|
Edited on Thu Jul-14-05 01:07 PM by Bill Bored
3% MMRAs (I was told they would go to 5% but someone dropped the ball!)
Op Scans and DREs are treated basically the same. Notice the use of the phrase "machine or system" throughout the law. Op Scans are referred to as "systems", and DREs are referred to as "machines." So Op Scan VVPBs would be randomly audited too. I'm not sure if "system" also refers to tabulators, but it would be nice.
Only telephone connections would be allowed, no Internet and no wireless. Someone dropped the ball on this too. Originally, there were NO connections allowed!
The Dems are the ones who wanted there to be at least some standards for the machines. It's debatable whether the standards are adequate, but the Repukes wanted none of them.
The most important provisions in my view are these, which I think have been in both the Dem and Repub versions for some time:
MMRAs mentioned above
Full-face ballot. This means the DREs can not require paging or scrolling from one race to another. The whole ballot must be displayed at one time. I think this is a good thing because it makes it harder to program the machines to switch votes.
You want a full hand count? Any BoE can order one in their jurisdiction. (It might cost you though, unless the election was very close.)
The BoE won't order the hand count? Contest the election in court and a judge can order one.
You want to see source code? Contest the election in court and a judge can order an expert inspection. The code is kept in escrow and remains secret until then, but at least it's possible to have it examined at some point.
This law is far from perfect, but at least it gives the candidates and their election lawyers some recourse if they can show evidence that the outcome of a race may be in question. In a way, the relatively weak auditing in the law and the proprietary nature of the machines themselves already provides such evidence. All one would have to do is show that there is a mathematical possibility that the outcome is wrong. This is not that hard to do under the circumstances, unless you have a landslide that could be verified with only a 3% random audit.
So it will all depend on the candidates desire to stand up for the voters' and their own rights to have a verified election. Not the worst possible situation, but then look at how Kerry handled Ohio. :(
A lot is also left up to the state BoE, but at least they are truly bi-partisan and the courts can overrule them to get full hand counts, etc. if they don't play ball. We don't have a partisan SoS or any of that BS overseeing our elections the way FL and OH do.
And yes, we are still fighting for Op Scan and VVPBs instead of DREs and VVPATs! To help, New Yorkers should go to nyvv.org and contact Bo Lipari or better yet, their local county or NYC BoE. The choice has been left up to the individual counties.
You can also go to your county or NYC legislators, because they are the ones who will have to PAY for the DREs, which in many cases cost a lot more than Op Scans. HAVA only pays $4,000 per precinct! It's an unfunded mandate. The states have to pay the difference.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
