Lever Look-a-Like: Mahvelous in Northampton County Primary

Last November, we were lucky in Northampton County. We got away with using "Ol' Faithful," our 267 lever machines, in the municipal elections. Not only did the county save a fortune in leasing costs, but more importantly, the election itself was flawless.

But for federal elections conducted last week, we used the look-a-likes - 300 Advantage D-10 voting machines, supplied by Sequoia Voting Systems. These touch screen voting machines are almost identical in appearance to those lever machines.

So how did that work out?

Last night, Director of Administration John Conklin told council members that the word he received from election judges was "fantastic." The only objection noted by council members was a need for more machines. Ron Angle reported a shortage in eight different slate belt voting districts. Peg Ferraro added that there was a "thirty to forty minute wait" at a Bushkill Township precinct.

Northampton County Voting Machine Demonstrations

After February 21, the Sequoia Voting Systems lever look-a-like voting machine will be on display at two locations:

1) Voter Registration Office, 670 Wolf Avenue, Easton, PA.

2) Northampton County Courthouse, 669 Washington Street, Easton, PA in the rotunda.

Besides being displayed, this new system will also be demonstrated, although those dates aren't yet carved in stone.

For those few among you who don't visit the courthouse daily, looking for a chance to knock me off, there will be other demonstrations throughout the county as follows:

Wednesday, February 20 from 9:00 AM to 11:00 AM at the Northampton Senior Center, 9th and Lincoln Avenue, Northampton, PA.

Thursday, February 21 from 8:30 AM to 10:00 AM at the Nazareth Senior Center, 15 South Wood St., Nazareth, PA.

Thursday, February 21 from 11:00 AM to 12:30 PM at the Lower Mt Bethel Senior Center, RT 611, Martins Creek, PA.

Tuesday, February 26 from 9:00 AM to 11:00 AM at the Rooney Senior Center, 4 East 4th St., Bethlehem, PA.

Thursday, February 28, from 10:00 AM to 11:30 AM at the Cherryville Senior Center, 4131 Lehigh Drive, Cherryville, PA.

If the weather is bad, don't waste your time trying to get there. You can call the Voter Registration Office at 610-559-3055 to see if the show still goes on. The Morning Call also has a video demonstration, and you can view printed instructions here. In addition, Northampton County Executive Stoffa has asked LANTA to attach a machine to every bus bike rack with as sign saying, "We take a lickin' and keep on tickin'." LANTA wants too much money.

Norco Council Approves Lever Look-a-Like For Future Elections

Ron Angle finally ended his boycott of the Northampton County Council dais last night, ascending into the stratosphere with seven other council members. But he was still the sole vote against a lever look-a-like endorsed by seven council members.

Sequoia Voting Systems, in the elections business for over 100 years, won over the elections commission, council and even me. Its product, technically called the Advantage D-10, already serves most of New Jersey, Louisiana and Montgomery County. A disabled elections commission member reports it is extremely user friendly, with buttons located within easy reach. The system does mimic the lever machine, presenting a full face ballot to the voter. Each machine is independently operated and is run on firmware.

Dr. Alan Brau, a leading voting rights activist, conceded that the Advantage has many "good points" and is a "strong system from a hardware standpoint." But he stressed there is no way you can really be sure your vote counts, and suggested that we run one election with paper ballots until we have time to pursue other options. Instead of giving a nonlocal vendor millions, he argued it made for sense to hire people locally to count the votes, and argued other jurisdictions have done so very quickly. He claimed we could conduct an election for $100 to $200 thousand, and our biggest expense would be the purchase of an automark for visually disabled voters.

Sequoia was asked to respond to Dr. Brau, and started by acknowledging that it actually sells the products used for elections with paper ballots. But its project manager, who started out as a county clerk in Montgomery County, said it would be "close to catastrophic for the voters in your county to use paper ballots." He noted most paper ballots break up the party and that questions of "voter intent" will invariably arise, just like they do with punch cards.

Councilman Charles Dertinger, himself a former elections commissioner, noted that Pennsylvania, with its many jurisdictions, would always have a much larger ballot than commonly found elsewhere. Because of this, he thought it would be impossible to get results using paper ballots until well into the next day. He noted that the county already has to "scour" the area for elections workers, and would have a very hard time finding the additional staff needed to count the votes. Finally, he noted that voters are already comfortable with full face ballots that appear on what he calls "the big green machine." Voters will be reassured by a lever look-a-like whose only major difference is that it is electronic.

Although I was leaning towards optical scanning or paper ballots, Dertinger made too compelling a case for Advantage D-10, which can easily be retrofitted to add a paper ballot backup if the state decides to impose that requirement. He very nearly persuaded Angle, too, but Angle was unable to support a system that has no paper trail. As he pointed out last night, his main problem is with the state, for not insisting on it.

The county will load up with 300 of these babies, which weigh 225 lb. per machine. Price? $1.8 million, but the state will reimburse us.

Angle and Dertinger, usually at each other's throats, were unusually cordial to each other last night, and reportedly left the courthouse together, holding hands.

Update: The Morning Calls' Joe Nixon has a detailed account, including a video demonstration, located here. Sarah Cassi's equally detailed report, published in The Express Times, is located here. Wayne Grube absence is noted in both stories, and I hope the lousy weather had more to do with that than his health.

We're ALL Responsible For Tonight's Voting Machine Selection

"Memo to County leadership: Don't screw it up this time!"

That's one anonymous comment to yesterday's post about five different voting systems being considered by Northampton County. You'll notice no vendor is recommended. This person just wants someone to blame if things go wrong.

"I'm not selecting the voting machine."

That's how one Northampton County Council member responded when I mentioned different voting machine possibilities yesterday. Like that anonymous commenter, this council member is more interested in ducking responsibility. "The elections commission will decide."

Council members view the elections commission as a convenient escape hatch. If the system chosen is a disaster, they can point their fingers. But under our home rule charter, that appointed body exists to "administer the system of elections and the registration of voters under applicable law." According to the courts, its function is purely ministerial. It sets no policy. That's council's job. Council exercises the county's residual powers.

On Tuesday, as the county's newly appointed elections commission reviewed different possibilities, I was encouraged by the many citizens - like Dottie Niklos and Walter Garvin - who were there. At least four members of county council sat in on the session. I was discouraged when elections commission member Joan Rosenthal dismissed, as inappropriate, concerns about different vendors voiced by Lilly Gioia, herself a former elections commission member.

What could be more appropriate than that?

But let's get something straight. The decision will be made tonight. An unelected elections commission, which is meeting as I write this blog, will merely be making a recommendation. Tonight, when county council makes a decision, it will be our decision. And we all have the right to address them with our own opinions and concerns. Some like the Sequoia selection because it is difficult to hack, can be retrofitted for a paper trail, and looks amazingly like our lever machines. I've opted for the sole optical scanner under consideration, which will give us a paper trail and a check on the count displayed by the scanner.

Whether we get it right or not, this is our collective responsibility.

Optical Scan Among Five Voting Choices Provided to Three Pa. Counties

If the New York Times Magazine is right, Pennsylvania will be the "next Florida," focal point of our next electoral storm. Whether that prediction is true or not, people are paying attention. At yesterday's public demonstration of five different voting systems, the training room was packed with concerned members of the public, local party officials, reporters, elections commission members, and at least four members of a Northampton County Council that now has just one day to make a decision. Representatives of Wayne and Lackawanna County were also present.

County Exec John Stoffa sat forlornly in the back of the room, and was probably asking himself, "How the hell did this mess happen?"

I felt like I was looking at the few items left on the shelves on Christmas Eve, when I do most of my shopping. It's a very limited choice. I listened to the presentations, but missed the questions from the public. Fortunately, Dottie Niklos stuck around, tested each machine, and was kind enough to share her views. I'll let you know what she thinks about each system.

1. Sequoia Advantage D-10: (state certification contains restrictions). Colorado, concerned about reliability, decertified this system in December. Dottie's take: My first choice would be the Sequoia. It has a screen identical to our lever machines, but lights up when a candidate is selected. It supplies an internal paper trail of the vote for verification, and can be retrofitted with a cut and drop paper ballot that is seen by the voter before vote confirmation . The write-in option is a keyboard and enters the printed name in the box on the screen for verification by the voter. This machine, like all the others, does an auto tally and stores the tally and vote history electronically. BUT this machine is electronic and not networked so that there is no software necessary. This is an advantage because it cannot be hacked. Availability? A mix of new and refurbished.

2. ES & S iVotronic: (state certification contains restrictions)
This is the state's biggest supplier of voting machines, servicing thirty-six counties. But in 2006, ES&S was plagued by complaints of poor quality control (faulty memory cards), poor service, and problems with election preparation. In a Florida congressional race, there was an 18,000 undervote. But that's not what bothers me most. According to a Colorado report, this voting machine can be disabled by simply running a magnet across the touch-screen. Wired reports that, with nothing more than a magnet and a palm pilot or cell phone, you can prevent voters from voting for specific candidates or cause the machine to secretly record a voter's vote for a different candidate than the one the voter chose. Colorado has decertified this system. Dottie's take: The ESS has several features, such as the disc packet, that has to be entered. That makes errors by poll workers a distinct possibility. The loading of the machine seems less than efficient and it would appear that the transfer of data is manual, especially for absentees. Availabilty? Only "reconditioned" machines.

3. Hart InterCivic e-Scan & Hart InterCivic e-Slate: (state certification granted). Most of us agree that optically scanned ballots are the best available voting technology. The voter can see for herself that her ballot is cast, and there's a paper copy. But this system has an Ethernet port on the back, and guess what? That's right, bippy, you can just jack into that port and rewrite the recorded votes. Wheee! Colorado just dumped this system, too. Dottie's take: The Hart Machines are interesting, BUT the scanners can pick up stray marks invalidate the ballot or register the vote incorrectly. This just seems like hanging chads to me. It also requires that a touch screen be at each location for the visually impaired. Availability? Brand spankin' new.

4. Danaher ELECTronic 1242: (state certification granted). This system, another lever machine imitation, has been around since 1986. It has all kinds of goofy flashing red lights, too. At one point during the demo, I could swear I heard someone say, "You sunk my battleship!" Incidentally, this is the machine that gave Bush thousands of extra votes in Ohio. Dottie's take: The electec is a familiar screen, but it is large and cumbersome in comparison to others, and uses Microsoft software. It also uses a pop open panel for hand written votes for the write in which is not as easily managed as the keyboard. Availability? A mix of new and refurbished.

5. Diebold (now Premier) AccuVote TSX: (state certification granted with restrictions) This is one of the few systems that passed the recent testing in Colorado. But it was just declared vulnerable in Ohio, and will be phased out. Yes, this is what you bastards in Lehigh County use. Thanks to you, we all know it can't take a hammer shot. One member of council likes this machine. Dottie's take: "The Diebold looked fragile and somewhat complicated to administer and to use for some voters." Dottie, are you saying we're dumber than Lehigh County voters? Availability? Brand new!

I wish we had a bigger selection. Although four optical scanning systems have been certified, only one was demonstrated yesterday. What about the others?

The citizens' advisory panel that studied our elections last year made this recommendation in its final report: "The County should both advocate and prepare for the purchase and use of voting machines that generate a voter-verifiable paper trail." If we follow that advice, we should take a closer look Hart's E-Scan. Former elections commissioner Lilly Gioia warns that Hart's offering may result in stray marks, and she may be right. But it's also clear that optical scanning is the only way to create a true paper trail.

Norco Has Two Days to Select New Voting Machines

Last November, we were lucky. We got away with using "Ol' Faithful," our 267 lever machines, in November's muncipal elections. Not only did the county save a fortune in leasing costs, but more importantly, the election itself was flawless. In fact, things went so well that even the cranky editors at The Express Times fired off a letter to commend the elections office.

That was then.

Now, three counties - Northampton, Lackawanna & Wayne - have just two days to select a new voting system for this Spring's primary. Today, five electronic touch screen vendors will strut their stuff at the courthouse at 1:30 PM. The following day, at 3 PM, a brand new elections commission will make a recommendation. And on Thursday, county council will decide whether to approve this recommendation.

Will the system that is ultimately selected be reliable? The state Commonwelath Court has ruled that voters have a state constitutional right to reliable and secure voting systems and can challenge the use of electronic voting machines “that provide no way for Electors to know whether their votes will be recognized” through voter verification or independent audit.

Twelve DOS-approved voting systems are produced by six different companies, but only four have unrestricted certifications. After the demonstrations tomorrow, I'll give you my take on each of the systems. Voting activist Dr. Alan Brau is already worried, and I'll share his concerns with you.

You are most likely aware that Northampton County is poised to pick another voting system after the failure of Advanced Voting Solutions to pass certification. The Diebold (renamed Premier) touchscreen system, used in Lehigh County is the frontrunner. Touchscreen DRE's do not provide any paper record of one's vote, making election fraud simple and undetectable. There is evidence that touchscreens have dramatically changed elections elsewhere in the country, but it is difficult to know for sure, since there is nothing to check or audit after the election.

Whatever system is purchased, it must have a voter verified paper record and appropriate auditing of counted results. My own preference is hand counted paper ballots, which are less expensive and more accurate, but realistically, this won't be accepted by the elections department or county government. My second choice is paper ballots, optically-scanned. The optical-scammers can be manipulated, but at least the paper ballot memorializes the voter's intent and can be manually counted after the election.

There will be a vendor fair with representatives from the voting machine companies certified in PA, some of which sell op-scans. It will take place at the new voting office on Wolf St. across from the courthouse at 1:30 on Tuesday afternoon. On Wednesday at 3 PM there will be a meeting of the elections board to make a selection and on Thursday evening at 6:30 PM, County Council will meet to vote on a system.

If you cannot make any of the meetings, please contact Mr. John Stoffa (610) 559-3000 or jstoffa@northamptoncounty.org and let him know how you feel about paper ballots being necessary for the security of elections. Touchscreen machines will not create confidence and will forever lead voters to question results of elections. Another argument against DRE's is that in a number of states touchscreen DRE's have been outlawed and may in the future be outlawed in PA. Why buy a system which will have to be scrapped if future legislation prohibits its use?

Also, if you know anyone on county council, please contact him/her to share your thoughts. Feel free to pass this e-mail on to others who may be interested.

Norco Not Alone in Electronic Voting Machine Woes

If you think Northampton County is the only place in the world besieged with problems caused by touchscreen voting machines, think again. A report to be published in The New York Times Magazine tomorrow should scare the hell out of anyone who believes in the electoral process.

Instead of adding certainty, this new technology has created doubt. Machines fail and count backwards. Printers that supposedly create paper trails jam. Against this backdrop, Northampton County has very little time to choose and train on a new system for April's primary election.

"What happens if the next presidential election is extremely close and decided by a handful of votes cast on machines that crashed? Will voters accept a presidency decided by ballots that weren’t backed up on paper and existed only on a computer drive? And what if they don’t?"

Pennsylvania has already been selected as the state most likely to experience voting machine trouble in the next presidential election. “If it was Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004, everyone is saying it’s going to be Pennsylvania in 2008.”

State Rep. Brennan Seeks Hearings On Future Voting Options

This Fall's general election will be conducted with "Ol' Faithful," our 267 lever machines. We do have fancy new electronic voting machines supplied by Advanced Voting Solutions (AVS). But we can't use them. The Department of State has suspended the AVS voting system because the vendor simply refuses to complete federal certification in time for the election.

We're lucky. County exec John Stoffa held on to those lever machines, knowing that the legality of the controversial AVS system is still being litigated. Voting rights activist Alan Brau, during meetings of the citizens' advisory panel studying our elections, made those problems very clear.

Two other counties with AVS contracts, Wayne and Lackawanna, have already scrapped their older lever machines. Wayne has been forced to lease optical scanning machines, and it appears Lackawanna is leaning in that direction, too.

Justifiably concerned about future elections, state rep. Joe Brennan has asked for hearings. "In order to ensure a fair and equal election to my constituents of my legislative district, I respectfully request the State Government Committee to arrange a public hearing to review testimony and evidence about electronic voting, the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), and our future voting options."

Norco Exec Stoffa: Lever Voting Machines are Back!

In a press conference held late this afternoon, Northampton County Exec. John Stoffa announced that this November's election will be conducted with the county's 267 lever machines.

Pennsylvania Elections Commissioner Harry VanSickle previously had advised the county that "while lever machines are not HAVA compliant, there would be no prohibition on using them in this 2007 municipal election."

Stoffa's decision comes fast on the tracks of a Department of State decision, made earlier today, to suspend the use of Advanced Voting Solutions equipment in Pennsylvania. Secretary of State Pedro Cortes made this statement. "Given the fact that there is no way for the Department to predict when the federal examination and approval process will be completed, I have no choice but to suspend the use of Advanced's electronic voting system in the Commonwealth for the upcoming November 6 election. Doing so now will provide the affected counties - Lackawanna, Northampton and Wayne - the necessary time to consider and implement and alternative voting system solution."

Old Faithful is back.

Old Faithful - Those Lever Machines

As state elections officials try to come up with a solution to the latest problems caused by Advanced Voting Solutions (AVS), it's worth remembering that we still have perfectly functioning lever machines, collecting dust at Gracedale.

Unlike the touchscreen voting machines supplied by AVS, there's no need to have a new software version tested by the feds and certified by the state before every election. They hold up under power failures. They can't be hacked. No parts are made in China. There's even a privacy curtain, ensuring that your vote is a secret ballot.
A friend of mine took pictures of these machines before they were last used. The picture on your left is especially enlightening as it shows the internal counters that must be transcribed to paper by the poll workers when voting precincts close. Few people have any idea what these things look like on the inside, so I thought I'd share his pictures.
Update: The Express Times tells us Northampton County exec John Stoffa will decide today whether the lever machines can be used in November's election. Unlike Lackawanna, Northampton County retained its lever machines for exactly this possibility. I don't know, but believe, the county won't make this decision withour consulting the Department of State.

Voting Machine Shutdown in Northampton, Wayne & Lackawanna Counties

Yesterday, I told you that federal testing of needed changes in Advanced Voting Solutions (AVS) software has been suspended. That's the voting system used in three Pennsylvania counties - Northampton, Lackawanna and Wayne. Both The Express Times and Morning Call have detailed accounts of this crisis.

Among the problems - a possible bait and switch. At a February 13 meeting of the citizens' task force, voting rights activist Dr. Alan Brau told the panel about this allegation, originally made at BlackBox voting. After getting its hardware certified, AVS is accused of shipping a cheaper internal hardware system, manufactured in China. AVS has denied this to federal testers, but pretty much ignored the elections panel.

This morning, the Office of Legislative Affairs at the Pa. State Dep't told state lawmakers what's going on. I'll share their explanation with you.

The following information relates to voting systems currently being used in Lackawanna, Wayne and Northampton Counties:

Advanced Voting Solutions (AVS) is having issues getting approval from federal testing agencies of a new software release. Any changes to an electronic voting system must be submitted for review to federal testing agencies. Under Pennsylvania law, federal approval is a pre-condition of state certification of voting systems.

The issue at hand is that AVS developed new software for its voting systems which are used in the above mentioned counties. Before AVS can put that new software on the voting systems, it must be tested by a Federal Independent Testing Authority (ITA) under the jurisdiction of the Untied States Elections Assistance Commission. The ITA has recently notified the Federal Elections Assistance Commission that AVS has not paid their testing fee and that ALL testing will cease until the balance is paid in full. The ITA also indicated that AVS changed the motherboard component of the hardware previously tested and certified. This is a matter of disagreement between AVS and the ITA. If the monies owed are not remitted and the testing does not resume, it is highly likely that the state certification of all AVS voting systems in the Commonwealth will be suspended.

Norco Voting Machine Testing & Certification is Suspended

As the election season approaches, county officials have just received ominous news concerning our voting machines. We might not be able to use them.

WinVote Version 2.0.4, needed for November's election, must first be certified. But federal testers have suspended certification for three reasons. First, AVS has refused to pay any of its invoices for the testing. Second, testing has turned up a ton of source code errors, including 1,946 source code review anomalies and 25 documentation errors. Third, it appears that the hardware in the voting machines differs from what was originally approved.

The Elections Assistance Commission has posted the following correspondence regarding the Voting System Testing & Certification Program:

(1) iBeta Quality Assurance letter to EAC regarding AVS WINware 2.0.4 voting system

(2) EAC's reply to iBeta Quality Assurance regarding AVS WINware 2.0.4 voting system

(3) EAC letter to Advanced Voting Solutions (AVS) requesting written clarification

If these problems are not quickly resolved, AVS touchscreen voting machines will be prohibited in November's election. The state will either have to lease machines or permit the county to return to the lever.

"What do we do?" Conklin asked ET reporter Sarah Cassi. Dust off those lever machines.

Norco Elections Office Report Card is Imminent

In early January, Northampton County Exec John Stoffa named a five person "blue ribbon citizens advisory committee" to untangle a Gordian knot in the elections office. Its members were Russ Shade (Stoffa's reform-minded former campaign manager); Richard Benner (former registrar who oversaw 45 elections); Peg Ferraro (former county councilperson); Jack Bradt (former CEO at SI Handling); and Greta Browne (former congressional candidate).

Stoffa's request was very simple - "how can we do better?"

This group conducted seven wild productions between January 23 and April 4. At times, it had all the cacaphony of a three ring circus. I loved it! I thought it was a great opportunity to describe problems, both in the elections office and with those new touchscreen voting machines. But others, including Dem chair Joe "Bossman" Long, condemned these weekly extravaganzas as little more than a witch hunt.

I have a link to the "official" minutes of these meetings on my left sidebar. But let me give you links to my own first hand reports. They're a lot less objective, but also a little more fun:

January 23: "Stoffa's Citizen Committee Deals With NorCo Election Mess" - Stoffa draws first blood with this: "Our elections have been like giving birth to an elephant." Former voter registrar Dick Benner sets the theme of this panel: "[P]eople must be made to understand you're there to help them."

January 31: "Norco Citizens Elections Committee Follow That Paper Trail" - The importance of a voter-verified paper trail is discussed, and co-chair Russ Shade notes it's already required in 27 states, and will soon be coming to a U.S. Congress near you.

February 7: "Citizens' Election Panel Questions Voting Machine Certification" - Elections panel learns we voted with machines that were never certified. Whee! Registrar Debbie DePaul insists "we're doing very well." I wonder if she invented the phrase, "stay the course."

February 13: "Norco Elections Committee Wants Answers From AVS" - Dr. Alan Brau, a passionate voting rights activist, details BlackBox voting's claim that voting machine manufacturer AVS used shoddy parts, manufactured in China, to assemble our touchscreen voting machines. I don't care because I get a fortune cookie every time I vote!

February 21: "Norco Voter Registrar DePaul Discusses Her Kingdom" - DePaul consumes most of the evening saying goofy things like "The people who left under my reign are people I am still close with," and defends letters to state and federal officials urging that the county executive ignore new voting laws. "While it might be criminal, criminals are pardoned."

February 28: There are three posts concerning this fascinating meeting.

Pre-Meeting Post: "In Northampton County, Bloggin' is Dangerous to Your Health!" - Dem bossman Joe Long makes his first appearance at a meeting. The second he sees me, he demands a duel. Sadly, he trips over his sword and castrates himself!

Meeting Post: "Norco Registrar DePaul to Critics: 'Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire!'" - Registrar DePaul incredibly brings a goofy lawyer, whom we later learn comes from a list supplied by Bossman Long. Her attorney is a "buffer" to protect her "from the falsehoods and basic lies." This legal eagle manages to insult the panel, press, Republicans, those of us sitting in the peanut gallery and even sticks his tongue out at a custodian. The meeting is adjourned when the accumulated hot air causes the entire building to start floating away.

Post-Meeting Post: "Norco Registrar DePaul Tries to Soak County for $2470 Private Lawyer Bill" - You can't make this stuff up! DePaul's windbag even wanted the county to pay for crabcakes at Uncle Wesley's!

April 4: "Norco Elections Task Force Reviews Positive Survey in Final Public Meeting" - In its last anticlimactic meeting, the elections panel reviews 370 returned survey questionnaires out of 1400 mailed to candidates(300), poll workers(700) and voters(400). A detailed summary, the same one presented to the citizens' task force, is posted here.

After these meetings, the panel met privately to make their findings and submit a report. It did so without Peg Ferraro, who resigned when she decided to seek a seat on county council. A week ago today, The Express Times' Sarah Cassi told us the report is now in, and Stoffa intends to release it to the public once he reads it himself.

Inside word is that the report, like those meetings, is a scorcher. Part of the delay in putting it together was the difficulty in finding asbestos paper.

WFMZ-TV Online Election Central Has Bogus Election Results Six Days Before Election!

Someone is smoking funny stuff at WFMZ-TV Online Election Central. The election won't occur for another six days, but last night it posted voter results. In some cases, it has even projected winners!

Dean Browning, come on down! You've won your primary for Lehigh County commissioner without a vote being cast! That's what happens when you start commenting on this blog!

36% Browning, Dean 23,526
28% Reis, Roger 18,276
17% Halper, Barry 11,031
15% Labenberg, Brent 9,775
5% Roman, Andy 3,433

Will Power blows out Lamont McClure with 69% of the vote for Norco Council, District 3. Geez, that's almost as good as Will's sister! Too bad, Lamont. That's what you get for sliming your opponent. It blows up in your face!

69% Power, Will - 28,410
31% McClure Jr, Lamont - 12,473

Sal Panto edges out Mike Fleck! Mike will have to return to the lucrative world of political consulting.

57% Panto, Sal - 27,330
43% Fleck, Michael - 20,807

Chris Casey gets 78% of the Dem vote in his Upper Macungie. Now he can finally go on a diet.

78% Casey, Chris - 29,475
22% Deprill, Chuck - 8,290

Ron Angle is stunned by heavy write-in vote for Jolly Joe Timmer in Norco Council, District 4.

OK. I made that one up.

Big Spender Jeff Warren only in second place in Easton city council race. Ashley developers demand their money back.

41% Warner, Elinor - 27,576
39% Warren, Jeff - 26,195
13% Brown, Ken - 9,124
7% Loane, Nadine - 5,013

Wayne Grube, although he's not running for anything, is lead vote getter for all offices. OK. I made that one up, too. If WFMZ can create bogus results, so can I!

Call me crazy, but it's kooky for a news organization, even TV news, to post results and project winners nearly a week in advance of an election. In fact, it's downright misleading unless WFMZ has obtained the results from voting machine manufacturers.
Update: WFMZ has now replaced its unofficial "election results" with a disclaimer telling us, "Every effort is being expended to make this page an accurate source of information. However, the Internet is both volatile and diverse." If WFMZ meant what it said, it would never have run artificial results or projected winners six days in advance of the election. What it did is both inaccurate and created volatility that did not need to be there.

Norco Voting Machines Might Be Certified in Time for Primary

Northampton County's elections last November were conducted with voting machines the state never certified. Pennsylvania's Department of State had reluctantly certified WinVote Version 2.0.2 in February, 2006, noting twelve specific problems. But the system we had used was WinVote Version 2.0.3, an uncertified version.

Russ Shade, co-chair of a citizens' panel convened to examine our election troubles, wanted answers both from the state and vendor Advanced Voting Solutions. "They have this nasty habit of not returning phone calls."

Northampton County's citizen panel eventually sent a certified letter, and the state has responded as fast as a glacier.

State elections commissioner Harry A. VanSickle sent an email to county officials just today. "Wanted to let all of you know that the Certification Report for Advanced was approved and signed by the Secretary. I want to read it over again before sending it out to you tomorrow. This is for version 2.0.3."

Whoopee!

No rush, Harry. We've already conducted one election with uncertified machines and the next one is only twelve days away. Take your time. Maybe you should run it by PennDot, too.

Commonwealth Court: You Have a Right to Know Your Vote Counts

Late yesterday, a sharply divided Commonwealth Court refused to dismiss a complaint by Dr. Alan Brau, and others attacking the state's lax certification procedures for touchscreen voting machines here and throughout most of Pennsylvania.

Dr. Brau, a local physician, insists these touchscreen machines are unreliable and advocates a voter-verified paper trail. Nearly a year ago, he was spurned by the Department of State when he asked for re-examination of the WINVote system. He is part of a nonpartisan group that has challenged the state's certification in Commonwealth Court. When asked about his motivation, Dr. Brau simply responded. "I'm a citizen. I'm a voter." In addition to general concerns about the lack of a paper trail, Dr. Brau is troubled by the specific WINVote system used in Northampton County. He has reiterated BlackBox Voting's allegation about AVS, the county's voting machine vendor. It's been accused of pulling a bait and switch. After getting its hardware certified, AVS is accused of shipping a cheaper internal hardware system, manufactured in China.

In recent weeks, we've learned we voted last November with machines the state never bothered to certify. And it's about to happen again. Changes are being made to voting software to accommodate large municipal ballots, and those changes won't be certified until after the election.

In essence, the court's ruling means voters have a state constitutional right to reliable and secure voting systems and can challenge the use of electronic voting machines “that provide no way for Electors to know whether their votes will be recognized” through voter verification or independent audit.

Correction: I'm an idiot. I just told you we'll be voting this spring with uncertified machines, but I'm wrong. AVS does want to change its software for larger municipal ballots, but it won't happen until after the primary. County officials won't allow uncertified machines to be used. I apologize for adding to the confusion.

State Elections Official Finally Speaks, But Not to Norco Citizens' Elections Panel

Northampton County voting registrar Deborah DePaul says many things. Just last week, she claimed the Department of State will only speak through her. That's why the state won't return repeated calls from the elections panel or county administrators. I see.

Yet when I looked at the Sunday Morning Call, I learned that the state's election maven, Harry VanSickle, recently spoke to The Morning Call editorial board. "He's got a story to tell, with some details until now untold, it seems, to many in the county." Well, yeah. That's why the panel has formally demanded answers.

One little secret is that, last time we voted, we used a software design the state never approved. Shhh! Another reassuring detail is that, if anyone challenges the voting machine hardware, all bets are off. The editorial incredulously concludes, "Much work lies ahead. But now there is reason to better trust county election results."

Huh? That's like saying that George Bush's disastrous Iraq record is reason to trust him with more troops.

My Local Elections Chair is a Party Honcho - Why Should I Care?

"Much ado about nothing. Must be a very slow weekend for blogging, hey Bernie?"

"... I am having a hard time convincing myself that I should care about it."

These are reactions to my Friday and Saturday posts about Northampton County Elections Commission Chair Walter R. Garvin. The Home Rule Charter bars political party officers from the election commission. Yet our elections commission chair is not just an elected Democratic committeeman, he's also a regional chair. And he hosts a partisan radio show under an assumed name. Why should we care? We should if we care about the integrity of our voting system. And this has been complicated by new and highly controversial touch screen electronic voting systems.

Northampton County purchased its little black boxes from Advanced Voting Systems while Lehigh County uses a Diebold innovation. Both systems have the same two problems. First, there's no paper trail. That's too expensive, we're told. Second, they can be hacked. Diebold reps call this internet hysteria. But a group of Lehigh University computer science and engineering professors are convinced there's “a wide variety of threats, many of which could be carried out by a single perpetrator or a small group needing only a modest understanding of computer security.” Pennsylvania's new voting machines already face a legal challenge as well as a House Bill to require paper trails.

In addition to worries about a paper trail and hacking, Jon Soden of the Lehigh/Northampton Progressive Alliance points to problems with our very first use. In the last election, a "glitch" turned Northampton County's ballot upside down, so that Democrats were voting in the Republican primary and vice versa. "If this was done in the 2004 election anyone voting for Kerry would have really been voting for Bush if the problem was not found and corrected."

Could you imagine how any election irregularity, no matter how innocent, will be interpreted if party honchos are allowed to sit on the election commission? And should the chair of an elections commission host a radio show promoting party propaganda from either side? When vote counters get political, public confidence in new requirements HAVA (Help America Vote Act) requirements is jeapordized.

Much ado about nothing? Ask the folks with hanging chads in Florida. Ask Ohio Democrats. I suppose the answer depends on whether you like your vote to count.