brennan center for justice

brennan center for justice brennan center for justice

brennancenter.org
from brennancenter.org More from this publisher
12.07.2015 Views

May 2004December2008ES&SM150PremierAccu-Vote ES2000ArkansasCaliforniaThe Jonesboro Sun reported that the initial results of aconstable race in District 13 showed that onecandidate received all 158 votes cast in one precinct.When the opponent questioned the results of theelections, the machine was inspected and an error wasfound in a computer chip’s code. A recount showedthat both candidates received votes, though theoutcome of the election was unchanged. 308Fulton County, ARAccording to the South Missourian, a malfunction ina ballot scanner caused county election officials torecount ballots for the primary election by hand.County officials blamed the machine manufacturerfor incorrectly programming the machine. Thecompany blamed the county officials for not sendingall of the sample ballots needed for the company toprogram the machines accurately. 309Humboldt County, CAAccording to the Times Standard, “a glitch in the[Humboldt] county election's software . . . resultedin almost 200 ballots not being included in initialvote totals and the county certifying inaccurateelection results.”Carolyn Crnich, the Humboldt County Registrar ofVoters, told the paper that she realized there was aproblem when “she discovered a deck of 197 vote-bymailballots for the precinct that had been runthrough the ballot counting optical scanner, but didnot seem to appear in the final vote tallies.” 310Wired and Computerworld magazines reported thatthe voting system manufacturer, Premier, was awareof the software flaw that caused the problem foryears, but failed to notify federal or state authorities,opting instead to send an e-mail to county officials.Crnich states that the information in this e-mail wasnot passed onto her. 311November2008SequoiaAVC Edge IICaliforniaFor more on this incident, see case study 2 on pages 12 -13 of this report.Santa Clara County, CAIn Santa Clara County, the San Jose Mercury Newsreports, “fifty-seven electronic voting machines forthe disabled malfunctioned Tuesday and could not50 | Brennan Center for Justice

June 2008SequoiaOptech 400CCaliforniabe replaced for hours, despite requirements that theybe available in each precinct.” Indeed, “backupmachines took three hours to prepare, with somearriving as late as 2 p.m.” It was unclear what causedthe malfunction of the machines. 312San Bernardino County, CAAccording to the Press Enterprise, a “computer glitchin the San Bernardino County registrar of voters'ballot-counting system sent some losing candidates inTuesday night's election to bed thinking moreprecincts were left to be heard from when, in fact, allthe votes were in and counted.”San Bernardino County voter Registrar Kari Verjiltold the paper, “the glitch is embedded in computervote-counting software provided by Sequoia VotingSystems, the Denver-based contractor that servesmany counties in California.”March 2008February2008ES&SModel 650SequoiaOptech 400CCaliforniaCaliforniaA staffer in the registrar’s office told the paper thatSan Bernardino County officials discovered the glitchlast year and told the manufacturer. A Sequoiaspokeswoman acknowledged that San Bernadinoreported problems and stressed that the issue “hasabsolutely nothing to do with vote totals ortabulations.” 313Sacramento County, CAThe Sacramento Bee reports that “impropermaintenance of some of Sacramento County's votingmachines⎯and the tint of the Feb. 5 ballots⎯wereto blame for malfunctions that sidelined votecountingscanners and delayed results of last month'spresidential primary, according to the county's topelection official.”The county, during its investigation, “said that thevendor that supplies and maintains the scanners,Elections Systems & Software, conducted improperrecalibration and preventive maintenance on themachines in December.” Moreover, according to theBee, “the [county] report said that ballots printed byConsolidated Printers were too dark to allow theballot to be correctly read by the faulty scanners.” 314Santa Clara County, CAThe San Francisco Chronicle reported that, at onepolling station, “more than a dozen people trying toBrennan Center for Justice | 51

June 2008SequoiaOptech 400CCali<strong>for</strong>niabe replaced <strong>for</strong> hours, despite requirements that theybe available in each precinct.” Indeed, “backupmachines took three hours to prepare, with somearriving as late as 2 p.m.” It was unclear what causedthe malfunction of the machines. 312San Bernardino County, CAAccording to the Press Enterprise, a “computer glitchin the San Bernardino County registrar of voters'ballot-counting system sent some losing candidates inTuesday night's election to bed thinking moreprecincts were left to be heard from when, in fact, allthe votes were in and counted.”San Bernardino County voter Registrar Kari Verjiltold the paper, “the glitch is embedded in computervote-counting software provided by Sequoia VotingSystems, the Denver-based contractor that servesmany counties in Cali<strong>for</strong>nia.”March 2008February2008ES&SModel 650SequoiaOptech 400CCali<strong>for</strong>niaCali<strong>for</strong>niaA staffer in the registrar’s office told the paper thatSan Bernardino County officials discovered the glitchlast year and told the manufacturer. A Sequoiaspokeswoman acknowledged that San Bernadinoreported problems and stressed that the issue “hasabsolutely nothing to do with vote totals ortabulations.” 313Sacramento County, CAThe Sacramento Bee reports that “impropermaintenance of some of Sacramento County's votingmachines⎯and the tint of the Feb. 5 ballots⎯wereto blame <strong>for</strong> malfunctions that sidelined votecountingscanners and delayed results of last month'spresidential primary, according to the county's topelection official.”The county, during its investigation, “said that thevendor that supplies and maintains the scanners,Elections Systems & Software, conducted improperrecalibration and preventive maintenance on themachines in December.” Moreover, according to theBee, “the [county] report said that ballots printed byConsolidated Printers were too dark to allow theballot to be correctly read by the faulty scanners.” 314Santa Clara County, CAThe San Francisco Chronicle reported that, at onepolling station, “more than a dozen people trying toBrennan Center <strong>for</strong> Justice | 51

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!