By Brad Friedman from St. Louis, MO…
ED NOTE: Story now updated with additional information and statement from Secretary of State Debra Bowen.
“ES&S sold nearly 1,000 voting machines in California without telling the counties that bought them that they had never been certified for use in this state,” CA Secretary of State Debra Bowen announced in a statement released moments ago. (Complete statement now posted at end of article).
“Given that each machine costs about $5,000, it appears ES&S has taken $5 million out of the pockets of several California counties, that were simply trying to follow the law and equip their polling places with certified voting machines.”
“Not only did ES&S sell machines to California counties that weren’t state certified, it’s clear the machines weren’t even federally certified when the company delivered them to California,†Bowen continued in the no-holds-barred statement. “While ES&S may not like California law, I expect the company to follow the law and not trample over it by selling uncertified voting equipment in this state.”
She went on to add that she intends “to go after the company for the full $9.72 million in penalties allowable by law, along with the original $5 million the company took from counties’ pockets.”
She ain’t kidding! ES&S, the country’s largest distributor of voting machines, looks to be in a lot of trouble in California.
Earlier we reported that a public notice from the CA Secretary of State’s office was posted this morning by Thad Hall of CalTech announcing that the company “has violated” CA Elections Code by modifying “hundreds of units of a version of the AutoMARK ballot marking device” without certification or permission of the Secretary of State…
The notice (now posted at the CA SoS site [PDF] as well) goes on to announce a hearing that will be held in Sacramento on September 20th to determine the penalties that ES&S may face, including a $10,000 fine per violation, complete refund of the price of the “compromised voting system, whether or not the voting system has been used in an election,” full decertification of the system, and prohibition from doing business in the state.
The penalties could mirror those brought against the Diebold voting machine company back in 2004 when then-Secretary of State Kevin Shelley discovered the company had secretly installed uncertified updates to their voting systems in several counties just before the primary elections that year. The Diebold systems in question were decertified at the time, and Diebold faced financial penalties.
Here’s how the notice from current CA SoS Debra Bowen describes the severe penalties that ES&S may be facing, as shall be determined at the hearing next month, for their illegal modifications under section 19213 of the CA Election Law…
(2) Immediate commencement of decertification proceedings for the voting system in question.
(3) Prohibiting the manufacturer or vendor of a voting system from doing any elections-related business in the state for one, two, or three years.
(4) Refund of all moneys paid by a locality for a compromised voting system, whether or not the voting system has been used in an election.
(5) Any other remedial actions authorized by law to prevent unjust enrichment of the offending party.
ES&S failed to participate in Bowen’s recent “Top-to-Bottom Review” of all certified voting systems in the state, as the company refused to turn over the requisite source code and other materials in time for the study. Now, perhaps, we know why it was unwilling to do so.
As The BRAD BLOG reported several weeks ago, there were also questions about the InkaVote Plus system as distributed by ES&S for use in Los Angeles County. At the time, it was reported that the source code ES&S eventually turned over — some three months too late to be used in the “Top-to-Bottom Review” — for that system did not seem to match the version stored in escrow under state law.
The question of vendors using different software from that which has been placed in escrow raises notable concerns about the effectiveness of similar such “escrow laws” for e-voting software around the country, and currently being considered by the U.S. Congress.
While the InkaVote system has, for the time being, been decertified [PDF] for use in the country’s most populous county, the issue of whether the source code in escrow was a different version remained “unresolved” as of several weeks ago when we asked Bowen herself about it.
If the earlier reports are verified as accurate, and it’s shown that ES&S also used uncertified software in Los Angeles County, the company may face similar penalties for their uncertified use of that system.
UPDATE: The statement released this afternoon from SoS Bowen follows in full below…
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 21, 2007
Contact: Nicole Winger (916) 653-6575
Equipment To California Counties?
Secretary of State Bowen Sets Hearing to Investigate Company
SACRAMENTO – Secretary of State Debra Bowen today announced she has set a public hearing for September 20, 2007, to examine whether Election Systems & Software, Inc. (ES&S) sold uncertified voting machines to as many as five California counties.
“ES&S sold nearly 1,000 voting machines in California without telling the counties that bought them that they had never been certified for use in this state,†said Secretary Bowen, the state’s chief elections officer. “Given that each machine costs about $5,000, it appears ES&S has taken $5 million out of the pockets of several California counties that were simply trying to follow the law and equip their polling places with certified voting machines.â€
The ES&S AutoMARK Version 1.0, also known as Phase One or Model A100, is an electronic ballot-marking device that the Secretary of State certified for use in California in August 2005. According to information provided by the counties to the Secretary of State, 14 counties (Amador, Calaveras, Colusa, Contra Costa, Marin, Merced, Sacramento, San Francisco, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Siskiyou, Solano, Stanislaus and Tuolumne) use the AutoMARK to comply with the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) requirement to provide at least one machine in each polling place so voters with disabilities can cast ballots independently.
However, according to information obtained by Secretary Bowen, ES&S sold AutoMARK Version 1.1, also known as Phase Two or Model A200, to five of those counties (San Francisco, Colusa, Marin, Merced and Solano) in 2006. ES&S had never submitted Phase Two, a version that is substantially different from the state-certified AutoMARK Phase One, to the California Secretary of State for certification. Furthermore, ES&S delivered hundreds of AutoMARK Phase Two machines to California counties months before the model’s August 2006 federal certification.
“Not only did ES&S sell machines to California counties that weren’t state certified, it’s clear the machines weren’t even federally certified when the company delivered them to California,†Bowen continued. “While ES&S may not like California law, I expect the company to follow the law and not trample over it by selling uncertified voting equipment in this state.â€
Under California law, no voting system or part of a voting system can be used in the state until it has been certified by the Secretary of State. Vendors also are required to get the Secretary’s approval of any changes to a certified voting system. If the Secretary of State determines a certified voting system has been modified without such approval, she can ask a court or an administrative law judge to impose any of a number of penalties. The Secretary of State is required to hold a public hearing – and give 30 days advance notice – before formally asking for penalties to be imposed on the vendor.
“If ES&S has broken the law and misled counties into buying nearly 1,000 uncertified machines, I intend to go after the company for the full $9.72 million in penalties allowable by law, along with the original $5 million the company took from counties’ pockets,†concluded Bowen.
According to information ES&S provided to the Secretary of State, it sold 972 of its uncertified Phase Two machines to:
California law authorizes the Secretary of State to pursue the following penalties against a voting system manufacturer for making any unauthorized change in the hardware, software or firmware of a certified or conditionally certified system:
The public hearing regarding ES&S will be held on September 20, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. in the auditorium of the Secretary of State’s office in Sacramento. The hearing notice is posted here [PDF].
This is good news. Keep after them SoS Bowen – no flip flopping cave-ins like your predecessor!
I’ve been thinking that if there was ever a suitable application for open source software, this is it.
Has an open source alternative been proposed? I had a conversation with a good programmer I know and we agreed one could build something based on open source software and a relatively low budget that could handle the national volume of votes pretty easily, that would also be (relatively) secure / voter verified after the fact…
Thanks as always for your effort Brad.
It’s probably too late for ES&S to spin off its e-voting section into a wholly-disowned subsidiary called BS&S, right?
Even in the scanning of paper ballots open source code does not solve the fatal flaws in e-voting… and I believe trying to ramp up for it now will only prolong the current agony.
The public does need to know exactly what software is running on these e-voting machines… but that’s damage control– it’s not a solution.
As for any implicit faith that the problems in e-voting “must be solvable”…
https://bradblog.com/?p=4973#comment-250836
… that’s one of the problems. Let us know when you
have a solution 🙂
(Hint: a few computer scientists will be very surprised if you have a transparent solution that uses current technology.)
Public oversight of the whole process, is another issue that must be addressed. No “secret” counting or “secret” code not available to the public!!!
http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=120&topic_id=3589
California Secretary of State Bowen decertified Touch Screens (DRE) and mandated a complete audit for counties with Optical Scanners. This analysis
shows that the largest vote discrepancies were in DRE counties.
Bush’s recorded CA vote share increased by 2.9% over 2000 while the Kerry share increased by 0.9% over Gore. Assuming no voter defection, this implies that Bush won 76% of returning Nader voters. But this is clearly impossible since the National Exit Poll reported that 71% of Nader voters switched to Kerry, 21% to Bush and 8% to Other.
ELECTION CALCULATOR
2004 Recorded
Kerry Bush Other
6.75 5.51 0.14
54.4% 44.5% 1.1%
Exit Poll (WPE)
59.9% 38.9% 1.2%
2004 Calculated
Kerry Bush Other
7.49 5.09 0.19
58.7% 39.9% 1.5%
Exit Poll
59.9% 38.9% 1.2%
This is really going to stick in the craw of Steven Weir since this is what he uses in Contra Costa County. For those of you who don’t know, Mr. Weir is the head of the CACEO and has been the main RoV type that is fighting Bowen.
Can Bradblog find out more about the escrowed code not matching and if the code was checked on any of the other vendors and if not, will it be checked? If not, why not?
It would be great if we could get an answer from the SoS’s office on this.
Thanks for all the work you do!
Can we dump electronic voting machines and get back to paper and a pencil now please!
Yeah, no damn computerized machines AT ALL. If it’s a computer, it can be hacked and manipulated.
A Democratic Secretary of State makes all the difference in the world. It was proven last year here in Missouri. Work hard for all Dem. Secretary’s of State. Thank God for this lady in California and may she stay safe. And thanks for coming to St. Louis, Brad and for all your excellent work!
Ricky? Rick Simon? Where are ya, buddy? We miss you and your diarrheic lies. I bet you could use a hug right about now, huh?
California law goes beyond stating that an unapproved voting system may not be used. The law states that: (19201(b)) No jurisdiction may purchase or contract for a voting system, in whole or in part, unless it has received the approval of the Secretary of State.
ES & S has perpetuated fraud upon the counties. Not only should all monies expended for the illegal voting systems be refunded to the counties, but also punitive damages be sought. Such a sale was conducted knowingly and intentionally. The Secretary’s approval was conditioned, and most county contracts would include, a provision that the voting systems being supplied met the requirements of all laws.
It will be interesting to see if the counties involved will continue to defend the indefensible.
{Censored by 99, a Buddhist.}
I agree 100% with Big Dan, but this is good news.
It’s great to see Deborah going after these crooks!
{gone…}
YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYES!!!!!!!!
*doing the Snoopy Dance*
Let Jerry Brown loose on them … “that’s what I’m talkin’ about.”
Somebody delete the hate monger’s post #12 and #14.
Get lost hate monger, and don’t come back. Your mind is a crime.
I love Jews … and Arabs … and Americans … and Canadians … and Iraqi’s … and Iranians … and bloggers 🙂 … and etc. … hate sucks.
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
… {racist} said on 8/21/2007 @ 4:22 pm PT…
{Quote of racist comment was here… sorry, dear, dear turkie, but what’s the sense in deleting his comment if someone else just quotes him? His message gets out then. love, 99}
——-
What galaxy is this dude from,.. well at least he can keep on message,.. not wander and deviate to brown-shirt territory. NOT
The code word: REPULSIVE
Today is historic, but is merely a skirmish in a long war that has only just begun. All of us must now mobilize our friends and neighbors to call and lobby our Boards of Supes, as well as the ROV’s, to either get with democracy or step aside, and admit how dismally they have betrayed us. We must especially go after Stephen Weir(Contra Costa) and Conny McCormack LA) who have been the most vehement in their attacks on Bowen.
This all makes me wonder if this will affect the move by Repugs to change the awarding of electoral votes. Could it be that those counties that are supposedly so Repuglican really aren’t, but have been manipulated to appear that way by the voting machine companies? Maybe CA is still the great bastion of liberal Democrats/Independents it has always been and shouldn’t be changed to reflect some new supposedly Repug rising wave. Don’t fall for it CA! Don’t put it up for consideration the way Repugs led you by the nose into the “recall” sham! That had KKKarl’s fingerprints all over it. The celebrity nature of it all was just frosting on the cake and took away concerns about the true reasons for it. I have seriously doubted that ol’ Schwarzie really was elected all along. And I will never forget that revealing speech by the author of it all, Rep. Issa, where he was crying crocodile tears when he had to concede to the Gropinator as the party choice. He really must have thought it would be him. None of them seem to realize that there is no honor among thieves.
To the comment about there being no way to have open source codes with the current technology – I believe I read (probably here) that Australia has a very affordable, open source code system that is trusted by all. Am I wrong about this? I’ll check further. If so, then let’s adopt their system or go back to paper ballots with the whole process conducted by and overseen by people chosen in non-partisan lotteries for every election. That includes the printing companies, as we’ve now seen that private companies also rigged that aspect of the elections by using different weight paper stock and running the lines below the approved standard to insure the votes could/would not be machine countable, and perhaps NEVER counted. The depths to which these people will go seems unfathomable.
Brad, however this stupendous wrong is righted, I hope that those running it have you involved in every phase of it. Without you, Bev Harris, Greg Palast and others we would still be in the dark about this huge threat to our democracy. Thank you…a million times, thank you!
… Sue asked…
“To the comment about there being no way to have open source codes with the current technology”
You misunderstood me. You could indeed use open source code on the current machines, and it would undoubtedly perform better than the corporate mess that’s in there now…
… but…
… you would still not have solved the fatal flaws of e-voting and the machines would be just as vulnerable as under corporate code in the areas that matter.
As for Australia’s wonderful e-voting system… it ain’t.
Nope. For the vast majority of Australian citizens it’s still paper ballots.
The stories about Oz’s ubiquitous e-voting system have been growing in the telling as people among other countries swapped the tale… especially after Wired ran an article praising it… but it just ain’t so.
Australia has been experimenting with e-voting since 2000 and yet for some reason full-on deployment is still not “just around the corner”… and that’s far short of being “fully implemented and trusted by everyone”. Indeed the experiments have been limited to fewer than 10 locations up till now.
In fact the next trial will be at the Federal Elections this year, will only involve 29 locations out of 7700+ polling places across the entire nation… and use will be limited to…
… take a guess…
… that’s right…
… the visualy disabled.
(… the zapkitty wonders what is it about having his retinas shredded that made him guinea pig #1 for these damn machines…)
Australia, like most of the rest of the world, lagged behind us in e-voting and has thus avoided some of the stupider decisions the US had rammed down its throat by our oligarchy-in-the-making… but they haven’t solved the e-voting paradoxes either and right now they’re looking at the precipice the U.S. just sailed over….
… and chances are they’ve stopped congratulating each other on being smarter than the Yanks long enough to realize there’s still something very wrong with the picture they’re in…
(Not a slam at the Aussies… they were smarter than we were in this.)
The smell of election results being tampered with has the smell of a KKKarl rove ploy written all over it – yes indeed.
Tamper with the “Blue State” (California) votes and the way they are divided and apportioned during a presidential election,.. but leaving the winner takes all electoral system intact in the “Red States” (Big voting blocks of the State of Texas and Florida for starts) to give the Republican Party the upper hand in a national election.
The effort to get this issue on the California ballot as a Proposition has the filthy, grimy, fascist fingerprints of KKKarl rove all over it.
—-
GOP Power grab Scheme in California Could Swing 2008 Election If It’s Not Stopped
By Barbara Boxer, HuffingtonPost.com. Posted August 20, 2007.
Just when it seemed like the Democrats had a good chance of taking the White House, along comes a cynical power grab by GOP operatives to divvy up California’s electoral votes based on the number of congressional districts each candidate wins.
Just when you thought it was safe to start thinking about having a Democrat in the White House, along comes a cynical power grab by Republican operatives. And unfortunately, it’s happening right here in my own state of California.
If you haven’t heard already, Republican strategists recently announced plans to begin raising money for a dangerous initiative that would radically change the way California apportions our electoral votes in presidential elections.
Rather than awarding all of California’s electoral votes to the candidate that wins the popular vote — the way it works in every single state except the small states of Maine and Nebraska — their scheme would divvy up California’s electoral votes based on the number of congressional districts each candidate wins.
What does this mean? Well, if the last few elections are any guide, rather than the Democratic nominee winning all 55 of California’s electoral votes in 2008, this new partisan scheme could hand 20 of California’s electoral votes to the Republican candidate and only 35 to the Democrat.
Don’t get me wrong: After the 2000 and 2004 election debacles, I’m a strong advocate for election reform. But it’s absolutely wrong for California to go it alone. It’s just patently unfair for a large “blue” state like California to change our system for awarding electoral votes while other large states which trend “red” like Texas and Florida don’t change their system at the same time.
This isn’t reform — this is a partisan power grab by Republican operatives in the Karl Rove tradition.
Source/link to remainder of above article,..
http://alternet.org/story/60165/
Brad,
Yes a million, billion, zillion times – Thank You for all you do to save our DEMOCRACY. The research and in-depth investigations you do to bring these issues to the forefront and keep us posted – your like a thousand angels from heaven coming to the rescue.
For those who read and keep posted at the Green Blog to the status of our derailed democracy and what we can do to get things back on track – remember this Paul Revere endeavor is a costly proposition for Mr. Friedman – a 1/2 a “C – Note” or a full “C – Note” in the tip jar would keep this excellent investigative reporting coming and the feet of the ANTI-DEMOCRACY crowd,.. their feet would remain in the blazing fire.
Election 2008 is rapidly approaching. KKKarl rove did not clear his schedule so he can play more golf. Anticipate Mr. rove will be going election dirty trickster ploys – big time – but in 2008 – off the radar screen of scrutiny, and far more covert.
Don’t give a Neo-con fascist like KKKarl and his brown-shirt operatives a free pass – he needs a pit-bull for democracy like Brad Friedman constantly nipping at his ankles where ever he goes, what ever he does as rove attempts to subvert democracy and revamp America to the benefit of the robber baron corporatist and the ultra rich elite.
If we don’t make the effort to save democracy, stop the KKKarl rove’s and financially support/backup the Brad Friedman’s – they will steal America right from under our noses and substitute it with a fascist/police state to the sole advantage/benefit of only the financially – very well to do.
The quest to save democracy is not free but costly,.. that is all part and parcel to the plan of the power brokers as they gluttonously grab a larger and larger piece of the total pie.
Progressive Troll # 9—– Thank God for Dem SOS Debra Bowen in Ca. …. Sure agree with you on that. Our Ohio SOS Jennifer Brunner is also a Dem , and she won’t do anything about Blackwell trashing over 60% of the 04 ballots the court ordered him to save ! Somethings up with the Dems on these corrupted elections. They SHOULD be kicking and screaming. After 06 they can’t be called sore losers right ?
Who says democrats are weak?! Debra Bowen is SuperWoman!
Brad, on the video you linked us to with Rather narrating, the one that interviewd employees of the company that produced the hanging chads ballots, it was stated somewhere in the video that the price paid for each of these machines was $3000. Now I’m reading $5000. That’s a proportionately significant difference. Do you or anyone else actually know how much we all paid for these machines? I’d like to know, and I’ll bet others would, too.
Linda –
It’s a bit different in each and every state and county depending on the deal they made. Some were even given the machines for free. Like heroine in the schoolyard…
Our Democratic election process has been compromised, and is now dead. Don’t kid yourself into thinking nothing is wrong.
Thank you Ms. Bowen!
here’s one for all you dems that can’t see the light of day…Hillary Clinton has acquired a near-lock on the Democratic establishment in the nation’s capital…it’s called peak oil, and if you want to know which way the fascism blows all you have to do is follow the money.
Peak Oil
Thank you for pursuing these companies that cheat and lie about their voting machines. This corruption in our society has got to stop.