Re: Sequoia Test Group

From: Arthur Keller <voting_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Mon Jun 12 2006 - 12:12:04 CDT

At 10:41 AM -0600 6/12/06, Kathy Dopp wrote:
>On 6/12/06,
><mailto:ovc-discuss-request@listman.sonic.net>ovc-discuss-request@listman.sonic.net
><<mailto:ovc-discuss-request@listman.sonic.net>
>ovc-discuss-request@listman.sonic.net> wrote:
>
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 02:06:37 EDT
>From: <mailto:SomeThoughts@aol.com>SomeThoughts@aol.com
>
>On June 8, the Alameda County, CA, voted to purchase voting systems from
>Sequoia, with one condition, that the system undergo security
>vulnerability tests.
>This is a first, and the first time that Sequoia will ever be subjected to
>red team testing.
>
>
>
>Arthur and Jim,
>
>Are you aware of the statistically highly improbable vote counts
>from Sequoia DREs in the 2004 November election in NV, NM, and WA?
>
>NM - the extremely high under-vote rate where anyone who voted
>straight party ticket for any party other than the Republican party,
>allegedly took the extra step to remove their vote for the
>presidential candidate and a few other key races. Plus exit poll
>disparities well outside the MOE. (Warren Stewart & Ellen Theisen
>as well as NEDA analyzed them)
>
>NV - Exit poll disparities and other evidence (The Rolling Stones
>article by RFK speaks of them.)
>
>WA - Paul Lehto's analysis of vote counts in Snohomish County showed
>highly statistically improbable pattern of Sequoia vote counts
>compared to the mail in paper ballots which were all verified in the
>8 month long Governor's race.
>
>It seems rather incomprehensible that anyone would consider
>replacing Diebolds with Sequoias!
>
>Kathy Dopp

Thanks, Kathy, for your message. They want to go primarily with a
paper ballot system with precinct-based optical scan. Alameda County
has chosen Sequoia as the vendor for that system, and therefore also
for the DRE's (with paper trail).

The other alternative they were considering was Diebold (comparable
arrangement). An alternative bid was from ES&S including the
Automark, an all paper ballot with precinct optical scan and
Automark's for accessibility. What are the reports on the ES&S
precinct-based optical scan systems? I'm wondering if they are
really a better alternative. In general, the activists spoke for the
all ES&S option, including myself.

Best regards,
Arthur

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424

_______________________________________________
OVC-discuss mailing list
OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss

==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Fri Jun 30 23:17:04 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Jun 30 2006 - 23:17:12 CDT