Former voter may have found problems with machines other then Diebold

[MSgt213]

Hi. After reading your article--A Stolen Election?--I am inclined to share my experience with you.

I witnessed my wife's attempts to vote for Kerry in precinct 1196, St. Edwards Church, Palm Beach FL 33480. She pushed Kerry at least 3 times, each time a Bush vote displayed. anxiously called me over and I suggested that she not push so hard on the screen, and push DIRECTLY on the X for Kerry and it worked. The summary at end stated a Kerry vote. My machine gave no problems. We voted early, to go answer phones for the PB county Democratic HQ.

During my stint on PB Dems phones, I answered 2 calls from poll watchers, relating to VOTER COMPLAINTS: "I Push the Kerry button, and get a Bush vote." After the first one, I called the Kerry lawyer pool, and their response was "seems to be happening everywhere," "poll workers have a procedure to take offending machine off line, and re-calibrate it." the 2nd call, I relayed the information to "demand a re calibration."

After thinking about this problem (with 40 years of computer programming experience), I thought about how to debug a program, REQUIRING RECALIBRATION enough to make it a STANDARD PROCEDURE. Then the thought came to me that it may not be a BUG, but a "DESIGN FEATURE" as we euphemistically call some in the trade. This was a Sequoia machine, not a (Republican-run) Diebold. If your touch-screen routine was designed to properly execute when pushed lightly in the DESIGNATED SPOT, it would be certifiable. If it was pushed elsewhere or TOO HARD, what would the program do? Perhaps skew to a "preferred candidate"? Based on proximity to the DESIGNATED SPOT. Perhaps this was calculated on a pixel basis, and maybe the size of the finger/footprint. What happens when one pushes farther along the longer "Kerry" name versus the shorter "Bush" name? Is the touch-screen map parametrically hard-coded in pixel ranges, or with a (calculated, possibly volatile) bitmap, which could be modified by a bug in a clock routine? Or some other routine, unrelated to voting such as Windows scheduler, or the touch interrupt?

http://www.davidcorn.com/

[aprillcm]

1. I know its not the same...

But when I waited tables we had a touch screen system and it was not as sensitive as these voting machines seem to be, are you telling we can not provide voters with the same reliable equipment the local IHOP uses to run the Restaurant?? WOW.

[kcwayne]

2. I think the point is it is reliable

and designe to skew the vote... reliably

[aquart]

3. Exactly.

[aprillcm]

4. I should have stated I was being a smart ass :(

I was being a smart butt about this, Republicans think we are stupid! I am sick of the Media and the Republican Party thinking that the American People are stupid, even if 58 million are the rest of us including little tiny babies are not stupid or blind. I hate it for the Republicans that some people actually pay attention.

[hedda_foil]

5. Diebold is just the best known because Bev found their files.

Sequoia and ES&S software can do the job just as well. They're all disastrously riggable, both in the voting machine programming and in the even more dangerous central tabulating software at the County elections office.

[Straight Shooter]

6. Sequoia gave its machines away free to swing states

Check this out, it's a Nov. 8, 2004, BuzzFlash reader contribution:

"I’m a lawyer researching Sequoia Electronic Voting systems used in Washington state. They are also used in the swing state of Nevada (in all counties) thanks to federal grants.

In August of 2004 Sequoia wanted to get its software into the Reno area (Washoe County Board of Commissioners). How much do you think it costs to license their software for voting purposes? $30,000 a year, plus an annual adjustment for increased costs and inflation EXCEPT THAT THE FIRST FOUR YEARS ARE FREE. That’s right, free."

more ... http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/04/11/con04490.html