R-Gov.: Maryland Not Ready to Hold Elections - D-SoS Lamone Hiding

[Wilms]

R-Gov.: Maryland Not Ready to Hold Elections

By TOM STUCKEY
The Associated Press

Thursday, February 16, 2006; 12:05 AM

ANNAPOLIS, Md. -- Gov. Robert Ehrlich, citing concerns over electronic voting machines and a new early voting law passed by Democrats over his veto, said Wednesday that he no longer has confidence in the state's ability to conduct fair and accurate elections this year.

In a letter to the state election board, Ehrlich said he supports a paper ballot or some kind of paper trail that voters could use to verify that their ballots cast on touchscreen machines were recorded and counted accurately.

snip

Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller, a Democrat, rejected the governor's complaints, saying, "He's trying to create confusion and chaos" before the election.

Miller said he is confident the election results will be fairly and accurately recorded.

snip

Calls Wednesday to Linda Lamone, state elections administrator, and her deputy, Ross Goldstein, were not immediately returned.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/16/AR2006021600005.html

Maryland on the Verge of Major Election Reform

By Kevin Zeese

February 16, 2006

Maryland Illegally Used Uncertified Software in 2004 Election, Misled Media and Continues to Cover for Diebold

Maryland, the staunchest hold-out for paperless voting is about to change. Yesterday, Governor Robert Ehrlich joined the leadership of the Democratic Party to support a voter verified paper ballot saying: I no longer have the in the State Board of Elections' ability to conduct fair and accurate elections in 2006.

At the same time new documents revealed in litigation as well as from California and Pennsylvania show that Maryland illegally used uncertified software in a 2004 election. Further, State Election Administrator Linda Lamone misled the media in July 2004 when she denied allegations that uncertified software was illegally used in the March 2004 primary election. In addition, she is failing to address the current serious security problems with Diebold machines.

Maryland is of national interest because Lamone is the President of the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) and the most vociferous advocate for paperless voting in the United States. John Gideon Information Manager of VoteTrustUSA.org says NASED presently controls all federal voting systems qualifications. They control the panel that reviews the testing results from the Independent Test Authorities and because of that they control who gets qualified and who doesn't. Indeed, unless Maryland passes legislation immediately, it will be the only state to use a statewide paperless Diebold system as Georgia, the other statewide paperless state has announced it is changing its system. The Maryland legislature is currently considering legislation to end paperless voting. Not surprisingly, Lamone is fighting the legislation.

snip

This week when I asked Ms. Lamone and her deputy, Ross Goldstein, whether uncertified software was used in Maryland elections, Mr. Goldstein responded that he could not answer on the advice of counsel. Ms. Lamone remained silent. Governor Ehrlich asked the same question, among others, in his letter yesterday to the Chairman of the Board of Elections and demanded an answer by February 28th.

snip

Brian Hancock, the Independent Testing Authority (ITA) Secretariat at NASED reported that NASED is unaware of any testing of the Maryland TS machines. Calls to Diebold and the ITA Ciber, Inc. went without response.

snip

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=5932

Maryland: Governor Ehrlich's Letter To State Board of Elections

By Maryland Governor Robert Ehrlich

February 15, 2006

The following letter from Maryland Governor Robert Ehrlich to Gilles Burger, Chairman Maryland State Board of Elections was released on February 15, 2006.

Dear Chairman Burger:

As you are aware, there has been widespread national concern about the reliability and security of electronic voting systems. Many states have decertified Diebold voting machines, including those similar to the ones used in Maryland, because certain components were never subjected to federal testing. In light of these recent national decertifications and the Maryland General Assembly’s decision to override my vetoes of bills implementing early voting and allowing voters to cast ballots anywhere in the state, I no longer have confidence in the State Board of Elections’ ability to conduct fair and accurate elections in 2006.

California, Pennsylvania, and dozens of local jurisdictions recently have decertified or denied certification to the Diebold voting machines pending further testing by federal authorities, citing, among other concerns, the potential for manipulation of election results due to the susceptibility to tampering of the vote-counting memory cards. In response, the Independent Testing Authority (ITA) has been reviewing Diebold voting systems and their electronic components for almost two months and has not released any findings. The State Administrator issued a letter to Diebold requesting daily status reports on the testing, but to my knowledge, no information has been shared with the State Board of Elections members, the Administration or the General Assembly about the implications for Maryland with regard to this testing.

It is imperative that I receive accurate information on the potential consequences that these test results may have on Maryland’s ability to conduct fair and accurate elections this year. In discussions with my staff, you have stated that members of the State Board of Elections have not received regular updates on the testing controversy. I believe that it is time for the Board to get aggressive in responding to citizens’ concerns over public confidence in the elections system.

I am also disheartened by the unresponsiveness of the State Administrator to the issue of voter verification. It is my personal belief that the voters of Maryland should be allowed to vote a paper ballot or have a voter verification paper-trail to electronic voting as reassurance to voters that their votes are being accurately cast. Therefore, I had requested that the Commission on the Administration of Elections chaired by George Beall, evaluate the potential for the introduction of this technology in Maryland. The Commission intended to rely on the report commissioned by the State Board of Elections and being compiled by Dr. Donald Norris of UMBC. That report was due to be completed in early December. I am sure that you share my disappointment that Dr. Norris’ report still has not yet been released and that the Beall Commission has been unable to complete its work.

snip/ouch

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=933&Itemid=113

Maryland's Republican Governor Issues Devastating Blow to Diebold!

Calls for Paper Ballots, Decries Lack of Security, 1000% Increase in Maintenance Cost for Diebold Voting System!
In Letter to Election Board, Guv of Diebold's Model State Declares He 'No Longer Has Confidence in Their Ability to Conduct Fair and Accurate Elections'

by Brad

2/16/2006

Maryland was the "model state" for Diebold. It was amongst the first to roll out a near state-wide adoption of the new paperless Diebold DRE (touch-screen) voting machines after the 2000 election.

Diebold plowed millions into advertising campaigns across the state in order to declare the dawn of their new electronic voting age. "It's Here!" screamed billboards on buses, billboards, mall kiosks and television commercials -- "Maryland's Better Way to Vote".

Diebold's dream has become a nightmare for the once-great company.

snip

Some Democrats in the Maryland Senate, however, are critical of Ehrlich who, they point out, had previously blocked efforts to include "voter-verified paper trails" on Maryland's paperless touch-screen machines.

snip

http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002431.htm

[bluestateguy]

1. See

Republicans don't like the electronic voting machines so much when Democrats are in control of state government, including the people who count the votes.

[aintitfunny]

2. I'll take support for verifiable voting

from anywhere I can get it. That being said, however, Bobby Haircut seems so concerned now that it is too late to accomplish anything in time for the '06 elections. This is an election year ploy, in the end there will be no money in the budget for this under his watch. The Democrats in the state legislature are the ones who will see this through. He had previously rejected taking action when there was time to get something in place by the upcoming election.

His grandstanding support at this late date, will serve to bring it to the attention of many more people.

[Wilms]

3. Thanks for the analysis.

While posting the story I read he had previously rejected VVPAT.

Maybe he's just a slow learner.

-on edit-

LBN Discussion

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x438754

[kster]

4. K&R..nt