The Dieboldizing of Our ElectionsIn Los Angeles County Ms McCormack has been staying the course towards recommending and implementing an all electronic voting system since she arrived here a decade ago. It is still underway. Prior to Los Angeles, she was Registrar in San Diego - and before that in Texas.
Los Angeles County currently has over 4 Million voters , certainly not an easy feat considering 4500 precincts and numerous different races, districts and Cities. However, automation and convenience for the registrar should not come at the expense of openness and verifiability of each vote cast.
I was under the impression that the InkaVote system was pretty decent. The switch from a punch card system in 2003 was rather smooth for the voter as it is in principle the same little box with holes where you slide your paper ballot precisely to match the numbers. The only difference is the little pen. It does not poke a hole, it creates a dot on the bubbles. This switch cost the county 3 Million. I still get my receipt. Fair enough.
Meanwhile,
elsewhere the controversy and problems of DRE's were raging and continues to this day.
According to various correspondences from Ms. McCormack to the County Supervisors, it is clear that she has wanted to install DRE's - the InkaVote is an interim solution. I believe that our County Supervisors have done a fairly good job of fending off the electronification of our end user voting system so far. The compromise, it seems, is to go slow and do this in phases.
Ms McCormack has consistently objected bills introduced in the State and urged County Supervisors to oppose bills that called to ban or require VVPAT DRE's. In April of 2004, in preparation of the 2004 elections the letter to the supervisors states:
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT YOUR BOARD:
1. Approve the recommended position of OPPOSE regarding SB 530, SB 1723
and SB 1438.The reasoning behind this opposition she says is that the Board has approved the touchscreen machines contract in 2002, (Diebold) of course her recommendation. The DRE acquisition at a cost to the county of 107 Million towards HAVA compliance, according to another letter. She cites the touchscreen systems to be the only units allowing the disabled to vote privately and unassisted and minorities can view the ballot in their language of choice.
Touchscreen early voting was installed in 2000 - hmmm the infamous 2000 Presidential elections. She cites not only the disabled and minorities but other voters, according to her survey of ten's of thousands of voters preferred the DRE's over the paper based systems. No attachments to support this statement is provided.
We can additionally glean from her comments that she was certainly no friend of our later ousted Secretary of State Mr. Kevin Shelley.
This measure would have the effect of ending the County’s touchscreen early
voting program until such time as system modifications are developed, tested
and certified by federal and state authorities that would produce the specified
AVVPAT.
This bill would, in effect, put into statute a directive previously promulgated by
California’s Secretary of State in November 2003 that requires:
· “…beginning July 1, 2005, no county or city may purchase a touch screen
voting system that does not include an accessible voter verified paper
audit trail (VVPAT” and that
· “As of July 2006, all touch screen voting systems used in California,
regardless of when they were purchased, must have a VVPAT that can be
used by all voters, including the visually impaired…”
Now the DRE's and InkaVote or whatever system is the end-user part of the entire voting system, and therefore the most visible. The controversies
elsewhere gave Angelenos voting on InkaVote, like myself, a false sense of assurance.
Unbeknown to me other "improvements' were long under way.
Los Angeles County, based on Ms. McCormack's recommendation dumped the IBM voter registration system that was in place since the 1970's citing maintenance costs per voter. The new VIMS, (Voter Information Management System) is a proprietary software which was installed in 1998. Interestingly this is a sole source no bid 5 year contract with a vendor, Data Information Management Systems.
The company currently services more voters than any other voter registration company in the United States, supporting information for more than 14 million votersDIMS's software is being used according to the references below for 55% of voters in California as well as in Cuyahoga, Ohio and Michigan. In early 2003 Diebold has acquired this company. Red Flag? Diebold as of 2003 has had control of 14 Million voter registrations. The electronic poll books - those, too are DIMS inventions, a wholly owned subsidiary of Diebold.
These counties had a whole year and some to "improve" their voter registration database leading up to the 2004 Presidential elections. I wonder what caused the "glitch" or discrepancy of total registered voters reported by Ms. McCormack on October 18, 2004 to the SOS of 3,972,738 to the version of 3,901,106 upon certification of the election results? The purge of registered voters constitutes 70,000 people.
http://web.mit.edu/mit-rnr/www/lists/announce.w3archive/200301/msg00006.htmlbocc.cuyahogacounty.us/GSC/pdf/ elections/CERP_Final_Report_20060720.pdf
www.michigan.gov/documents/ Diebold_Cost_Detail_89491_7.pdf
Further, a bigger concern is silently brewing in an inaccessible room at the County Registrar's headquarters in Norwalk. It is the vote tabulation system. It was not long ago that citizen observers were refused entry to observe the computers tabulating the results by Ms McCormack. While it is true that starring at practically a box would not enlighten anyone as to the comings and goings inside that darn thing.
However, here are highlights from Ms McCormack's communication titled " Approve Sole Source Agreement with Data Information Management Systems for Continuation of Existing System Maintenance and Support Services of The County's Voter Information Management System", dated January 30, 2007.
Ms McCormack now has the authority to extend the contract at her or her designates sole discretion. (previously having to seek approval from the Board)
starting on page 76 of 132: Excerpts
Contractor shall provide Voter Information Management System (VIMS or System)
Software, Interfaces, and related support and maintenance services to accomplish all of
the Tasks and subtasks set forth in the Agreement and in this SOW. Such services
shall include the following:
(1) Provide onsite support and maintenance services for VIMS.
(2) Develop, test, and implement software modifications and System enhancements to
comply with requirements imposed by state, and federal statutes.
(3) Provide Interfaces to systems identified by County to automate and facilitate
information exchange.
(4) Conduct training for database administration staff and end user whenever County
requests such training.
(5) Develop both database-administration and end-user documentation whenever a new
feature or function is implemented.
TASK 1 - SUPPORT AND MAINTENANCE SERVICES
TASK 2 - SYSTEM INTERFACE PROGRAMMING AND EXECUTION
TASK 3 - WIDE AREA NETWORK ACCESS PLAN
TASK 4 - CUSTOM PROGRAMMING MODIFICATIONS
Contractor shall use the standard RR/CC software set forth below when preparing
Deliverables. Contractor shall provide Deliverables in a file format importable to the
standard RR/CC software. RR/CC standard software is as follows:
•Microsoft Word 2000 - Word Processing
•Microsoft Excel 2000 - Spreadsheet
•Microsoft PowerPoint 2000 - Project Presentations
•Microsoft Access 2000 - Database Manager
•Visio Version 2000 - Illustrations, Flowcharts, and Drawings
•Microsoft Project 2000 - Project Manager
Contractor shall provide the analysis, design, development, testing, installation and
installation testing, of software that will provide the Interfaces between VIMS and
external systems identified by County.Subtask 2.1 -Define and Develop Interface Software for Automated Ballot Layout
(ABL) SystemThe Automated Ballot Layout (hereinafter "ABL") System consists of processes that
define ballot styles, vote recorder assembly sequences, and political contest rules and
descriptions. The ABL System programmatically produces the layout of official and
sample ballot pages. The ABL System is currently hosted on a mainframe and the
County is transitioning to Windows/Intel. A transaction process that shall send and
receive data to and from the ABL System and VIMS in the same format and the same
frequency as the existing interface process or a future process defined by County shall
be developed by the Contractor. Contractor shall also build and document processing
logic and map transaction files to RR/CC’s existing interface or future files.
Subtask 2.2 - Define and Develop Interface Software for Candidate and Measure
Filing SystemThe Candidate and Measure Filing System currently executes
on a Hewlett-Packard minicomputer platform and County intends to replace it with a
Windows/Intel based system. A transaction process that shall send and receive data to
and from Candidate and Measure Filing System and VIMS shall be in a format identified
and approved by County.
Subtask 2.3 - Define and Develop Interface Software for Election Tally System
(ETS)The Election Tally System (ETS) programmatically tallies election results for an election.
The current ETS operates on a networked Intel client workstation platform using an
internally developed tally system called “InkaVote”. The County intends to replace it
with a vendor developed system. A transaction process that shall send and receive data
to and from ETS to VIMS in the same format and the same frequency as the existing
interface process or a future process identified by County shall be defined and
developed by Contractor.
Subtask 2.4 - Define and Develop Interface Software for both the interim and
permanent Statewide Voter DatabaseThe CALVOTER System is the state of California's interim Statewide Voter Registration
Database. The CALVOTER System executes on computers located in Sacramento. A
transaction process that shall send and receive data to and from the CALVOTER
System and any future Statewide Voter Registration System administered and
maintained by the California Secretary of State shall be developed and implemented by
the contractor.
TASK 3 - WIDE AREA NETWORK ACCESS PLAN SPECIFICATIONSContractor shall, upon County’s request, submit a written report that contains
specifications for a wide area network (hereinafter "WAN") including but not limited to
(1) hardware requirements (2) software requirements (3) telecommunications
requirements (4) routing protocols required (5) recommended network design and
(6) network conceptual design. The written specifications shall make recommendations
to meet the requirements listed below.
Contractor’s written recommendations must include capability for a WAN such that: (1)
Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk branch offices shall have full access to VIMS and (2)
all of the City Clerks of Los Angeles County shall have limited access to VIMS. The
WAN for the City Clerks shall allow for:
A. Capability to access the voter file, but not to edit the voter file.
B. Capability to access the full absentee voter system.
C. Capability to check signatures and an internal tracker so that the cities in Los
Angeles County may be billed for signature look up but not for simply viewing
voter files.
D. Capability to exchange polls and officers information.
E. Capability to send voter updates to the County system tied to automatically
generated letter to voter to confirm.
F. Capability to add and access multilingual voter information.
G. Capability to add city/municipal voting history to individual voter files.
H. Capability to use electronic mail to flow documents or files to/from County
system.
This contract extending now for 5 years with this wholly owned subsidiary of Diebold is a done deal.
No matter what legislation is introduced, a private vendor controls our entire election system. The so called safe guards at every point is a waste of breath and effort. The only guardian to oversee the technology in this case of Los Angeles County is in the hands of one person at the County Project Director.
In a letter to the appointed interim CA SOS McPherson supporting Diebold to be certified for use as accurate and secure, the following county Registrars have signed this letter on November 17, 2005:
William E Schultz, El Dorado County
Victor E. Salazar, Fresno County
Carolyn CRnich, Humbolt County
Ann K. Barnett, Kern County
Theresa Nagel, Lassen County
Conny B McCormack, Los Angeles County
Michael Smith, Marin County
Marsha A Wharff, Mendocino County
Kathleen Williams, Plumas County
Colleen Baker, Siskiyou County
Deborah Hench, San Joaquin County
Julie Rodewald, San Luis Obispo County
Mikel Hass, San Diego County
Hiley R. Wallis, Tulare County
Elaine Zimmel (? - can't read handwriting), Alameda County
A question to all these counties: do you use VIMS, too?
All this at a cost of hundreds of Millions of taxpayer dollars - is it worth it? For Diebold a resounding YES.
All members welcome and encouraged to participate.Please post Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News on this thread.
If you can:
1. Post stories and announcements you find on the web.
2. Re-post stories and announcements you find on DU, providing a link to the original thread with thanks to the Original Poster, too.
3. If you have information from an election reform activist organization outside of DU feel free to post (local or national)
4. Start a discussion thread by re-posting a story you see on this thread.
5. Election related sources
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph ...
6. If you want to know how to post "News Banners" or other images, go here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/faq.html#im ...