel Haas, who said he is returning to paper ballots because the state refused to recertify more than 10,000 electronic machines the county bought two years ago. "Everyone is in uncharted territory here."
---
The arcane world of voting technology and ballot counting once drew little attention from anyone other than elections officials.
But 2000 changed everything.
"Everyone looked at what was coming out of Florida — scenes of judges squinting to look at ballots — and agreed there had to be a better way to do this," said Doug Chapin, head of the nonpartisan Election Reform Information Project. "There was a real push toward computerized paperless machines to get away from these chads."
Congress in 2002 passed the Help America Vote Act, pledging nearly $4 billion to help states upgrade their voting systems. The same year, California passed its own $200-million bond for the same purpose.
The flood of money fueled a nationwide spending spree on high-tech machines that were expected to revolutionize vote counting.
But the machines often have not proved as reliable as hoped.
And while states and counties rushed to buy them, elections officials struggled to regulate how machines should record votes and safeguard results.
Although the Help America Vote Act set up a federal commission to assist the states, the Election Assistance Commission did not come into existence until 2004, more than a year late. And only in December did it release voluntary voting-machine guidelines.
"In voting technology, the pace of innovation was outpacing the regulation," Chapin said.
The result has sometimes been chaotic.
----
California's Orange County is retrofitting its voting machines with printers, a task that Neal Kelley, acting registrar of voters, said will require the county to cut open thousands of machines. Voters there will use paper ballots for an April special election to fill a state Senate seat.
Other California counties have pulled electronic systems out of service while the state reevaluates whether the machines are vulnerable to hacking.
That has jeopardized plans by several counties to use the machines in the state's June 6 primary election.
"The frustration level is very, very high," said Elaine Ginnold, acting registrar of voters in Alameda County, whose plans to purchase a new voting system have been thrown into disarray.
Many California counties, including Los Angeles, are in open revolt against the secretary of state's office, which they charge is arbitrarily setting and resetting standards to appease a few outspoken activists.
"This all started with paranoia over technology, even though we trust it in our banking and we trust it to fly airplanes," said Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder Conny McCormack, one of the nation's leading local elections officials. "This is about change management, and people are not managing."
------
(Sacramento Bee)
Most counties in California - and many across the country - officially fell out of compliance Sunday with rules mandating that election systems be accessible to voters with disabilities. But the San Diego County special election puts Haas at the head of the line when it comes to compliance.
While the legal deadline has passed, Secretary of State Bruce McPherson has tried to assure county officials and voters that California will resolve its Help America Vote Act issues by the June primary, the first statewide election with federal races.
But McPherson has not certified any new accessible voting machines since August, making some registrars nervous and others downright angry.
---
But registrars like Haas are torn. They say they respect McPherson's need to put controversial equipment through a battery of tests. But they also face the practical need of having to run an election in a matter of months.
"It's a squeeze," said Haas, who is preparing for a special election to replace U.S. Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, who resigned in November after he was convicted of accepting bribes from defense contractors. "Registrars and county clerks are in a squeeze because we're going to be held accountable for an election. We're dying for the tools."
California has certified only one accessible voting machine for the June primary - the AutoMARK made by Omaha, Neb.-based Election Systems & Software. At least a dozen California counties are expected to use the system, including Sacramento, said ES&S spokesman Ken Fields.
The Associated Press reported last week that McPherson's office threatened in November to decertify ES&S because of potential flaws, but Kerns said the company has since resolved the state's concerns.
A second accessible machine, made by Oakland-based Sequoia Voting Systems, has been certified for use in California's general elections but not its primaries due to a problem in reporting crossover selections by independent voters.
Sequoia has created software to correct the problem, but it is awaiting approval from federal officials before it tries to obtain California certification. Spokeswoman Michelle Shafer said she expects the state's 15 counties with Sequoia equipment to be able to use it by the June election.
The remaining counties in California have yet to select their equipment or have chosen another company. At least 17 counties have purchased or plan to use equipment from Diebold Elections Systems of Allen, Texas.
----
Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, praised McPherson for delaying certification, because she said he has uncovered serious concerns with Diebold.
California is not alone in missing the Help America Vote Act accessibility deadline. Some 21 states will be out of compliance, according to Dan Seligson, editor of Electionline.org, a nonpartisan organization tracking election reform.
-------------
(LA Times)
In California, counties have lurched from one voting system to another as the state has written and rewritten standards. Several counties are scrambling to redo their June election plans after the state's top elections official raised new questions last month about an electronic voting machine in use for years.
Miami officials talk of scrapping their 3-year-old electronic machines, while Mercer County, Pa., officials want to keep theirs but were ordered by state authorities to take them out of service after glitches during the 2004 presidential election.
"It pretty much left the county up a tree," said Tom Rookey, elections chief of the Steel Belt county on the Ohio border.
In Connecticut, the secretary of state is tussling with the federal government over how quickly the state must replace its decades-old lever-style voting machines with electronic machines.
Indiana's largest county has sued the company that sold it electronic voting machines. Across the border in Ohio, the same company has sued the state.
"It's been crazy," said San Diego County Registrar of Voters Mikel Haas, who said he is returning to paper ballots because the state refused to recertify more than 10,000 electronic machines the county bought two years ago. "Everyone is in uncharted territory here."
---
The arcane world of voting technology and ballot counting once drew little attention from anyone other than elections officials.
But 2000 changed everything.
"Everyone looked at what was coming out of Florida — scenes of judges squinting to look at ballots — and agreed there had to be a better way to do this," said Doug Chapin, head of the nonpartisan Election Reform Information Project. "There was a real push toward computerized paperless machines to get away from these chads."
Congress in 2002 passed the Help America Vote Act, pledging nearly $4 billion to help states upgrade their voting systems. The same year, California passed its own $200-million bond for the same purpose.
The flood of money fueled a nationwide spending spree on high-tech machines that were expected to revolutionize vote counting.
But the machines often have not proved as reliable as hoped.
And while states and counties rushed to buy them, elections officials struggled to regulate how machines should record votes and safeguard results.
Although the Help America Vote Act set up a federal commission to assist the states, the Election Assistance Commission did not come into existence until 2004, more than a year late. And only in December did it release voluntary voting-machine guidelines.
"In voting technology, the pace of innovation was outpacing the regulation," Chapin said.
The result has sometimes been chaotic.
----
California's Orange County is retrofitting its voting machines with printers, a task that Neal Kelley, acting registrar of voters, said will require the county to cut open thousands of machines. Voters there will use paper ballots for an April special election to fill a state Senate seat.
Other California counties have pulled electronic systems out of service while the state reevaluates whether the machines are vulnerable to hacking.
That has jeopardized plans by several counties to use the machines in the state's June 6 primary election.
"The frustration level is very, very high," said Elaine Ginnold, acting registrar of voters in Alameda County, whose plans to purchase a new voting system have been thrown into disarray.
Many California counties, including Los Angeles, are in open revolt against the secretary of state's office, which they charge is arbitrarily setting and resetting standards to appease a few outspoken activists.
"This all started with paranoia over technology, even though we trust it in our banking and we trust it to fly airplanes," said Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder Conny McCormack, one of the nation's leading local elections officials. "This is about change management, and people are not managing."
------
(Sacramento Bee)
Most counties in California - and many across the country - officially fell out of compliance Sunday with rules mandating that election systems be accessible to voters with disabilities. But the San Diego County special election puts Haas at the head of the line when it comes to compliance.
While the legal deadline has passed, Secretary of State Bruce McPherson has tried to assure county officials and voters that California will resolve its Help America Vote Act issues by the June primary, the first statewide election with federal races.
But McPherson has not certified any new accessible voting machines since August, making some registrars nervous and others downright angry.
---
But registrars like Haas are torn. They say they respect McPherson's need to put controversial equipment through a battery of tests. But they also face the practical need of having to run an election in a matter of months.
"It's a squeeze," said Haas, who is preparing for a special election to replace U.S. Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, who resigned in November after he was convicted of accepting bribes from defense contractors. "Registrars and county clerks are in a squeeze because we're going to be held accountable for an election. We're dying for the tools."
California has certified only one accessible voting machine for the June primary - the AutoMARK made by Omaha, Neb.-based Election Systems & Software. At least a dozen California counties are expected to use the system, including Sacramento, said ES&S spokesman Ken Fields.
The Associated Press reported last week that McPherson's office threatened in November to decertify ES&S because of potential flaws, but Kerns said the company has since resolved the state's concerns.
A second accessible machine, made by Oakland-based Sequoia Voting Systems, has been certified for use in California's general elections but not its primaries due to a problem in reporting crossover selections by independent voters.
Sequoia has created software to correct the problem, but it is awaiting approval from federal officials before it tries to obtain California certification. Spokeswoman Michelle Shafer said she expects the state's 15 counties with Sequoia equipment to be able to use it by the June election.
The remaining counties in California have yet to select their equipment or have chosen another company. At least 17 counties have purchased or plan to use equipment from Diebold Elections Systems of Allen, Texas.
----
Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, praised McPherson for delaying certification, because she said he has uncovered serious concerns with Diebold.
California is not alone in missing the Help America Vote Act accessibility deadline. Some 21 states will be out of compliance, according to Dan Seligson, editor of Electionline.org, a nonpartisan organization tracking election reform.
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
CA Secretary of State kicks Diebold certification back to the feds
I'm interrupting my vacation time to share some breaking news....yesterday California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson issued this press release announcing he is returning Diebold's latest voting system application to the federal testing authorities for further evaluation. Here is an excerpt from the letter the SoS sent to Diebold:
------
Unresolved significant security concerns exist with respect to the memory card used to program and configure the AccuVote-OS and the AccuVote-TSX components of this system because this component was not subjected to federal source code review and evaluation by the Independent Testing Authorities (ITA) who examined your system for federal qualification. It is the Secretary of State's position that the source code for the AccuBasic code on these cards, as well as for the AccuBasic interpreter that interprets this code, should have been federally reviewed.
-------
There are several news stories today about this development. For further details, see John Wildermuth's article in the San Francisco Chronicle, Ian Hoffman's article in the Oakland Tribune, and Greg Kane's article in the Stockton Record, excerpts from which are featured below.
--------
At issue is the software language Diebold uses in the memory cards for both machines, according to a letter from state elections chief Caren Daniels-Meade. Critics say it contains a security flaw that allows outsiders to access and manipulate ballots.
Jennifer Kerns, a spokeswoman for McPherson's office, said Tuesday that the source code wasn't reviewed in a previous federal inspection of the OS and TSx machines. A Finnish computer expert reportedly used the flaw twice to hack into OS memory cards during separate tests in Florida this year.
San Joaquin County Registrar of Voters Deborah Hench said Tuesday that she doesn't believe a new round of testing would reverse the government's approval of the equipment. However, the latest delay in the state's certification of the TSx system leads Hench to wonder if the 1,600 machines the county agreed to purchase for $5.7 million will be available for elections in 2006.
"It makes it less and less likely that we'll be able to use it for the June election," Hench said. "What else are they going to make Diebold do to get certified?"
------
Unresolved significant security concerns exist with respect to the memory card used to program and configure the AccuVote-OS and the AccuVote-TSX components of this system because this component was not subjected to federal source code review and evaluation by the Independent Testing Authorities (ITA) who examined your system for federal qualification. It is the Secretary of State's position that the source code for the AccuBasic code on these cards, as well as for the AccuBasic interpreter that interprets this code, should have been federally reviewed.
-------
There are several news stories today about this development. For further details, see John Wildermuth's article in the San Francisco Chronicle, Ian Hoffman's article in the Oakland Tribune, and Greg Kane's article in the Stockton Record, excerpts from which are featured below.
--------
At issue is the software language Diebold uses in the memory cards for both machines, according to a letter from state elections chief Caren Daniels-Meade. Critics say it contains a security flaw that allows outsiders to access and manipulate ballots.
Jennifer Kerns, a spokeswoman for McPherson's office, said Tuesday that the source code wasn't reviewed in a previous federal inspection of the OS and TSx machines. A Finnish computer expert reportedly used the flaw twice to hack into OS memory cards during separate tests in Florida this year.
San Joaquin County Registrar of Voters Deborah Hench said Tuesday that she doesn't believe a new round of testing would reverse the government's approval of the equipment. However, the latest delay in the state's certification of the TSx system leads Hench to wonder if the 1,600 machines the county agreed to purchase for $5.7 million will be available for elections in 2006.
"It makes it less and less likely that we'll be able to use it for the June election," Hench said. "What else are they going to make Diebold do to get certified?"
Friday, December 16, 2005
On vacation until the new year....
I'll be on vacation for the holidays and back to work at the beginning of the new year. My blog will be on hiatus during this time. I hope everyone has a happy and restful holiday season!
Thursday, December 15, 2005
Securities fraud class action filed against Diebold
A class action filed against Diebold may have contributed to Wally O'Dell's departure as the company's CEO. This news release from the Connecticut law firm Scott+Scott provides further details. Excerpts are below.
---------
COLCHESTER, Conn., Dec. 13 /PRNewswire/ -- Scott+Scott, LLC (http://www.scott-scott.com), at the direction of clients, has filed a securities fraud class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio against Diebold Inc. ("Diebold" or the "Company") (NYSE: DBD - News) and individual defendants. Presently, the class is defined in the complaint drafted by Scott+Scott as those who purchased Diebold securities between October 22, 2003, and September 21, 2005, inclusive (the "Class Period").
----
The complaint alleges that defendants violated provisions of the United States securities laws causing artificial inflation of the Company's stock price. According to the complaint, during the Class Period, the Company lacked a credible state of internal controls and corporate compliance and remained unable to assure the quality and working order of its voting machine products. It is further alleged that the Company's false and misleading statements served to conceal the dimensions and scope of internal problems at the Company, impacting product quality, strategic planning, forecasting and guidance and culminating in false representations of astonishingly low and incredibly inaccurate restructuring charges for the 2005 fiscal year, which grossly understated the true costs and problems defendants faced to restructure the Company. The complaint also alleges over $2.7 million of insider trading proceeds obtained by individual defendants during the Class Period.
Finally, investors learned the truth about the adverse impact of the Company's alleged defective and deficient inventory-related controls and systems on Diebold's financial performance. As a result of defendants' shocking news and disclosures of September 21, 2005, the price of Diebold shares plunged 15.5% on unusually high volume, falling from $44.37 per share on September 20, 2005, to $37.47 per share on September 21, 2005, for a one- day drop of $6.90 per share on volume of 6.1 million shares -- nearly eight times the average daily trading volume.
---------
COLCHESTER, Conn., Dec. 13 /PRNewswire/ -- Scott+Scott, LLC (http://www.scott-scott.com), at the direction of clients, has filed a securities fraud class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio against Diebold Inc. ("Diebold" or the "Company") (NYSE: DBD - News) and individual defendants. Presently, the class is defined in the complaint drafted by Scott+Scott as those who purchased Diebold securities between October 22, 2003, and September 21, 2005, inclusive (the "Class Period").
----
The complaint alleges that defendants violated provisions of the United States securities laws causing artificial inflation of the Company's stock price. According to the complaint, during the Class Period, the Company lacked a credible state of internal controls and corporate compliance and remained unable to assure the quality and working order of its voting machine products. It is further alleged that the Company's false and misleading statements served to conceal the dimensions and scope of internal problems at the Company, impacting product quality, strategic planning, forecasting and guidance and culminating in false representations of astonishingly low and incredibly inaccurate restructuring charges for the 2005 fiscal year, which grossly understated the true costs and problems defendants faced to restructure the Company. The complaint also alleges over $2.7 million of insider trading proceeds obtained by individual defendants during the Class Period.
Finally, investors learned the truth about the adverse impact of the Company's alleged defective and deficient inventory-related controls and systems on Diebold's financial performance. As a result of defendants' shocking news and disclosures of September 21, 2005, the price of Diebold shares plunged 15.5% on unusually high volume, falling from $44.37 per share on September 20, 2005, to $37.47 per share on September 21, 2005, for a one- day drop of $6.90 per share on volume of 6.1 million shares -- nearly eight times the average daily trading volume.
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Controversial Diebold CEO resigns
Yesterday Wally O'Dell, chairman and CEO of Diebold, Inc., announced he is resigning effective immediately. This news comes at a time when Diebold's prospects for future sales of voting machines in California are up in the air pending the state's certification of its TSx electronic voting machine. Another blow against the company came last week, when the Electronic Frontier Foundation sued North Carolina for certifying voting equipment from Diebold and other manufacturers that failed to meet state certification requirements.
Excerpts from Dave Scott's article in today's Akron Beacon Journal are featured below.
------------
Controversial Diebold Inc. Chairman and Chief Executive Wally O'Dell resigned Monday, only a few days after meeting with the company's board.
A company statement cited personal reasons for the resignation, which took effect immediately.
Thomas W. Swidarski, a rising star in the company recently put in charge of an important restructuring, was named O'Dell's successor. John N. Lauer was named nonexecutive chairman.
Diebold's stock has fallen out of favor as it has dealt with poor results from its voting machine business and disappointing cost-cutting efforts in the automated teller machine division.
Monday's announcement came after the market closed with Diebold shares up 11 cents to $37.73, but down 32.3 percent for the year. The shares reached a high of $57.81 earlier this year.
``The board of directors and Wally mutually agreed that his decision to resign at this time for personal reasons was in the best interest of all parties,'' Lauer said in a news release issued after markets closed Monday.
O'Dell, 60, had been with Diebold since 1999. He was not quoted in the release and was not available for comment. The company did not elaborate on the ``personal reasons.''
-----
On Monday, Swidarski, 46, also was named to the board of directors.
``I will have more to report on our progress and plans for 2006 and beyond during our fourth-quarter and year-end conference call with investors in January,'' Swidarski said in the release. He was unavailable for additional comment.
---
Swidarski joined Diebold in 1996. He held a variety of banking positions before that, including a stint as a senior executive of PNC Bank.
Green-based Diebold went into business in 1859 making bank vaults. Most of its sales these days come from automated teller machines. But much of the attention the company has received recently came from its relatively new business of making election machines.
O'Dell gained national attention when he invited people to a fund-raiser for George Bush with a 2003 letter stating he planned to help ``Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president.''
Critics howled that the maker of voting machines should not be involved in partisan politics. The company has since forbidden its top executives from making political contributions.
The company has been disappointed as legal and technical problems and political issues have prevented boards of election from buying election machines as quickly as first anticipated. The company also announced in October that Hurricane Katrina slowed the sale of ATMs to some Gulf Coast states.
Excerpts from Dave Scott's article in today's Akron Beacon Journal are featured below.
------------
Controversial Diebold Inc. Chairman and Chief Executive Wally O'Dell resigned Monday, only a few days after meeting with the company's board.
A company statement cited personal reasons for the resignation, which took effect immediately.
Thomas W. Swidarski, a rising star in the company recently put in charge of an important restructuring, was named O'Dell's successor. John N. Lauer was named nonexecutive chairman.
Diebold's stock has fallen out of favor as it has dealt with poor results from its voting machine business and disappointing cost-cutting efforts in the automated teller machine division.
Monday's announcement came after the market closed with Diebold shares up 11 cents to $37.73, but down 32.3 percent for the year. The shares reached a high of $57.81 earlier this year.
``The board of directors and Wally mutually agreed that his decision to resign at this time for personal reasons was in the best interest of all parties,'' Lauer said in a news release issued after markets closed Monday.
O'Dell, 60, had been with Diebold since 1999. He was not quoted in the release and was not available for comment. The company did not elaborate on the ``personal reasons.''
-----
On Monday, Swidarski, 46, also was named to the board of directors.
``I will have more to report on our progress and plans for 2006 and beyond during our fourth-quarter and year-end conference call with investors in January,'' Swidarski said in the release. He was unavailable for additional comment.
---
Swidarski joined Diebold in 1996. He held a variety of banking positions before that, including a stint as a senior executive of PNC Bank.
Green-based Diebold went into business in 1859 making bank vaults. Most of its sales these days come from automated teller machines. But much of the attention the company has received recently came from its relatively new business of making election machines.
O'Dell gained national attention when he invited people to a fund-raiser for George Bush with a 2003 letter stating he planned to help ``Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president.''
Critics howled that the maker of voting machines should not be involved in partisan politics. The company has since forbidden its top executives from making political contributions.
The company has been disappointed as legal and technical problems and political issues have prevented boards of election from buying election machines as quickly as first anticipated. The company also announced in October that Hurricane Katrina slowed the sale of ATMs to some Gulf Coast states.
Friday, December 9, 2005
Survey: Internet can help people gain political power
A new survey by the USC/Annenberg Center for the Digital Future finds that a growing number of people in the U.S. are using the Internet to be informed and involved in the political process. Excerpts from Grant Gross' Computerworld article on the survey are featured below.
----------
Just under 40% of U.S. Internet users believe people can increase their political power by going online, up from 27% of Web surfers who thought that when surveyed in 2003, according to an Internet research center.
This year marked the first increase in the percentage of U.S. users who believe the Internet can help people gain political power, said the Annenberg School Center for the Digital Future at the University of Southern California. The center has been conducting surveys on Internet use for five years.
"Print and broadcast forever changed politics," said Jeffrey I. Cole, director of the center. "They certainly made the audience feel more informed, but print and broadcast never made the audience feel more empowered politically."
Until this year's responses, Internet users didn't feel politically empowered either, Cole said. But a number of factors, including the growth of blogs and Democrat Howard Dean's Internet-centric presidential campaign in 2004, seem to have increased the visibility of the Web as a political tool, Cole said during a teleconference.
---
Cole pointed to growth in the number of Internet users who post their own content. This year, 6% of regular Internet users said they have their own blogs, 16% said they post pictures on the Web, and more than 10% maintain their own Web sites. In 2003, 3% of Internet users said they blogged, 11% posted photos, and less than 9% maintained Web sites.
Nearly 14% of Internet users under age 18 said they post their own content, compared with about 6% who did so in 2003. The growth in posting personal content is "reversing 450 years of media trends that was largely one way, from the source to the audience," Cole said.
The survey of people residing in 2,072 U.S. households during early 2005 found more than 60% of Internet users saying they believe the Web can be a tool to learn about the political process. That's up from 53% who said that in 2003. Just under 35% of nonusers agreed. The center defines nonusers as people who access the Internet less than once a month. The survey also found that 41% of Internet users went online to gather information about the 2004 U.S. presidential campaign.
----------
Just under 40% of U.S. Internet users believe people can increase their political power by going online, up from 27% of Web surfers who thought that when surveyed in 2003, according to an Internet research center.
This year marked the first increase in the percentage of U.S. users who believe the Internet can help people gain political power, said the Annenberg School Center for the Digital Future at the University of Southern California. The center has been conducting surveys on Internet use for five years.
"Print and broadcast forever changed politics," said Jeffrey I. Cole, director of the center. "They certainly made the audience feel more informed, but print and broadcast never made the audience feel more empowered politically."
Until this year's responses, Internet users didn't feel politically empowered either, Cole said. But a number of factors, including the growth of blogs and Democrat Howard Dean's Internet-centric presidential campaign in 2004, seem to have increased the visibility of the Web as a political tool, Cole said during a teleconference.
---
Cole pointed to growth in the number of Internet users who post their own content. This year, 6% of regular Internet users said they have their own blogs, 16% said they post pictures on the Web, and more than 10% maintain their own Web sites. In 2003, 3% of Internet users said they blogged, 11% posted photos, and less than 9% maintained Web sites.
Nearly 14% of Internet users under age 18 said they post their own content, compared with about 6% who did so in 2003. The growth in posting personal content is "reversing 450 years of media trends that was largely one way, from the source to the audience," Cole said.
The survey of people residing in 2,072 U.S. households during early 2005 found more than 60% of Internet users saying they believe the Web can be a tool to learn about the political process. That's up from 53% who said that in 2003. Just under 35% of nonusers agreed. The center defines nonusers as people who access the Internet less than once a month. The survey also found that 41% of Internet users went online to gather information about the 2004 U.S. presidential campaign.
Wednesday, December 7, 2005
Court hears Riverside County e-voting recount appeal
I've been offline for the past few days attending the Council on Governmental Ethics Laws' (COGEL) annual conference in Boston. Meanwhile, yesterday in Riverside a state appeals court heard Riverside county supervisorial candidate Linda Soubirous' case involving her request for a recount of the votes from her 2004 contest. Excerpts from Dave Downey's article in the North County Times are featured below.
----------
Lawyers for the county and a candidate who lost a bid for county office clashed in court Tuesday over whether an electronic-vote recount was mishandled.
The hearing ended with state judges saying they would rule shortly in Linda Soubirous' appeal of a 2004 Riverside County Superior Court decision, which found that the county's former elections chief did not abuse her authority when she refused to consult certain information for the recount.
A three-judge panel from the California Court of Appeal, 4th District, has 90 days to issue a decision, and observers said a ruling is likely within 45 days.
Soubirous, a Lake Mathews resident, finished a distant second to Supervisor Bob Buster in a three-way primary race in March 2004 that also featured former Lake Elsinore Mayor Kevin Pape. If Buster had finished with less than 50 percent of the vote, she could have forced a November runoff between the two of them, but Buster finished with just a few dozen votes more than half and avoided the runoff.
Then, Soubirous demanded a recount.
The recount upheld Buster as the winner with a bare majority of votes. Soubirous then filed suit in July of last year, asserting officials did little more than "press the reprint button" when they rechecked ballots cast on electronic touch-screen machines.
Riverside was the first large county in the nation to adopt electronic voting in 2000, when it purchased 4,250 touchscreen machines for $14 million.
Early on, few concerns were expressed about them. As their popularity spread, so did concern that the machines could malfunction or be hacked into. That led California officials to pass a law requiring counties using touch-screens to keep backup paper records of electronic votes starting next year and use them for recounts.
Soubirous' attorney Gregory Luke, however, argued in court Tuesday that the new state law didn't erase all concerns about electronic voting. Luke contended there is still a need for a court to compel Riverside and other counties to consult all relevant backup information to make sure a recount is accurate.
When Soubirous asked former Registrar of Voters Mischelle Townsend to recount votes in the 2004 race with Buster, lawyers asked to see ballot information stored in the touch-screen machines used in the election. But, the county refused and, instead, chose to recount electronic votes solely by consulting the cartridges that recorded people's votes.
Attorney Charles Bell, arguing on behalf of Riverside County, maintained Townsend had wide latitude to decide what information sources to use for the recount.
"What you seem to be suggesting is that this is totally up to the discretion of the registrar," said Justice Jeffrey King, who asked Bell several pointed questions on that subject.
Bell said it would not be a good idea to open up all records because that would subject the county to the scrutiny of anti-electronic-voting groups seeking to find anything wrong with the touch-screen system to advance their cause.
"Is there anything wrong that?" King asked.
At the same time, the justices questioned why Soubirous was still pursuing the case, because the election ended long ago and Buster started his fourth term more than a year ago.
"So what are we going to do? Move Mr. Buster out? Isn't she out of luck?" asked King. "This is something that this court can't remedy. It's just water under the bridge."
Luke countered that his client wasn't looking to boot Buster out, but rather to prevent Riverside County from keeping vital electronic-vote information from people who request recounts in the future.
----------
Lawyers for the county and a candidate who lost a bid for county office clashed in court Tuesday over whether an electronic-vote recount was mishandled.
The hearing ended with state judges saying they would rule shortly in Linda Soubirous' appeal of a 2004 Riverside County Superior Court decision, which found that the county's former elections chief did not abuse her authority when she refused to consult certain information for the recount.
A three-judge panel from the California Court of Appeal, 4th District, has 90 days to issue a decision, and observers said a ruling is likely within 45 days.
Soubirous, a Lake Mathews resident, finished a distant second to Supervisor Bob Buster in a three-way primary race in March 2004 that also featured former Lake Elsinore Mayor Kevin Pape. If Buster had finished with less than 50 percent of the vote, she could have forced a November runoff between the two of them, but Buster finished with just a few dozen votes more than half and avoided the runoff.
Then, Soubirous demanded a recount.
The recount upheld Buster as the winner with a bare majority of votes. Soubirous then filed suit in July of last year, asserting officials did little more than "press the reprint button" when they rechecked ballots cast on electronic touch-screen machines.
Riverside was the first large county in the nation to adopt electronic voting in 2000, when it purchased 4,250 touchscreen machines for $14 million.
Early on, few concerns were expressed about them. As their popularity spread, so did concern that the machines could malfunction or be hacked into. That led California officials to pass a law requiring counties using touch-screens to keep backup paper records of electronic votes starting next year and use them for recounts.
Soubirous' attorney Gregory Luke, however, argued in court Tuesday that the new state law didn't erase all concerns about electronic voting. Luke contended there is still a need for a court to compel Riverside and other counties to consult all relevant backup information to make sure a recount is accurate.
When Soubirous asked former Registrar of Voters Mischelle Townsend to recount votes in the 2004 race with Buster, lawyers asked to see ballot information stored in the touch-screen machines used in the election. But, the county refused and, instead, chose to recount electronic votes solely by consulting the cartridges that recorded people's votes.
Attorney Charles Bell, arguing on behalf of Riverside County, maintained Townsend had wide latitude to decide what information sources to use for the recount.
"What you seem to be suggesting is that this is totally up to the discretion of the registrar," said Justice Jeffrey King, who asked Bell several pointed questions on that subject.
Bell said it would not be a good idea to open up all records because that would subject the county to the scrutiny of anti-electronic-voting groups seeking to find anything wrong with the touch-screen system to advance their cause.
"Is there anything wrong that?" King asked.
At the same time, the justices questioned why Soubirous was still pursuing the case, because the election ended long ago and Buster started his fourth term more than a year ago.
"So what are we going to do? Move Mr. Buster out? Isn't she out of luck?" asked King. "This is something that this court can't remedy. It's just water under the bridge."
Luke countered that his client wasn't looking to boot Buster out, but rather to prevent Riverside County from keeping vital electronic-vote information from people who request recounts in the future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
