|
California drops diebold machines { May 1 2004 } Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
http://www.ohio.com/mld/beaconjournal/8565571.htm?1chttp://www.ohio.com/mld/beaconjournal/8565571.htm?1c
Posted on Sat, May. 01, 2004
California drops Diebold machines
State bans equipment in four counties, considers filing fraud charges
By Erika D. Smith
Beacon Journal staff writer
Diebold Inc. took more heat from California on Friday as Secretary of State Kevin Shelley decided to boot the Green company's voting machines from four counties.
He also called for a criminal investigation of the company, saying he would ask California's attorney general to consider fraud charges.
``We will not tolerate the deceitful conduct of Diebold, and we must send a clear message to the rest of the industry: Don't try to pull a fast one on the voters of California,'' he said at a news conference in Sacramento.
Citing concerns about security and reliability, Shelley warned he might expand the ban to 10 other counties if machines don't provide paper records or meet 23 other security conditions before the November election. Those counties have 28,000 electronic voting machines, including about 4,000 made by Diebold. Shelley decertified all of them Friday.
As it stands now, as many as 15,000 Diebold touch-screens will be mothballed in San Diego, Solano, San Joaquin and Kern counties. There is no appeal. All four counties used the AccuVote-TSX machines in the March primary election, even though that model didn't pass federal testing until April 21.
Ohio counties that selected Diebold to supply their voting machines will get the AccuVote-TSX -- a successor to the AccuVote-TS, widely used in California, Maryland and Georgia.
Shelley's office accuses Diebold of marketing the AccuVote-TSX to California under false pretenses and, in effect, forcing the state to use the machines in the March 2 primary election. Those claims, along with earlier findings that the company used unapproved software in 17 California counties, could result in criminal or civil charges, Shelley said.
Diebold, in a statement issued Friday evening, disputed Shelley's accusations.
``We are committed to supporting our 19 California customer counties, including the four affected TSX counties, in their efforts to run an efficient election in November,'' said Mark Radke, director of marketing for Diebold Election Systems. ``We have confidence in our technology and its benefits, and we look forward to helping administer successful elections in California and elsewhere in the country.''
How Shelley's decision will be implemented and whether Diebold will have to return the millions of dollars the state already spent on the machines remained unclear Friday.
Diebold has touch-screen and optical-scan voting machines in 19 counties in California. The state is one of its biggest customers, spending more than $139 million so far on voting machines from Diebold and three competitors.
Diebold, which has been socked with delay after delay from lawmakers re-evaluating their commitment to electronic voting, said in April that it expected to collect $26 million from San Diego County next quarter. That's now uncertain.
Also, because of disputes in Ohio, Diebold cut the forecast for its elections division from $100 million to between $80 million and $95 million. The division represents only 3 percent of the Green company's business, but once was its fastest- growing segment.
``I anticipate his decision will have an immediate and widespread impact,'' said Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation and a frequent critic of the machines. ``California is turning away from e-voting equipment, and other states are sure to follow.''
Activists across the country insist all electronic voting machines are vulnerable to fraud and argue paper records of every vote cast are the only way to ensure an accurate election. Last month, Diebold Chairman and Chief Executive Walden O'Dell said the company is not against providing printouts, but noted there are no standards yet for such a system.
That hasn't quelled the debate. In Ohio, activists have managed to get the ears of legislators such as Sen. Teresa Fedor, who spearheaded an effort to slow the rush to e-voting.
Given Friday's decision in California, the Toledo Democrat said she's happy she decided to listen.
``I believe Mr. (Secretary of State J. Kenneth) Blackwell is going to have to take these complaints around the country seriously,'' Fedor said. ``I'm more confident than ever that we did the right thing here in Ohio.''
An investigation released this month said Diebold jeopardized the outcome of the March election in California with computer glitches, last- minute changes to its systems and installation of uncertified software in its machines in 17 counties. It specifically cited San Diego County, where 573 of 1,038 polling places failed to open on time because low battery power caused machines to malfunction.
Diebold officials, in a 28-page report rebutting many of the accusations about its performance, said the company had been unfairly singled out and insisted its machines are secure and accurate. But Diebold acknowledged it had ``alienated'' Shelley's office and promised to ``redouble its efforts'' to improve relations with counties and the state.
``Last-minute delays and poor business practices caused all of this,'' Fedor said. ``And for whatever reason, they thought they could get away with it.''
|
|
