brennan center for justice
brennan center for justice brennan center for justice
November2004November2004November2002November2002ES&SM550ES&SM650ES&SM100Sequoia:EdgeNebraskaNebraskaNebraskaNevadaAccording to the Billings Gazette, a programmingerror caused voting machines to inaccurately recordall votes. An election official explained that hesuspected the problem had occurred because heforgot to hit the “zero out” button required betweenentering absentee and regular ballots on the machine.Consequently, as many as 3,000 absentee ballots mayhave been counted a second time when the regularballots were being run through the machines.Officials decided to conduct a full recount to ensurethat the election outcome was accurate. 414Lancaster County, NEThe Lincoln Star Journal reported that a number ofmalfunctions occurred on optical scan machines inuse during the general election. According to thepaper, some machines shut down completely. Whenthe problems began, election officials stopped to testthe six machines, revealing that two were notproducing correct vote tallies. Those two machineswere shut down, but later in the day, the remainingmachines began to have similar mechanicalproblems. 415Sarpy County, NELocal TV news station WOWT 6 reported that afterballots were counted in a race for city council,election officials realized that there were more votesthan voters. According to the officials, the erroraffected 32 of 80 precincts and as many as 10,000votes. It was believed that the glitch affected thecandidates equally and did not alter the outcome ofthe elections. The evidence and explanation for themiscount were inconclusive at the time. 416Sarpy County, NEAccording to the Omaha World-Herald, the opticalscan machines failed to tally “yes” votes on theGretna school-bond issue, giving the false impressionthat the measure was defeated. The measure hadactually passed by a 2-1 margin. 417Clark County, NVAccording to the Albuquerque Tribune, the softwareused to aggregate the vote totals on a Sequoia votingsystem was overwhelmed by the volume of ballotscast and omitted some votes from total reports.74 | Brennan Center for Justice
March 2008June 2009November2008PremierAccuVote-OSSequoiaAVC AdvantageSequoiaAVC AdvantageNewHampshireNew JerseyNew JerseyAlthough a technician for the vendor fixed theproblem in Clark County and provided officials therewith a software patch, the same problem occurred afew weeks later in Bernalillo County, New Mexico. 418Rockingham County, NHThe Eagle Tribune reported that “a single key on afaulty computer keyboard” caused the election resultsfrom optical scanners to be mis-entered by electionofficials. Consequently, the initial election result waserroneous. 419Monmouth County, NJAccording to the Asbury Park Press, “results from ahalf-dozen towns were delayed because of problemsin transmitting data from machine cartridges, CountyClerk M. Claire French said on Wednesday.” Thecartridges thus had to be physically taken to thecentral election offices. "We're studying what causedthese problems," French said. 420Essex County, NJThe Star-Ledger reported that “[v]oters arriving atConklin Hall near the Rutgers-Newark campus werethwarted this morning by two malfunctioning votingmachines. Voters said they were told the machinewould have to be replaced and to come back later.“Carmen Cassiano, Essex County's commissioner ofregistration, said about half of the machinesmalfunctioned because they were turned onincorrectly, which caused them to jam.November2008SequoiaAVC AdvantageNew Jersey“They could not be reset, and had to be replaced,Cassiano said. All the jammed machines werereplaced by mid-morning, but there were sporadicproblems throughout the day.” 421Hudson County, NJAccording to the Jersey Journal, “the system ofcounting votes at Hudson County Clerk’s office hasgone haywire.”“According to County Clerk Barbara Netchert, theway things were supposed to work is that local townclerks were supposed to be able put the cartridgesfrom the electronic voting machines into a reader andthe information would be sent via computer to herBrennan Center for Justice | 75
- Page 30 and 31: Had advocates and researchers in Ne
- Page 32 and 33: elative to voting system vendors. A
- Page 34 and 35: or potential vulnerabilities by any
- Page 36 and 37: Finally, the Department of Justice
- Page 38 and 39: Provide Timely & Organized Access t
- Page 40 and 41: the CPSC may compel the manufacture
- Page 42 and 43: Civil Division of the Department of
- Page 44 and 45: C. Analogous RegimesCivil penalty p
- Page 46 and 47: Of course, adding these kinds of pr
- Page 49 and 50: v. conclusionVoting is the most imp
- Page 51 and 52: System Vulnerabilities: should incl
- Page 53 and 54: February2008September2004November20
- Page 55 and 56: November2006November2006ES&SiVotron
- Page 57 and 58: June 2008SequoiaOptech 400CCaliforn
- Page 59 and 60: March 2004March 2004DieboldAccuVote
- Page 61 and 62: February2008September2008PremierAcc
- Page 63 and 64: event of an overvote displayed a co
- Page 67 and 68: January 2008January 2008PremierAccu
- Page 69 and 70: November2004ES&SM650FloridaSupervis
- Page 71 and 72: October 2008February2008PremierAccu
- Page 73 and 74: February2008February2008October 200
- Page 75 and 76: 2004 AccuVote 2000ESNovember2008Nov
- Page 77 and 78: November2008November2008Hart InterC
- Page 79: February2008May 2006August 2004May2
- Page 83 and 84: February2008November2006SequoiaAVC
- Page 85 and 86: November2008SequoiaImageCastNew Yor
- Page 87 and 88: November2004November2004UnilectPatr
- Page 89 and 90: November2008November2008March 2008E
- Page 91 and 92: May 2008April 2008November2006May 2
- Page 93 and 94: 2006 iVotronicThe Post & Courier re
- Page 95 and 96: AccuVote TSR6; HartInterCiviceScan;
- Page 97 and 98: November2006ES&S:iVotronicTexasHida
- Page 99 and 100: November2003November2009November200
- Page 101 and 102: October 2008October 2008May 2008ES&
- Page 103 and 104: appendix c : dupage county election
- Page 105 and 106: and resolve problems with certified
- Page 107 and 108: 49. E-mail from Carolyn Crnich, Cle
- Page 109 and 110: 95. Kleinberg, supra note 92.96. Ma
- Page 111 and 112: 143. Telephone Interview with Rokey
- Page 113 and 114: 187. Id. at 22.188. See Thomas, sup
- Page 115 and 116: 1801 (“[T]he Secretary shall init
- Page 117 and 118: 258. See United States Department o
- Page 119 and 120: 294. John Archibald & Brett J. Blac
- Page 121 and 122: 334. Jane Musgrave, Palm Beach Coun
- Page 123 and 124: 374. Glitch Keeps Fulton Voters Wai
- Page 125 and 126: 417. Joe Dejka & Chris Olson, A Lat
- Page 127 and 128: 457. Letter from Dave Byrd, Preside
- Page 129: 498. Lauren Glendenning, Voting Gli
November2004November2004November2002November2002ES&SM550ES&SM650ES&SM100Sequoia:EdgeNebraskaNebraskaNebraskaNevadaAccording to the Billings Gazette, a programmingerror caused voting machines to inaccurately recordall votes. An election official explained that hesuspected the problem had occurred because he<strong>for</strong>got to hit the “zero out” button required betweenentering absentee and regular ballots on the machine.Consequently, as many as 3,000 absentee ballots mayhave been counted a second time when the regularballots were being run through the machines.Officials decided to conduct a full recount to ensurethat the election outcome was accurate. 414Lancaster County, NEThe Lincoln Star Journal reported that a number ofmalfunctions occurred on optical scan machines inuse during the general election. According to thepaper, some machines shut down completely. Whenthe problems began, election officials stopped to testthe six machines, revealing that two were notproducing correct vote tallies. Those two machineswere shut down, but later in the day, the remainingmachines began to have similar mechanicalproblems. 415Sarpy County, NELocal TV news station WOWT 6 reported that afterballots were counted in a race <strong>for</strong> city council,election officials realized that there were more votesthan voters. According to the officials, the erroraffected 32 of 80 precincts and as many as 10,000votes. It was believed that the glitch affected thecandidates equally and did not alter the outcome ofthe elections. The evidence and explanation <strong>for</strong> themiscount were inconclusive at the time. 416Sarpy County, NEAccording to the Omaha World-Herald, the opticalscan machines failed to tally “yes” votes on theGretna school-bond issue, giving the false impressionthat the measure was defeated. The measure hadactually passed by a 2-1 margin. 417Clark County, NVAccording to the Albuquerque Tribune, the softwareused to aggregate the vote totals on a Sequoia votingsystem was overwhelmed by the volume of ballotscast and omitted some votes from total reports.74 | Brennan Center <strong>for</strong> Justice