Coalition for Voting Integrity

Brennan Center Report, August 28, 2006

Home
SaveOurVote.com
Join Us!
Donate
Voice of the Voters! Internet/Radio
Voice of the Voters! Radio Archives
Your Questions & Comments
Press Releases
Voting News 2008
2008 Municipal Resolutions
Holt's HR 5036
HR 811
S 1487
Redistricting
Reports
*GAO Reports*
Take Action!
Legislative Efforts
Letters, 2008
Editorials
Videos
"If You Want to Be a Voter (The Ballad of Sarasota)"
Voting Principles
Vision and Principles
Facts & FAQs
Rebuttal re Danaher
Blogs, Groups
Cost Comparisons
2005 Municipal Resolutions
News Archives, Late 2006
Lou Dobbs
Slideshow
Chester County
Lehigh & Northampton County
Facts about HAVA
Vote-PAD
New York Times
Contact Us
Contact Your PA Legislators
Links
Supportive Candidates
Re-examination Request
Songs
Voting Forum October 2005
Voting Integrity Forum, June 2005


Media Advisory

August 29, 2006

NYU's Brennan Center for Justice Report Faults Continued Use of Full-Face Ballot Touch Screen Systems

Bucks County Scheduled to Vote on Full-Face Touch Screen System in November

SB1299 Would Offer Voters a Choice to Avoid Compromised Machines
 
Doylestown - The prestigious Brennan Center for Justice this week released a report that finds that that full-face DRE's like the Danaher machines that Bucks County will be using in the fall, cause more votes to be lost than precinct-based optical scan (PCOS) voting systems.

The full report can be found here.

Key findings from the report include:

■ With few exceptions, PCOS systems and scrolling DREs produce lower rates of residual votes than central-count optical scan, full-face DRE, or mixed voting systems.

■ Residual vote rates are higher on DREs with a full-face ballot design than on scrolling DREs with a scrolling or consecutive screen format. The negative impact of full-face ballot design in terms of lost votes is even greater in low income and minority communities than in other communities.

■ PCOS systems produce significantly lower residual vote rates than central count optical scan systems because the former systems allow the voter to correct certain of her errors prior to casting her ballot.

For explanation of "residual votes" see here.

This is the third paper in a series from the Brennan Center for Justice, which also includes:

Making the List: Database Matching and Verification Processes for Voter Registration by Justin Levitt, Wendy Weiser and Ana Muņoz.

The Machinery of Democracy: Protecting Elections in an Electronic World by the Brennan Center Task Force on Voting System Security, which exposed the fact that all three of the nation’s most commonly purchased electronic voting systems are vulnerable to software attacks that could threaten the integrity of a state or national election.

Immediate Passage of SB 1299 Now Absolutely Vital

Also recently released is this Zogby poll, which illuminates the general public's mistrust of voting systems that are not based on the use of voter-verified paper ballots. Zogby is reporting that 80% of the respondents said they want votes to be counted in front of observers representing the public, and that elections officials should not rely solely on the proprietary software that operates electronic voting machines that are presently being installed all over the United States.

In light of this new wealth of information, in addition to the mountains of corroborating evidence already compiled, the Coalition of Voting Integrity is pushing even harder for the immediate passage of SB1299, which will allow all Pennsylvania voters to vote on paper ballots in November if they chose.

CVI and key state legislators will hold a press conference next week to announce SB1299 and its companion legislation in the House and to explain the urgent need for its immediate passage.

Details to be announced.

Contact information:

Mary Ann Gould

Coalition for Voting Integrity

votingintegrity@aol.com

(c) 215.588.8518

(h) 215.357.5206