Two weeks ago, Northampton County Council voted to delay the $2.9 million purchase of a new voting system mandated by the state. It;s called Express Vote XL, and the vote was delayed at the suggestion of Council member John Cusick. He wants to see how well the system works in Delaware. As a result of this delay, there was no scheduled discussion. It happened anyway. Earlier in the day, a clarion call went out to Democrats. So a procession of speakers blasted one system they don't understand in favor of another system they don't understand. Now, County Council wants to hear from the three Elections Commission members who voted to recommend this purchase.
Three of last night's speakers had just spoken at the last meeting, but wanted to be heard again. A fourth speaker claimed to be an election judge who was never notified when systems were available for review. This will be news to the 40 elections judges who attended a day-long presentation of the different systems in March, and with no remuneration. They once again attended the March Elections Comm'n meeting at which the Express Vote XL system was chosen, and with no compensation.
There were complaints about flipping, which is a reversal of how a person actually voted. That flipping did occur, but not with ExressVote XL. It occurred with the Clear Ballot system over which they all gushed.
The guy who claimed to be an elections judge went on to tell Council that he knows them all and respects them. Right after that, he hinted they were all on the take. He also argued that ExpressVote XL is the system Republicans want. It was the choice of Executive Lamont McClure, who happens to be a Democrat.
It was also the overwhelming choice of elections judges, but their vote was discounted.
Tara Zrinski suggested that Council invite the elections Commission members who voted for ExpressVoteXL.
I'd invite the elections judges, who can explain better than anyone why they prefer this system over the choice of partisans who have deluded themselves into thinking something is amiss.
Today's one-liner: "The shortest way to the distinguishing excellence of any writer is through his hostile critics." Richard LeGallienne
Local Government TV
▼
Friday, May 03, 2019
25 comments:
You own views are appreciated, especially if they differ from mine. But remember, commenting is a privilege, not a right. I will delete personal attacks or off-topic remarks at my discretion. Comments that play into the tribalism that has consumed this nation will be declined. So will comments alleging voter fraud unless backed up by concrete evidence. If you attack someone personally, I expect you to identify yourself. I will delete criticisms of my comment policy, vulgarities, cut-and-paste jobs from other sources and any suggestion of violence towards anyone. I will also delete sweeping generalizations about mainstream parties or ideologies, i.e. identity politics. My decisions on these matters are made on a case by case basis, and may be affected by my mood that day, my access to the blog at the time the comment was made or other information that isn’t readily apparent.
Thank God for Tara Zirinski!
ReplyDeleteThe same 4 people? The same misinformation, but TZ demands that we listen to the tinfoil hat people?
ReplyDeleteThank you for making the Democrats look foolish, again
ReplyDeleteToo much Tone Policing. I thought Zrinski was into philosophy. Has she never heard the Principle of Charity?
ReplyDeleteThere is something missing here. Whose job and responsibility is it to purchase the new voting machines. Is it the Election Board, is it McClure, or is it Council. I am totally confused. I don't think Council did any of their home work on the issue. I think McClure is a control freak, and It appears the election board is divided amongst party lines. Bend over taxpayer.
ReplyDeleteThree branches of government out of control.
This all seems very fishy. Let's spend more tax dollars analyzing this. We know how this ends. The answer is to hold numerous additional meetings and eventually spend more money. See, this government business is quite easy. A trained (albeit dishonest) ape can do this.
ReplyDeleteTHE RUSSIANS ARE COMING FOR OUR ELECTIONS!
ReplyDelete@ 8:13
ReplyDeleteIt is the Elections Commission
This entire conversation is only from a tiny fraction of people who all sit in the same office and make stuff up.
Why wont council shut down this sideshow? I can see how the lunatics got to Tarah- she'll do anything to appease the Muncey-bots, but how'd they infiltrate the Republicans? Anyone that folds every time a handful of nut jobs show up to a meeting claiming the sky is falling, isn't fit to hold office.
ReplyDeleteWho are these people?? Do they even live in Northampton County??
ReplyDeleteThe Clear Ballot System is a paper based system; how can the vote flip on a paper ballot?
ReplyDeleteAs I understand, it was happening during the scanning process. Certification had to be halted. The reality is that every system, including paper, is flawed.
ReplyDeleteNorthampton County is considering the Touchscreen XL voting machine by ES&S.
ReplyDelete1 - The link below is to a paper by some of the foremost authorities in voting machines, esteemed professors who "invented" the auditing procedures that are the gold standard of ensuring accurate elections. In this paper, the specifically mention the machine the NorCo is considering effectively saying it's the worst. Other than the vendor who wants to make billions of dollars from this machine, I am not aware of any large group disputing a single sentence in this paper:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3375755
2 - The link below is to the vendor’s sale material for the machine NorCo is considering. Look at the first photo and note the long, narrow glass window on the right-hand side of the machine: Under that glass are the tiny little barcode you must verify (yes, you must verify barcodes) if you want to accurately cast your vote:
https://www.essvote.com/products/expressvote-xl/
3 - The clear majority of experts (data security, cyber security, election integrity, voter access, etc.) all favor paper ballot based systems. The clear majority also specifically reject the machine (the Touchscreen XL) that Northampton County is considering. Keep in mind Lehigh County already rejected this machine.
(to be continued due to length)
Lorenzo Marinelli
4 – I am not peaking against this machine due to tinfoil hat conspiracy theories, nor partisan reasons, nor fear of technology. Rather, this system put an entirely unnecessary layer of complexity between the voter and their actual vote. It is the very people that are most into technology, the very people (including myself) who make their living due to technological savvy, that are strongly against the Touchscreen XL.
ReplyDeleteThe Touchscreen XL truly does not record YOUR VOTE. This machine takes your vote input via a touchscreen and then prints out BARCODES to represent your vote on this odd "VOTER SUMMARY" paper that is displayed under a glass plate . . . and to cast your vote you MUST VERIFY THE BARCODES and click the touchscreen before the machine then sucks these printed barcodes away and scans them. At no point can you ever be certain that the candidate you selected on the touchscreen is the candidate that the machine will scan to actually count your vote.
Why add that layer of uncertainty (and other) to elections?
Is it possible the convoluted process with the Touchscreen XL will work right every time? Maybe. Can it go wrong? Sure. Will this oddball method of voting mean long lines on election day and people not being able to vote? Likely, I’d say. Is it more likely for a complicated machine like the XL than simpler alternatives to be hacked, or tampered with, set up wrong, or breakdown? Of course.
Paper ballot systems are safer, faster, and do not require this double-effort voting. Paper-based voting eliminates many extra layers of complication and failure. If an election were tampered with, full paper ballots are the only way to recreate the election. Even if every single ballot was printed differently, paper ballots could still be recounted. Whereas the Touchscreen XL only prints what the vendor themselves calls a "vote summary" with barcodes that store your actual vote, so it cannot be reliably recounted by hand. It does not print the full text of your ballot. Why not? How can us mere humans be certain the barcodes match our vote? Why are we considering spending millions to make voting harder and less reliable?
The Election Commission did not unanimously approve this machine (it was a 3 to 2 vote), and in fact there are oddities such as one of the Commission members allegedly only being on-boarded shortly before voting on this machine, and the vendor managing to get the more expensive system (the XL) here for review but not getting their cheaper system here because of a snowstorm. Time should be taken to explore this better.
And while I am not accusing anyone on the Northampton County side of any impropriety, the manufacturer of the Touchscreen XL has been found complicit in bribes and such in the past, so to act as if that fact alone is not worrisome is irresponsible - why should we trust a vendor that has been proven untrustworthy?
Both Dems and Repubs are already guilty of using the 2016 election in dangerous ways to sew fear and doubt, so imagine what will happen with a voting machine that is the most confusing, complicated, and documented-untrustworthy system available?
I've never before heard the argument made so forcefully that we simply must accept any recommendation without dissent (if that were the case, this blog would have little content). Nor have I seen so much deference to the minority opinion: The argument seems to be that Warren County, NJ used this same machine for a ~300 person vote, and that a small school board election in Maryland is also going to use this machine in May. Those two tests are hardly a large sample size, but even so: Why are we giving such weight to those and discounting the many other counties passing on the Touchscreen XL, the thousands of industry professionals sounding the alarm? If Warren County using this machine means "sure, let's buy it", why doesn't Lehigh County rejecting this machine get treated with equal concern? There are far more people against this machine than for it.
Lorenzo Marinelli
I watched the video, Lorenzo. Christ all these people attacking each other. What a mess. Not only did speakers attack the council and McClure then McClure went on his own rant. Hope council can think straight with all these babies.
ReplyDeleteIn democrat's controlled areas it is a hacked equipment purchase to Garner votes that are right turned left.
ReplyDeleteSounds like this company may have a cozy relationship with someone? It is fun to see the democrats attacking each other. That is one thing they do well. All that anger, love it.
ReplyDeleteTo Anonymous who said "I watched the video, Lorenzo. Christ all these people attacking each other."
ReplyDeleteYes, there was certainly some political theater on both sides, mainly from two people. But I'll grant that they both have put considerable decades of their lives into the public / political arena so they have somewhat "earned it" if you will. Still, to the rest of us it comes across a bit silly.
But if we can't rely that our votes are counted right, then we can't vote in people we prefer more!
I want to stress to everyone that I have not seen, heard, nor felt that there has been anything nefarious with the process the County has taken so far and that I do respect both sides, though there are aspects that do not seem to have been explored. I do strongly feel the overcomplicating of the XL system is at best going to be a huge headache and lead to long lines and tons of confusion, at worst it is dangerous.
Paper ballot systems are still very automated. You fill in a ballot by hand and then you stick it into a scanner (which can instantly read your vote and pop it back out if there is an error you made). But instead of sitting in front of a complicated machine after waiting in a long line, you can take your time with your ballot at one of multiple cheaper privacy stations and then quickly pop it into a fast scanner.
Yes, there are room for malfunctions, etc. with scanning of paper ballots, but these scanners are faster, cheaper, and easier to maintain and protect than the XL, as well as having been used billions of times (the XL is essentially untested). The XL has all the same drawbacks as a scanner (it literally has a scanner built in) while also adding lots more complications and a non-human readable "vote summary". So we don't gain anything, we just add complication, cost, longer lines, etc.
Why over complicate things: to get the "fun" of a touchscreen, to have to do twice as much work, and to lose the ability verify our own vote?
And last but not least, there is a Federal bill working through their paces now that would make the XL system illegal. Paper-based systems are immune to this possibility.
Thanks.
Lorenzo Marinelli
You are welcome. Thank you for the information. Did not hear this from the county bosses.
ReplyDeleteIt was interesting.The Administration was mad and you could tell. They were whispering loudly and being disrespectful. A few council people seemed bored. The one lady looked mad and messed with her phone. The moderator was fair. I wonder what the executive has on some of these people? Are they afraid of him?
ReplyDeleteThank you Lorenzo Marinelli. Sensible, reasoned, civil and issue oriented comments. Did I wake up in the past?
ReplyDeleteThe issue now is are we committed to buy new machines ? Three days ago something might evan change our obligation to purchase.
ReplyDeleteThe vendor as well as thefatory assemblers are all adding the lefts software programs. This is so they can pander the Russian Collusion narratives all over again til 2024!
ReplyDeleteGlad no one listens to the fake news that edits out truths as to make there stories stick.
It seems the only credible information is coming from the paper ballot people. Why is the Admisntration stubbornly pushing the electronic machines? They can't explain why they are better. Also the Dertinger special secretary thy put in charge of machines is not as qualified as the other experts. Supposedly she has a failed baking business. Why did they not allow other systems to be checked out? Many questions.
ReplyDeleteInstead of answering these questions they just attack.
From the final sentence of the original post:
ReplyDelete"...partisans who have deluded themselves into thinking something is amiss."
No string of words on this blog has ever described the modern democratic party better.