Check out the new voting machines
They will be on display tomorrow at the Medley center.  From a D&C article today
If you go
What: Public inspection of new voting machines.
When: Noon to 6:30 p.m. Thursday.
Where: Medley Centre, Irondequoit. Use Entrance 1 on the mall’s north side, near the flag. The machines will be in the former Express store, C-201 on the mall directory.
Actually, while you are there check out the Medley Center and see how those COMDIA benefits are working out.
Again, I ask — what is the point of putting these machines on public display. The issue that concerns most people is the security and accuracy of the voting machines, and how can you judge that in a public display. The machines may or may not be acceptable but putting them on public display is a sham and a misdirection.
Come on Paige - don’t you, as a citizen, want to see what the machines might look like? That doesn’t mean rigorous testing and things like that should not be done as well.
This is simply an attempt to engage the public.
Nothing wrong here.
What color are they?
No, I don’t care what a computer or optical scanner looks like. Doesn’t matter to me if it is grey or beige or purple. Doesn’t matter to me whether the mouse is on the left or on the right. Doesn’t matter to me if the wallpaper is standard Windows background, or a picture of the Canadian Rockies.
Explain to me why you would want to see these devices. Explain to me why “public involvement” includes seeing the devices; if you ask me public involement would be demanding testing to show the machines are secure and accurate.
By look I mean the opportunity to see and touch. Frankly - as an informed citizen I’ve seen absentee ballots and lever machines. That’s it. I’ve never seen other voting machines. Seeing these machine swill help me better understand what we are getting into. That works for me. Maybe it doesn’t work for you.
I also want to see the output the recommendations of the BOE. I like that they are trying to reach out.
rigorous testing is also important. that should be done as well and it not on display at this forum. It should be discussed at a different forum.
In all of my reading about electronic voting, there have been two concerns. One is access to voting for handicapped people, and the other is security and accuracy of the vote counts.
You are interested to “See and touchâ€ÂÂ, and you are the first person I have ever heard with this concern. While I admit it is a legitimate concern, it ranks a very distant third in my mind behind the two issues I mentioned above. I think virtually every citizen in our society now has experience with touch-screen type devices, selecting a choice from among several choices, and so on. Similar machines are at Wegmans and all grocery stores, banks, OTB, airports and on and on. A voting system where people can’t even understand the screen would never even be put on display, much less considered by the BOE.
So let me ask you the devil’s advocate kind of question: is there anything that could happen as you view these machines that would make you say “Oh, this is terrible! We can’t use these machinesâ€ÂÂ? Or even something like “Hey, this needs to be fixedâ€ÂÂ?
And devils advocate question 2: If you see and touch these machines and you come away with a favorable impression, then what?
You are reading way too much into this IMHO.
There are people who have problems with the lever machines. really - they forget to pull the red lever, vote for propositions due to ballot placement. pull the lever down then push it up thinking they cast a vote.
people familar with ATM machines? Sure - they put a lot of trust in those machines don’t they. We have had ATM types of machines for a long time - does any of they explain the voter difficulty with ballots and oh, pick a state - a critical state like Florida or Ohio?
I’ve worked at polls, I’ve seen this over and over again. Usually in Presidential elections because there are people who thing we only have elections every 4 years.
If seeing touching punching the buttons, being able to discuss ballot placement, process of picking the candidate, and so on helps me explain the process to someone else either as an inspector (there will be training for that) or in conversations with my friends then it is worth it.
Get off the either or discussion here. Ensuring people can’t usurp the voter selection is critical. that is one part. I want to see it they system enables the voter to usurp themselves without the help of some unsavory character.
Oh - I hope they are black and not silver so they don’t show fingerprints and the polling place can look as sterile as a hospital (kidding)
When you go, can you take some pics so we all can see? See if they have info on or are able to answer questions about testing & security.
After the 2 POTUS elections and the fraud and hanging chads, machine errors, and ultimately having GWB shoved down our throats, I think that EVERY citizen should take these machines seriously and ask and DEMAND that every question be answered.
We know that New York was behind in updating the voting machines, so this whole maneuver is to meet Federal Guidelines, but we have to insure that the haste to comply does not create a mechanism wherein we have to worry or ever have to deal with vote manipulation ever again.
Granted no system is perfect, and there will always be a margin of error, but I applaud Rochester Turning for having their finger on the pulse of a very important and critical part of our vote.
You have a perspective that I don’t have. I did not know that people enter the lever-style voting booths and are unable to vote properly due to confusion about how the lever machines work. Now I know. Thank you. Of course it makes sense to make the machines as user-friendly as possible, and I hereby revise my earlier conclusion that putting these machines on public display was pointless.
My gut feel is that other than some gross malfeasance in the user interface (like the Florida 2000 ballots), the impact of a small number of voters being confused is much less than the potential impact of a security vulnerability or lack of accuracy by these machines, which is why that is my primary concern. I’m glad that you (and many others) are diligent on the user interface issues, and I’m glad there are many who are working on the security and accuracy issues. I look forward to future BOE analyses of the security and accuracy of these machines. Of course, as we have seen in other states, it may be that the BOE isn’t particularly concerned about user interface, security and/or accuracy, and I wonder if you have any comments about the NY State BOE on those issues.
Typographical error: sentence should read “I hereby revoke my earlier conclusion that putting these machines on public display was pointless.â€ÂÂ
You’re spot on Paige. Alot of people don’t think about how much control that one machine bears in the outcome of our government, and ultimately our lives.
There will be many (new voters, seniors, physically challenged and more) who will probably err unless enough public education is done PRIOR to the induction of the machines into the voting population.
I, like you, liked the old style machines, and think that the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” way of looking at them works.
But since Florida taught the country a lesson many of us will never forget, we have to stand behind any improvement that will never allow such a travesty to occur again. And it’s important that it’s a machine that every single American can use easily and without confusion or error.
But it’s up to each of us to make certain that this process truly IS without fraud or controversy. I look forward to hopefully seeing some of the pictures of the new machines. It’ll be interesting as well to see how much “training” the public gets on their usage.
Jiminy, my man
You say: “But since Florida taught the country a lesson many of us will never forgetâ€ÂÂ
Many of us will never forget? I wish it was all of us. But my only disagreement with you is that I think there are many who don’t feel Florida 2000 was a problem, or that they learned the wrong lesson from it.
The lesson some seem to have learned is that the problem with Florida 2000 was that it was obvious in hindsight (and maybe even in foresight) that the ballot structure (the butterly ballot) steered confused voters to vote for Rethuglicans. How to solve that problem … still steer voters to vote for Rethuglicans, but make it un-obvious that this is what is happening. This is the battle we must continue to fight.
Many of us will never forget? I wish it was all of us. But my only disagreement with you is that I think there are many who don’t feel Florida 2000 was a problem, or that they learned the wrong lesson from it.
I agree with you 150%.
Jiminy B,
Although I agree witht the sentiment here-you can’t agree with someone 150%.
For what it’s worth, I stopped by today then blogged about it myself.
According to the buzz in the room, two of the three companies scheduled to present had their machines “decertified” yesterday. The one remaining (Sequoia) was there to talk about how easy it was to use.
All discussion of security was declared to be a “procedural” facet of the Board of Elections and nothing to do with Sequoia. I asked about source code and engineering drawings and at least I was referred to the Board of Elections rather than being outright refused.
In all: a useless discussion. It neither gave me assurance nor further fears.
Thanks for the report! You’d think they wouldn’t pooh-pooh concerns about security. You’d think they’d be ultra-on-top of the issue and at least try to allay your concerns.
I was there as well and will write something up tomorrow.
I didn’t get that sense about pooh poohing security.
It is an optical reader with manual paper ballot recount.
[...] was a lively discussion in my announcement post. Good questions about concerns about the s/w. Snarky questions about the color of the voting [...]