Comments on: In NY State, HAVA may hava happy ending

By: NYCO

NYCO — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 17:36:37 +0000

I think this is an interesting point to make. As amusing as it would be that Albany’s dysfunction caused the slowdown, hence a favorable outcome for sober consideration, it perhaps was Albany’s FUNCTION that did it.

But my impression was that the BOE slowed things down by kicking the decisions down to the county level. Which at the time I thought was dysfunctional.

By: stlo7

stlo7 — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 14:27:23 +0000

OK - actually they are…

Fortunately, for us, here in NY State, our dysfunctional state government works very slowly which kept NY from moving forward to approve the faulty touch screen machines.

Who recommends? Who approves?

By: ladkiddo

ladkiddo — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:51:30 +0000

They aren’t in the same sentence.

By: stlo7

stlo7 — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 12:49:17 +0000

I see it as how government is really supposed to work specficially our BoE process.

I don’t see that the word dysfunctional and BoE need to be in the same sentence.

The bipartisan BoE drove the selection process.

The dysfunctional part (the three folks in a room part) exactly what role did they play?

By: ladkiddo

ladkiddo — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 12:26:38 +0000

They absolutely do, but the slowness of our dysfunctional government also worked in our favor.

By: stlo7

stlo7 — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 12:00:37 +0000

Fortunately, for us, here in NY State, our dysfunctional state government works very slowly which kept NY from moving forward to approve the faulty touch screen machines.

Wasn’t our slowness a function of being one of only a couple of states that has a true bipartisan BOE? Seems that State BOE functioned as it should.

My point is that the BoE deserves a lot of credit