Tell EAC to Re-inspect Diebold Voting Systems!

[katinmn]

This action totally sank in DU Activist Headquarters.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=106x25758

VOTING RIGHTS GROUP CALLS ON FEDERAL ELECTION OVERSEERS TO RE-INSPECT ELECTRONIC VOTING SYSTEMS

Demand Follows Rejection of Diebold Election Systems by California, North Carolina, Florida and Missouri Election Officials and Diebold’s Admission of Security Breeches

CHICAGO, IL – (January 2, 2005) – VoteTrustUSA, a national non-profit, non-partisan organization founded by e-voting experts, is calling for the immediate de-certification and re-inspection of all Diebold Elections Systems Inc. software and source code. In an open letter to the federal Elections Assistance Commission which oversees the inspection and certification of voting systems, VoteTrustUSA and a wide range of election integrity organizations across the country also urged the federal body to initiate the re-inspection of other brands of election software, which also may include software that is expressly forbidden by established standards. VoteTrustUSA has also issued an action alert for concerned citizens to email the EAC commissioners, at http://www.congressweb.com/cweb4/index.cfm?orgcode=VTUSA&hotissue=4

Groups co-signing the open letter to the EAC include: Arizona Citizens for FaIr Elections, Broward Verified Voting (Florida), California Election Protection Network, CASE Ohio, Citizens for Election Integrity (Minnesota), Coalition for Peace Action (New Jersey), Coloradans for Voting Integrity, Count the Vote (Georgia), Florida Fair Elections Coalition, GuvWurld (California), Illinois Ballot Integrity Project, Las Vegas Peace & Justice Center (New Mexico), Mercer County Citizens for Better Elections (Pennsylvania), Missourians for Honest Elections, New Yorkers for Verified Voting, North Carolina Coalition for Verifiable Voting, Oregon Voter Rights Coalition, Palm Beach Coalition for Election Reform (Florida), VelvetRevolution.us, Verified Voting New Mexico, VotePA, VotersUnite, and WheresThePaper.org

In December, computer experts in Florida demonstrated that the “electronic ballot box” in Diebold optical scan vote counting systems could undetectably alter the results of an election. Within days, California’s secretary of state reported that the banned software is in use in Diebold’s touch-screen voting system as well. Diebold officials acknowledged that they use “interpreted code” in their AccuBasic software and it may be used elsewhere in their code.

The interpreted code found in Diebold optical scanners and touch screens is prohibited by the Federal Voluntary Voting System Guidelines of 1990 and 2002. The code exploits an insecure feature and presents the opportunity for altering election results. The Federal Election Commission Voting System Standards were written by experts in the field of computer sciences and elections and adopted in 2002.

According to Joan Krawitz, VoteTrust executive director, “The ITA overlooked an obvious violation of federal standards when certifying Diebold voting systems. We have similar concerns that prohibited code may also be found in voting systems produced by Diebold’s competitors.”

“The EAC is on notice that voters will not tolerate violations of federal standards by the Independent Testing Authority, which it oversees. We are requesting that the ITA reinspect all source code and software used in Diebold Optical Scan and Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines to determine the presence of interpreted code.”

VoteTrustUSA is a national coalition and support network for 50 state-based election integrity groups. Their mission is to ensure that future elections are free, fair, accountable and accurately reflect the intentions of the voters. For more information visit VoteTrust at www.VoteTrustUSA.org .

###
Open Letter to the Election Assistance Commission:
http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=646&Itemid=914

[Peace Patriot]

1. There is nothing more important than restoring transparent, verifiable...

...elections. Nothing!

[Peace Patriot]

2. Here's my letter to the EAC. Paragraphs 2 and 3 (*) are mine. The rest

was composed by VoteTrustUSA.org:

Commissioners, Election Assistance Commission and
___________(named Commissioner), ITA Secretariat
United States Election Assistance Commission
1225 New York Avenue N.W. Suite - 1100
Washington, DC 20005

Dear Commissioners and Secretariat:

As a citizen and voter, I am writing to request that the Federal Independent Testing Authority (ITA) who inspected, for federal qualification, the software used on Diebold Optical Scan and Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines be ordered to reinspect all source code, including any code used on memory cards, looking in particular for 'interpreted' code.

*The insecurity, hackability, secrecy, expense and partisan ownership of privately controlled electronic voting systems has become THE scandal of the new century. These non-transparent voting systems have spread like a plague throughout our country since the passage of HAVA, and have been accompanied by the scandals of lavish lobbying, "revolving door" employment, computer breakdowns, highly suspicious results, and obvious vote flipping by the machines and their masters, as happened recently with the Ohio election reform initiatives (predicted 60/40 win, flipped over to a 60/40 loss on election day). And that is not even to mention the Abramoff scandals which are going to be linked to Bob Ney and HAVA.

*You are facing a revolt by the voters who will soon be demanding paper ballots hand-counted at the precinct level--the only voting system, in the current climate, that can be trusted as transparent and verifiable. If you want to retain the expensive electronic systems that you have all profited so well from, you had better act fast to fumigate the EAC and its oversight responsibilities.

'Interpreted' code is expressly banned for use on any voting systems as per the 2002 Federal Election Commission Voting System Standards Volume 1, Section 4.2.2, yet Diebold Elections Systems Inc. has admitted, in California, that they use 'interpreted' code in their AccuBasic software and it may be used elsewhere in their code.

This revelation from Diebold representatives and from documents obtained by "Freedom Of Information Act" from various sources points to a failure on the part of the ITA to use due diligence in their inspection of Diebold source code and software.

It is because of this failure on the part of the ITA and Diebold's revelations that we ask that all Diebold software/source code be reinspected by the ITA. The ITA should then report back whether the software/source code includes any 'interpreted' code and if that is the case, as Diebold has admitted, the EAC must direct that all Diebold software be decertified until such time as they can show that they have removed all such prohibited software.

This action must not stop with the Diebold products alone, as there is ample evidence that other voting systems also contain 'interpreted' code.

It must be made clear that the Voting System Standards were written by experts in the field of computer sciences and elections. The ITA have been tasked with ensuring that the voting machine vendors follow those standards or be denied federal qualification. I demand that the rules be followed by everyone.

Sincerely,

XXXX

-----------------------------------

To write to the EAC, go the following (as per above):
http://www.congressweb.com/cweb4/index.cfm?orgcode=VTUSA&hotissue=4

[katinmn]

3. Great! I think it's important to add some personal comments

But if people lack time, sending the pre-written draft is better than nadda.

edit: P.S. Thanks for the nom. :)