ES&S could be fined $9.7M in CA
According to the California Secretary of State and reported by Wired magazine and Brad blog it seems ES&S has sold uncertified voting systems to five counties in California.
As ES&S competitor, Diebold Election Systems, Inc. (now renamed Premier Election Systems), learned in 2003, selling uncertified systems in California is expensive. It cost DESI $2.6 million in fines and now ES&S faces $10 million in fines.
From the Wired article:
More interesting to me are twosets of pictures from the Wired article.
The model tag on the outside of the unit clearly displays two different model numbers; A100-00 or A200-00. Also on the back of the machine is the NASED qualification tag which clearly shows both models are part of the same the NASED certified system; N-1-16-22-12-001.
The point of NASED system identification numbers is so that a voting machine manufacturer cannot "mix and match" system components and claim the new constellation of hardware and software is certified. State and local election officials rely on the list of system descriptions provided by NASED to know what specific constellation of hardware and software make up a certified and tested system.
The ES&S tags clearly misrepresent to CA officials that two constellations of hardware and software are covered by an identical NASED system ID.
The question for Wisconsin eleciton officials is:
According the the Wisconsin State Elections Board, only Automark 100's (version 1.xx) are allowed here in Wisconsin. The largest pool of Automark ballot markers is 202 Automarks sold to the City of Milwaukee. By the Willie Sutton principle this is the logical place to start this investigation.
As ES&S competitor, Diebold Election Systems, Inc. (now renamed Premier Election Systems), learned in 2003, selling uncertified systems in California is expensive. It cost DESI $2.6 million in fines and now ES&S faces $10 million in fines.
From the Wired article:
- ES&S apparently sold about 1000 uncertified machines to San Francisco, Marin, Colusa, Solano and Merced counties. (The number of uncertified machines delivered to California was supplied by ES&S to the state; CA officials have yet to conduct their own inventory to determine if more machines are involved.)
More interesting to me are twosets of pictures from the Wired article.
The model tag on the outside of the unit clearly displays two different model numbers; A100-00 or A200-00. Also on the back of the machine is the NASED qualification tag which clearly shows both models are part of the same the NASED certified system; N-1-16-22-12-001.
The point of NASED system identification numbers is so that a voting machine manufacturer cannot "mix and match" system components and claim the new constellation of hardware and software is certified. State and local election officials rely on the list of system descriptions provided by NASED to know what specific constellation of hardware and software make up a certified and tested system.
The ES&S tags clearly misrepresent to CA officials that two constellations of hardware and software are covered by an identical NASED system ID.
The question for Wisconsin eleciton officials is:
- Was the same misrepresentation perpetrated here in Wisconsin?
According the the Wisconsin State Elections Board, only Automark 100's (version 1.xx) are allowed here in Wisconsin. The largest pool of Automark ballot markers is 202 Automarks sold to the City of Milwaukee. By the Willie Sutton principle this is the logical place to start this investigation.
posted by John Washburn | 10:04 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home