Justin Moore -  My Writings and Presentations   I am a member of the National Committee for Voting Integrity. In May of 2004 I helped edit and contribute to the written testimony we submitted to the U.S. Election Assistance Committee.   In December of 2004, I gave presentation about software engineering and security (PPT, 452 KB) to a Joint Special Committee of the North Carolina State Assembly. In March of 2005, I gave a presentation (PPT, 100 KB) about software engineering and preliminary statistical results to various citizens' groups. This two-page leaflet provides a short summary of why legislators should support the bills in the North Carolina House and Senate that will reform voting systems and standards. Justin Moore Department of Computer Science D307 Levine Science Research Center Duke University Durham, NC 27708-0129   ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Story that the News missed - paperless voting results in big undervote rate:   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   2004 - North Carolina study shows that Catawba County's switch to paperless voting coincides with jump in undervote rate of  40% - 130% higher than it was in 2000.   Duke University Computer Scientist and E-Voting Critic Justin Moore:   "This is EXACTLY in line with the statistics that the CalTech/MIT study reported back in 2001.   If Catawba County was still using optical scan machines in 2004 and had the same undervote rate as in 2000, Mr. Troxler would have picked up another 500 - 600 votes over Mr. Cobb. While this wouldn't have negated the issue that the number of votes lost by that one machine in Carteret was larger than Mr. Troxler's margin of victory, it means that Mr. Cobb would need to have received over 80% of the lost votes to beat Mr. Troxler. Given this, perhaps Mr. Cobb would have conceded earlier and the state could have avoided a protracted and expensive legal battle.   Also, I noticed that Catawba County is the home county of Senator Allran. The undervote percentage in his contest increased by 2% of the total votes cast (on par with other contests in the above chart).   Senator Allran: if Catawba County was still using optical scan in 2004, it is likely that you would have picked up another 1,200 votes."     2000 results. link  http://www.cs.duke.edu/~justin/voting/dat/2000/CATAWBA.html  2004 results. link  http://www.cs.duke.edu/~justin/voting/dat/2004/CATAWBA.html    ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Analysis of 2004 Election by Justin Moore, fifth-year PhD candidate at Duke Computer Science studying networked systems and a member of the National Committee for Voting Integrity. Graphs with information analyzing the NC 2004 Election Results. The x-axis is what percentage of the final total voted early -- f.x., if 1000 vote early and 3000 vote on election day, the x-axis coordinate is 25 -- and the y-axis is the change between the early voting percent and the final percent. So in Wake County where early voting went to Kerry, 53/47, but election day to Bush 53/47, Kerry will have a -6 and Bush will have a +6. The color of the dot indicates party affiliation:  blue for Democrat, red for Republican, green for Libertarian, black for unaffiliated, orange for non-partisan (such as judges or amendments). The shape of the dot indicates the voting technology used: an empty triangle for paper ballots, an empty circle for optical scan, a filled circle for lever machines, an 'X' for DREs, a filled triangle for punchcards, and an empty square for unknown, or a mix (such as the graph at the state level). http://www.cs.duke.edu/~justin/voting/dat/index.html