{news} More Voting Problems in Primaries-Electionline Weekly-- June 8, 2006

Thu Jun 8 15:26:39 EDT 2006

listadmin at electionline.org wrote:   From: <listadmin at electionline.org>
To: <greenpartyct at yahoo.com>
Subject: electionline Weekly-- June 8, 2006
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:17:00 -0400

  electionline Weekly - June 8, 2006 
electionline.org 

  I. In Focus This Week

  Omen of Things to Come? 
California primary bedeviled by bumpy 6/6/06 vote
  By M. Mindy Moretti
electionline.org

  SAN DIEGO-The devil was in the details as Californians went to the polls on the sixth day of the sixth month in the sixth year. And though the Armageddon feared by some hexakosioihexekontahexaphobics (and voting advocates) didn't quite materialize, it was still a bumpy day all over the Golden State for voters and election officials.

  In a state with a hodgepodge of voting systems in place, there was a hodgepodge of problems on a day when only around 30 percent of the state's voters cast their ballots:

   In Merced County (ES&S), problems started early with pens used to mark the ballots bleeding through to the opposite side of the ballot.

   In Orange County (Hart InterCivic), there were reports of paper jams in printers and instances of machines not working at all, forcing voters to use paper ballots.

   In Contra Costa County, 35 of the AutoMark machines used for accessibility (5 percent of the total purchased for the county) broke down.

   And in Ventura County (Sequoia) polling places reported problems throughout the day with the machines rejecting ballots.

  Not all of the problems were machine-related though. In San Joaquin County, dozens of poll workers either canceled at the last minute or simply failed to show up Tuesday morning. Deborah Hench, the county's registrar, told the Modesto Bee that in addition to polling places opening late because of the lack of poll workers, she had to use untrained workers which resulted in a lot of troubleshooting for Hench and her staff. And in the "nothing's sacred" category, in Contra Costa County, a poll worker's car - with voting equipment inside - was stolen.

  San Diego voters say good-bye to optical scan
In San Diego County, where a special election in the 50th Congressional district to replace convicted Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R) was held at the same time as the primary, turnout was similarly light, despite the race's perceived status as a bellwether for the fight to control Congress this fall.

  The handful of problems - late polling place openings and incorrect ballots - were also fairly typical for a primary election.

  "Nothing out of the ordinary," Registrar of Voters Mikel Haas told the North County Times. "As far as the voters go, few if any were impacted or inconvenienced as far as we could tell."

  Besides the special election, what made Tuesday's election in San Diego County different was it was the last time voters used optical-scan machines (Diebold AccuVote-OS) before the county completely transitions to DREs (Diebold AccuVote-TSx). 

  Plagued by problems with DRE machines in 2004 - many voter card encoders broke down and there were no paper ballots to replace them - the county switched to optical-scan machines. However, after more problems with optical-scan machines, the county is now preparing to go back to DRE machines but this time with a state-mandated, voter-verified paper trail. 

  With at least one DRE per polling place for accessible voting, Tuesday's election gave poll workers an opportunity to familiarize themselves (or, in some cases re-acquaint themselves) with the Diebold TSx system that two years ago was decertified by then-Secretary of State Kevin Shelley because of security concerns. 

  "This is a good opportunity for us because hopefully it will give us a chance get any kinks worked out before the fall," said a poll worker in Rancho Bernardo who asked not to be identified. "We're giving people the option of using the DREs if there is no one who needs to use it, but honestly most people are sticking with the paper ballots."

  Throughout the county on Tuesday, voters seemed ambivalent about the impending switch to new machines.

  "I'm not really sure what all the fuss is about," said Jim Thorn who had just finished voting in Escondido. "I mean we learned how to color in circles in elementary school and I'm not sure why we can't stick with that."

  At "The Spot," a restaurant in La Jolla, much of the lunchtime conversation focused on the election. The group of weekday regulars stationed at the bar seemed equally divided both in their politics and their thoughts on the new voting equipment.

  "We've definitely had some problems in the past and hopefully once we make the switch to the new machines in the fall, those problems will be over," said Ed Thompson of University City.

  "I don't know, to me it's sort of like throwing the baby out with the bathwater," chimed in Walt Stone. "I don't think the problems we've had in the past are going to go away with new machines, there will just be different problems. I can guarantee you right now that when people go back to the polls in November and they are forced to use the new machines, it's going to be a mess."

  Everyone in the group of friends who had already voted, regardless of their opinions on optical scan versus DRE, all said that when they went to the polls that morning they used the optical scan ballots.

  "This has all just been so chaotic. When they keep changing things around all the time, it's no wonder people don't vote. People really don't like change, even if - and that's a big if - if it's good for them," said Patricia Henson who emphasized her statement by pointing out that everyone at the lunch counter sat in the same seat every day and usually ordered the same food.

  And for Mario Cruz, who works in La Jolla but lives in the eastern part of the county, change is in fact his biggest concern.

  "Honestly, I don't so much care about what sort of machine I vote on, but I do care about where I vote," Cruz said. "They've moved my polling place three times now and honestly, if they move it one block further, I probably won't vote any more."

  II. Election Reform News This Week 

   The new optical-scan voting system in Montgomery, Ala. has the added and perhaps unanticipated advantage of reducing lines at polling places. The Montgomery Advertiser reported that lines in precincts during Tuesday's primary were less than five minutes in some places, representing "a first-time experience on election day." 

   In a related story, South Dakota voters complained that casting ballots on AutoMark hybrid voting systems, which employ a touch-screen interface to assist in filling out optically-scanned ballots, took a lot longer than paper and pencil methods, Keloland.com reported. 

   Termed alternatively in press reports as "glitches," "kinks" or "failures," the Mississippi debut of touch-screen voting machines was plagued with problems no matter how they were defined. Some of the most acute problems were in two counties, where machines were down for nearly half the day, The Clarion Ledger reported. 

   Results from Allegheny County's (Pa.) May primary will be certified this week despite failed efforts to locate more than a dozen missing optical-scan ballots, The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reported. The margin of victory in the closest race exceeds the number of missing ballots, officials said. 

   Security and reliability concerns about the new generation of voting machines have given two companies producing hybrid voting systems "a leg up" in the voting system market, The New York Times reported. AutoMARK machines will be in use this year in more than 30,000 precincts, adding up to sales of more than $100 million, while smaller manufacturer Avante is just beginning to win contracts around the country. (Registration required.)

  III. Opinion This Week

  National: Voting systems; 2004 election
Arizona: Voter ID
Arkansas: Voting systems, primary 
California: Election administration; vote centers
Colorado: Voting systems, primary; II
Iowa: Voting systems
Maryland: Early voting
North Carolina: Early voting, primary
Ohio: Partisan election officials
Pennsylvania: Voting systems, II
Utah: Voting systems
Vermont: Drive-through voting
West Virginia: Voting systems, p! rimary
Wisconsin: Voting systems

(Some sites require registration.)

---------------------------------
    electionline Weekly and electionline.org ALERTS are produced by the staff of electionline.org, a non-partisan, non-advocacy research effort supported by The Pew Charitable Trusts and administered by the University of Richmond. More information about the Project and up-to-the-minute news on election reform throughout ! the week can be found at electionline.org. 
  To unsubscribe from this and future messages from electionline.org, please click here.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20060608/78763c1a/attachment.html>