TESTIMONY CITY COUNCIL HEARING 4/24/06

NINA REZNICK

THE NYS LEGISLATURE HAS BEEN ROUNDLY CRITICIZED FOR BEING THE LAST STATE LEGISLATURE TO FACILITATE THE PURCHASE OF FEDERALLY MANDATED COMPUTER VOTING MACHINES. BUT TO ME, IT’S A SIGN OF PROFOUND NEW YORK GOOD SENSE.

WE NOW HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THE EXPERIENCE OF ALL THE STATES WHICH HAVE GONE BEFORE US, AND PURCHASED COMPUTER TOUCH SCREEN MACHINES (“DREs”)

THERE HAVE BEEN, OR ARE PENDING, LAWSUITS IN AT LEAST 18 STATES. MOST OF THEM CITE UNUSUALLY LARGE UNDERVOTES AND INACCURACIES; MALFUNCTIONS THAT MADE THOSE MACHINES UNUSABLE DURING THE ELECTION; AND SUCH OBVIOUS SECURITY PROBLEMS THAT THE MACHINES WERE LATER DE-CERTIFIED.

ONE COUNTY WHICH HAS REFUSED TO PAY FOR DEFECTIVE MACHINES UNTIL THEY’RE FIXED HAS DISCOVERED THAT THE DRE SELLER CAN REFUSE TO SERVICE ITS NEXT ELECTION UNTIL THE COUNTY PAYS UP.

A LAWSUIT IN NEW MEXICO SEEKS TO ENJOIN THE FURTHER USE OF THE DRE’S BECAUSE OF THE MACHINE MALFUNCTIONS AND INACCURACIES EXPERIENCED IN 2004; THE STATE HAS JUST GONE ALL PAPER BALLOT-OPTICAL SCAN.

THE LAWSUIT IN WASHINGTON STATE SEEKS TO BAR THE FURTHER PURCHASE OF DRE’S.

IN CALIFORNIA TO UPHOLD THE COURAGEOUS DE-CERTIFICATION OF DREs BY THE FORMER SEC OF STATE;

.

IN OHIO, ONE OF MANY LAWSUITS CITED 18 INCIDENTS OF MALFUNCTION AND 1 ELECTION WHICH HAD TO BE REDONE BECAUSE OF A PROVEN INACCURATE COUNT.

IN MARYLAND AND NORTH CAROLINA (WHERE ONE MACHINE ALONE DROPPED OVER 4500 VOTES). TO DE-CERTIFY ALREADY PURCHASED DRE’S AND IN FLORIDA TO PREVENT THEIR INSTALLATION. IN FACT: THE GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND (GOV EHRLICH) HAS RECENTLY ANNOUNCED THAT HE NO LONGER HAS CONFIDENCE THAT THE DRE’S CAN “PROVIDE A FAIR AND ACCURATE ELECTION IN 2006”;

THERE’S MUCH CHAOS OUT THERE. THESE 18 STATES ARE NOW IN LEGAL BATTLE OVER HOW TO HOLD AN HONESTLY RECORDED AND COUNTED ELECTION.

(INDIANA; ILLINOIS; NEW MEXICO; WASHINGTON STATE; CA; FLA; MARYLAND; N CAROLINA; OHIO; GEORGIA; NEVADA; TEXAS; INDIANA; MICHIGAN; MINNESOTA; N HAMPSHIRE; PA.)

A BIG PRICE IS BEING PAID FOR THE SAKE OF EXPEDIENCY. NOW THAT WE KNOW ALL THIS, DO WE REALLY WANT TO BUY DRE’S AT 2 TO 6 TIMES THE PURCHASE AND MAINTENANCE COST OF OPTISCANS BEFORE FACTORING IN THE COST OF ALL THESE LAWSUITS AND UNDECIDED ELECTIONS?

DOES IT MAKE GOOD NEW YORK SENSE?

THIS MANY LAWSUITS IS AN OMINOUS SIGN. IS THIS A ROAD NYC WANTS TO GO DOWN?