March 13, 2009

ACT NOW to protect Maryland Elections!

Maryland Legislators are seriously considering eliminating funding for
paper ballot voting systems. Not only is that wrong for elections, it's
money wasted.

If you have already sent a message to lawmakers, thank you, please send
another message today!

Make yourself heard once more. And if you have not sent a message urging
lawmakers to keep us moving away from the touch screens, now is the time
to act. Please take just a moment help to educate lawmakers about the
costs of keeping the touch screens. Visit our action center to send a
message to your lawmakers and to key members of the leadership.

Reminder--please use your own words, elected officials and staff tend to
discount several emails with the same comments. You can reword the
sample message (already loaded at the website) or pick and choose from
points (below).

TAKE ACTION BY CLICKING HERE:
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/199/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26869

Legislators have received cost estimates that do not include the
maintenance costs of the touch screens, even though those are some of
the highest costs of the state's current, unverifiable system of voting.

The state's current touch screen voting systems cannot prove their
accuracy, and do not allow meaningful recount. Please take action today
to make sure that the 2010 elections in Maryland are verifiable:

TAKE ACTION BY CLICKING HERE:
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/199/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26869

Thank you for all you do.

Best regards,

The Team at Verified Voting

Some talking points:
My research and discussions with election integrity activists and others
suggest the following:

Legislation passed unanimously in 2007 and the Governor's budget
provided the means and funding to purchase Optical Scan and other voting
equipment sufficient to transition to paper-ballot voting for all
Marylanders, including those with special access needs.

The planned transition to optically scanned paper ballots will save
Maryland the most money in the mid to long term, but apparently requires
amending the 2007 legislation to grant flexibility to election boards so
they can purchase reliable, secure, effective and appropriate--although
not necessarily federally certified--voter assistance equipment.

Enacting Del. Hixson's HB 893 (with Senate companion legislation) offers
to fully address concerns about accessibility, and would save Maryland
the most money in the mid and long terms.

Enacting Del. Cardin's HB 738 as currently drafted would implement a
"mixed machine" solution which is preferable to delaying implementation
of Optical Scan machines, but could be improved by an amendment allowing
implementation of reliable, secure, effective and appropriate--although
not necessarily federally certified--voter assistance equipment.

Delaying the transition to paper ballots and optical scans would cost
Maryland the most money due to higher ongoing expenses for elections in
the near, mid and long term--and continue unverifiable, highly
vulnerable voting--an outcome which is untenable for several reasons
discussed below.

Fewer machines means lower costs: The Optical Scanning machines each
replace approximately 10 touch screen DRE machines. This is because
approximately 10 voters may mark ballots at voting stations
simultaneously, and then feed their ballots into the Optical Scan
readers--requiring only 1 or 2 machines per precinct. The touch screen
DRE machines require one machine per voter. Therefore, Maryland needs to
buy, store, maintain, transport, etc. ten times more touch screen
machines than optical scan machines.

Touch screen DRE machines suffer from degradation similar to laptop
computers--they wear out quickly, require hardware and software patches
and upgrades, etc. which incur added expenses and may void their
certifications. (Note: This places into context concerns about new
equipment specifically the delay or lack of federal certification.

Maryland has been using problematic and potentially out-of-certification
technology because of vulnerabilities and other flaws in the touch
screen systems. Attorney General Gansler brought civil action against
vendors in an attempt to recover ongoing costs to maintain and remedy
these vulnerabilities.

We have an obligation to accommodate voters with special needs. Some
voters who are currently able to vote on require another person or
additional equipment to assist them, but there aren't any certified
voter assistance systems yet. The certification process is slow. Some
argue the state should purchase such equipment in anticipation of
certification.

Purchasing voter assistance equipment to facilitate voting by those with
special needs as well as the optical scan equipment this year would
deliver the greatest savings and best outcomes for all voters over the
mid and long term, because voter assistance equipment could ease
implementation of other reforms including early voting and voting by
Maryland citizens who speak English as a second language. This approach
would provide the least expensive implementation of paper ballot based
voting for all Marylanders in time for the 2010 cycle.

Paper ballot-based voting is the only reliable, verifiable form of
voting. Their operation is opaque to voters, election officials and
others, and they have well-established hardware and other
vulnerabilities, making widespread errors or even intentional "vote
flipping" possible. There is no tangible record of the ballots cast,
making audits, recounts etc. impossible. As noted, known and likely to
emerge vulnerabilities in touchscreen DRE machines call into question
the transparency, accuracy and legitimacy of elections. Any approach
which depends on use of any such touchscreen DRE machines remains
problematic for these reasons.

We support HB 893 the Hixson/Dyson/Carter Conway attempt to reconcile
the 2007 legislation with current conditions to allow for purchase of
optical scan and tested (although not necessarily federally certified)
voter assistance equipment which would facilitate voting by special
needs voters, ease implementation of early voting as well as voting by
Maryland citizens who speak English as a second language. This approach
would provide the least expensive implementation of paper ballot based
voting for all Marylanders in time for the 2010 cycle, and save the
state $millions over the short, mid and long terms.

We support the Cardin approach HB 738--hopefully with amendments, and if
not, with reservations. Using both Optical Scan and touchscreen DRE
machines machines in 2010 as a temporary transitional measure, with the
goal of complete transition to paper-based, verifiable voting by 2012
(once voter assistance machinery is federally certified) is better than
delaying the transition to paper-based voting past 2010. We can accept
HB 738--preferably if amended to allow for full implementation of
paper-based voting for all Maryland voters in time for the 2010 election
cycle. Such amendment(s) would address concerns in the 2007 legislation,
and allow the purchase and implementation of reliable, secure, effective
and appropriate--although not necessarily federally certified--voter
assistance equipment.

No comments: