Features

Alameda County Registrar of Voters Brad Clark deserves thanks for making a formal contract complaint against Diebold Election Systems, the vendor for the county’s touchscreen and vote tallying technology. According to the Oakland Tribune, the precipitating event for Registrar Clark’s action appears to have been the failure of 200 uncertified and poorly tested voter card encoders during the March 2 election.  

More ominous, however, is the reference to a “glitch” in the recent gubernatorial recall election that transferred thousands of absentee votes for Bustamante to another candidate. Clark is quoted as saying he was sure the problem had been fixed but was “not satisfied with the answers as to why it happened.” Those words make the hairs on the back of my neck stand on end.  

It is not only the registrar of voters who needs to know exactly how such a miscount of votes could take place. Every citizen has a right to know. Furthermore, we all have a right to know how the glitch was fixed. This is not a private matter between a vendor and its purchaser. It is a crucial matter of public policy and public concern. Apparently the glitch was detected by the registrar’s staff—and the public has a right to know the details of how all of this came to light. Apparently the problem was fixed by Diebold staff by a means that is not fully understood by the registrar. This is absolutely unacceptable.  

The voters of Alameda County and of the whole country cannot afford to entrust the conduct of the November 2004 presidential election to this kind of technology. We must replace all the Diebold hardware and software with methods that are transparent, that involve voter verification of the ballot, and that allow a meaningful recount. It is noteworthy that the glitch that was caught involved absentee votes—the only ballots in Alameda County that currently provide a voter verified paper audit trail. Who knows how many Bustamante votes were transferred to others within the paperless touchscreen part of the election? No one knows, because there is no voter verified paper ballot to count as an independent check against the electronic results. 

California State Senators Don Perata (Democrat) and Ross Johnson (Republican) have recently introduced SB 1438 calling for additions and amendments to the Elections Code to require among other things “a permanent paper record with an audit capacity for that system, to allow the voter to verify his or her votes before the voter’s ballot is cast, and to be accessible for individuals with disabilities.” Parallel legislation has been introduced in the Assembly (AB 2843) by Lloyd Levine. There has been a call for urgency legislation to suspend all paperless electronic voting to go back to paper balloting in order to provide a voter verified auditable paper ballot for the November 2004 election. Furthermore, State Sen. Perata also has introduced legislation (SB 1376, the “Voting System Security Act of 2004”) which makes it a felony to modify any voting system in any uncertified way. All of this legislation deserves to have the active support of all citizens who want a fair election in November. 

Secretary of State Kevin Shelley, who deserves our thanks for his courageous leadership requiring a voter verified paper audit trail by 2005-2006, is continuing to press for reforms that will assure a safe and secure election in November 2004. His Voter Systems and Procedures Panel will hold a two day meeting April 21-22 in Sacramento focused on Diebold and related matters of electronic voting (the agenda and meeting place/time can be viewed at www.ss.ca.gov/elections/ vsp_042104.pdf ). Comments may be sent by April 6 for inclusion in the panel members’ packets to Michael Wagaman, mwagaman@ss.ca.gov. 

The registrar of voters’ office is the responsibility of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors. It would seem sensible to let the supervisors know that we support Registrar Clark in his calling Diebold to task and that we demand and require a transparent, voter verified, and secure election system in place for the November 2004 presidential election.  

In the United States Congress, Rush Holt has introduced HR 2239 to require voter verification. Our representative, Barbara Lee, is a co-sponsor of HR 2239, for which she should be thanked. Parallel supportive legislation has been introduced in the Senate. 

I do not think that we can or should consider tolerating another election run by the Diebold technology. Alameda County should become the leader in the nation to get rid of this dysfunctional mess, which includes not only the touchscreens but also the optical scanner and the GEMS system that configures the election and does the final tally of votes, that could contribute to chaos and/or subversion of the voters’ intent in November 2004 by moving votes from the intended candidate to another. We have seen that this can happen here in our county. We need to contact Alameda County Registrar of Voters Brad Clark, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors, our representatives in the California State Senate and Assembly, and our representatives in Congress and the Senate to call for decertification of Diebold and other proprietary (secret) paperless touchscreen systems, establishment of transparent and voter-verifiable systems, and establishment of effective security for election processes.  

Judy Bertelsen, M.D., Ph.D., resides and votes (absentee) in Berkeley. She is an active member of the Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club and VoterMarch. 

f