|
Guilford County Voting Machine Politics
New: George Gilbert proposes Rube Goldberg Style voting system for Guiford County.
The threat of paperless verification systems is now rearing its head
once again in North Carolina.
Last year, it was the VoteHERE device being pushed by Guilford County NC Election Director
George Gilbert, anti paper activist. http://www.blackboxvoting.com/s9/index.php?/archives/8-Thwarting-democracy-in-Guilford-County.html
This year, Gilbert tries a fresh approach - the Ted Selker audio verification
system.
Friday, December 15, 2006 Printers failed on voting machines
"...Gilbert says the problems with paper argue for a move to other backup technology,
such as a system that uses sound to independently record a voter's choice...."
http://www.news-record.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061215/NEWSREC0101/61215003/-1/NEWSREC0201
Ted Selker recommends an audio verification system he has invented .
The NC State Board of Elections LOVES Ted Selker, aka "Mr. Gadget"
Last year the NC State Board of Elections got a pilot program
for independent verification to be tested in volunteer counties,
slipped into our law in 05, as a test.
The test of alternative or paperless verification systems,
aka the "Rube Goldberg Voting System" -
We still have many obstacles:
Election officials who love paperless voting, who respect the Election Center,
the EAC, and election officials like Linda Lamone. These entities,
have never seen a bad idea for Elections that they didn't just love.
And they are the Fox in the Henhouse
If we do not make paperless voting ILLEGAL, then we will lose our ground.
NIST, when recommending "software independent" (SI) systems, didn't say PAPER.
IF they meant that voting systems must have a voter verified paper BALLOT,
they would have said so.
Instead, NIST left the door open to paperless verification systems.
Here is the Voting System that George Gilbert and BOE members Picked For You
Courtesy of Plead The First Blog
Also see A Loss and a win in Guilford by David Allen
This is what the paper ballot looks like: 
Director of Elections,George Gilbert's long battle against Voter Verified Paper Ballots
-
Gilbert has fought VVPB legislation at the federal and state level,
-
Gilbert tried to amend S 223 to allow "paperless verification",
-
Gilbert's choice of voting systems most expensive, least suitable
-
Gilbert changes story to media frequently about purchase cost of voting systems,
-
Gilbert cited incorrectly that optical scan voting costs more than touchscreen voting,
-
Gilbert follows the Election Center talking points that paperless voting is safe
8/11/2005 Gilbert tells House Election Law committee that ballot on a reel is a horrible idea, pulls such a reel from a bag and sets the reel on the table. Gilbet also displays the VOTEHere device marketed by Jim Adler, fellow SAAFE member. This is a "paperless verification system" that makes a secondary digital recording of the ballot image. Gilbert says lawmakers should use this instead of Voter Verified Paper Ballots.
* Justin Moore, computer scientist speaks up that he opposes this type of ballot as well, and that instead
he recommended the optical scan ballot.
8/09/2005 Around this week,Gilbert asked Rep Pricey Harrison to amend the law, S 223 to allow non paper verification systems, in other words, evading the voter verified paper ballot requirement. He calls it the "Fail Safe" amendment.
12/20/2004 Testimony of George Gilbert, to the NC Legislature in opposition to Voter Verified Paper Ballots. On Behalf of the NC Association of Directors of Election before the Joint Select Committee on Electronic Voting Systems.http://www.ncleg.net/committees/jointselectcomm_/december202004m_/georgegilbertpr/default.htm
4/26/2004 Gilbert joined a Coalition called S.A.A.F.E. in signing a letter to US Congress opposing federal legislation that would require voter verified paper ballots (4/26/2004). Others signing the letter include Jim Adler, who sells "paperless verification systems", Ted Selker, a MIT computer scientists developing another paperless verification system, and Michelle Townsend, former registrar for Riverside County, California, who left her position under a cloud of suspicion and disgrace. http://www.electiontech.org/downloads/SAAFE-Prop%5B1%5D.pdf
Gilbert is a member of the Election Center, and also is on the "Election Center National Task Force on Election Reform". The Election Center is a non profit that claims to educate and inform election officials, yet it accepts large donations from voting machine companies. Further the EC endorses paperless voting. See our Election Center Page http://www.ncvoter.net/ElectionCenter.html
Gilbert changes cost estimate frequently and by the $ Millions --
Which can you believe?
Op-ed in the Greensboro N&R not available online, but see Ed Cone's blog on Gilbert's Feb 4, 2005 op/ed. Article http://radio.weblogs.com/0107946/2005/02/04.html
01/19/2005 Gilbert says cost $10 Million Article http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=13776238&BRD=1332&PAG=461&dept_id=414366&rfi=8
11/23/2004 Gilbert says cost $3.4 Million Assoc Press Article http://www.verifiedvotingfoundation.org/article.php?id=5342
Guilford County Board of Elections Members - (not listed at Guilford BOE)
Bruce E. Davis, Chairman
Paul Gibson, Vice Chairman
Melvin L. Skip Alston
Steve Arnold
Kay Cashion
Carolyn Q. Coleman
Kirk Perkins
Linda O. Shaw
Dr. Trudy Wade
Mike Winstead, Jr.
Billy Yow
Guilford County Lost Votes, Found Votes and Machine Malfunctions from 2000-2004:
2000 36 Lost votes. NBC 17 Article http://www.nbc17.com/politics/3937982/detail.html
2003 354 Lost votes.. where the bond was the only item on the ballot cast 354 blank ballots. Article http://www.votersunite.org/article.asp?id=1155
2004. 22,000 votes mistabulated. In Guilford County, ES&S early voting machines had capacity problems, which affected anywhere from 6,000 to 20,000 ballots. Voters Unite article http://www.votersunite.org/article.asp?id=3719
Gilbert's Choice for Guilford County is a $7 Million Waste of Taxpayer Dollars
Optical Scan + ballot marking device for Guilford County cost $ 0.00
- State grant will pay total cost of approx $ 2,000,000
- Meets state, federal law
- Meets disabled requirements
- 48 NC counties already use optical scan
- Disabled find this most user friendly
Touch-screens - would cost Guilford County $ 9,000,000
- County will pay $7,000,000 more than state grant
- Not required by state or federal law
- Does not meet most disabled requirements
- Uses ballot on a reel, violates secrecy of vote
- 20% failure rate in live test of ballot on reel this July in California
- Aug 11, 05 Guilford Co Election Director George Gilbert tells legislature this is horrible solution
DREs cost more to own and operate: In 2004, Guilford County's Board of Elections spent $114,436 more than Wake County's BOE, yet has 170,692 less registered voters! See cost comparison of Guilford County to Durham, Wake and Mecklenburg http://www.ncvoter.net/affordable.html
Ballot on reel touch-screens 20% failure rate, systems crash, printer jams http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=96&Itemid=30
Guilford Precinct info: Guilford has 159 precincts and 11 one stop sites. Guilford County could have all new equipment for under $2 Million (completely paid for by state grant) and meet the HAVA requirements which it currently does not do.
Reduce undervotes. 2004 - North Carolina study indicating that optical scan machines (using paper ballots) are more accurate than DREs (paperless voting machines, votes are only stored digitally) : Article http://www.cs.duke.edu/~justin/voting/totals.html
Guilford County currently uses the most expensive method to pay for voting machines -- by "Capital Lease Expense" for years 1998 through 2004. Guilford County could save nearly $1/2 Million a year buy using the state grant to purchase optical scan systems, and quit leasing voting machines. See the lease purchase expense history:
.................................1998-1999.....1999-2000... 2000-2001.... 2001-2002... 2002-2003.... 2003-2004
Capital Lease Exp............$165,714.....$173,085..... $396,917...... $477,463...... $466,322...... $486,958
Verify Guilford Expenditures in pdf format  (right click on file, select "open in new window") __________________________________________________________________________________________________
Duke University Computer Scientist rebutts George Gilbert's testimony to the NC Legislature. See - Response to Testimony of George Gilbert December 20, 2004
Justin Moore January 20, 2005 1 Introduction The goal ...
http://www.cs.duke.edu/~justin/voting/rebut-gilbert/rebut.pdf
|
Gilbert says it would take about 15 minutes to recount one paper ballot by hand. Gilbert's scenario: in the 2004 general election in Guilford County, NC, where 201,757 ballots were cast. The projected 673 people counting for eight hours a day for two weeks at a cost of more than $700,000 (more than double the cost of the election) is likely a best case scenario.
Assuming Gilbert means two 5 day weeks, then this amounts to counting 4 ballots per hour number of ballots number of counters nr of ballots per counter nr of hours ballots per hour
201,757 673 300 80 4
Assuming Gilbert means two 7 day weeks, then this amounts to counting 3 ballots per hour
11/18/2004. Gilbert seems to have more trouble than most in handling paper ballots - Discovery of more ballots.Guilford County election workers found 93 ballots Tuesday that had been cast in the Nov. 2 election but never counted, adding another twist to the recount and protest of the county commissioner race between Trudy Wade and John Parks. Greensboro News-Record Article
Confidence in Guilford County Elections -- Intro: If you went to the polls in Guilford County, your vote was recorded by an electronic voting machine, but no paper ballot was generated in the process. ...The lack of a paper trail raises questions about the potential for fraud, accountability and trust in the electoral process. More by Ed Cone article |
|
