Re: De-certification of Unilect DRE by PA State

From: charlie strauss <cems_at_earthlink_dot_net>
Date: Thu May 19 2005 - 12:32:59 CDT

This is the same unilect machine that lost the voted in north carolina and caused them to redo the nov 2 election at a cost estimated to be 3 million dollars.

Even micheal Shamos thinks they are awful and reccomended the decertification--that says a lot I guess!

http://www.timesonline.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=14489753&BRD=2305&PAG=461&dept_id=478569&rfi=6

After the NC debacle, PA commissioned a study of there machines and did not like the result though no proof of bad things happening was found some rather alarming stats were noted. In particular districits showed 50% higher undervoting than seen on the proevious machines in thiose districts and in the last election there was a 10% undervote rate for president despite record turnout.

My feeling is that people vote differently and may even make more mistakes on serial-ballot order systems. Add to this the NC problem where errors that discarded ballots were not evident to the poll workers and you have a recipie for...well what has happened in PA and NC.

The lesson I think is that human factors matter far more than anyone has realized. Every one is focues on clever methods and security and the bigger factors are reliability and ease of use.

you can read more on this here:
http://www.ncvoter.net/
_______________________________________________
OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to arthur@openvotingconsortium.org
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Tue May 31 23:17:42 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 31 2005 - 23:17:52 CDT