Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 2 (2 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   No comments

General News

NYSTEC Finds NY SBOE Voting Machine Tests 'Quite Good'

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 2 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H3 7/11/08

Become a Fan
  (2 fans)

Nassau County is not happy with the SBOE testing these machines in Albany, when Sequoia manufactures the BMDs on Long Island (where Nassau is situated).  The state charges $250 in shipping for each BMD delivered from Albany to Nassau, reported Nassau County Attorney Lori Barrett.  Biamonte explained on a July 2nd Voice of the Voters radio broadcast that one of the reasons they chose Sequoia was because of its proximity.  He would like to see joint testing of the BMDs with the SBOE in Nassau. This would also reduce the exorbitant shipping costs that Nassau County is forced to absorb, amounting to over $110,000. 

"We were told when we selected this manufacturer [Sequoia] – one of the reasons we selected them was that they made a major push, both the State Board and the manufacturer, that these machines would be manufactured locally, in Long Island.... Wouldn't that be a wonderful thing?  Because they're manufactured, they could be delivered to us, they could be acceptance tested by us, and working with the State, considering any defect problems, or any problems like we just [had]... they would be locally so we could address it locally. 

"The State did an about-face; decided that they were going to do centralized acceptance testing....  And the process has been, at best, a disaster, because we have almost 80% failure of machines being delivered. These are the same machines that the State has passed.  They've certified that these machines passed their acceptance testing....  We've been pressing all along that we really need to do local acceptance testing...."

NYSTEC concluded otherwise, advising in its July 10th report: 

"One of the big advantages of centralized testing is that a large number of people are testing systems over time.  As a result, discovery of issues and identifying resolutions occurs faster than it would if acceptance testing were being done at individual county locations.  Testers get more experienced and discover shortcuts and other information that individual counties can reap the benefit from."

Centralized testing creates additional costs that budget-strapped counties are expected to absorb.  Biamonte is furious over the $111,000 additional shipping costs Nassau is forced to absorb.  In a phone call today, he explained that one of their people, Donald Steiner, has been in the freight business for over 25 years.  "We're paying six to eight times the going rate to have these BMDs shipped from Albany." 

Last night, NY SBOE Commissioner Douglas Kellner responded to one of several questions posed, regarding these shipping fees. 

"The shipping fee was part of the bid submitted by each vendor and should have been factored in when the counties selected their voting system.

"The counties have the option of shipping the machines from the Albany acceptance test site themselves, but the counties are then responsible for any damage that might occur after receiving delivery of the machines in Albany.  Several counties in the capital area did choose to arrange for their own delivery from Albany."

In a phone conversation today, Nassau County attorney Lori Barrett  flatly denied that Nassau negotiated this shipment rate with Sequoia.  Biamonte backed up Barrett's assertion.  

"We had nothing to do with it.  The State negotiated the RFPs (Request for Proposals) with the vendors."

Despite the July 10th report fom NYSTEC, which the SBOE ordered, it appears that the high rate of machine failure experienced in Nassau County is not a result of local confusion about how to operate the BMDs, but rather a problem in their design.  In the July 9th testing in Nassau, Sequoia discovered a 25% failure rate.

Something's wrong somewhere.  If not in the SBOE certification process, then in the choice of frail software driven systems that cannot survive shipment or that are poorly designed.

New York is under a court order to deploy these frail, non-functional systems before the fall elections.  Yet, Sequoia is having trouble meeting production demands.  There simply are not enough functional machines on the market. 

Court orders ought to be based in reality.  Judge Gary Sharpe and the Department of Justice seem overly focused on HAVA-compliance, requiring that disabled accessible devices be deployed to every polling site this year.  No regard is given to the cost, security, reliability, or functionality of such systems, or that enough even exist to meet the Court's order.  (See January 2008 Remedial Order enforcing the SBOE’s timeline.)

Next Page  1  |  2

 

In 2004, Rady Ananda joined the growing community of citizen journalists. Initially focused on elections, she investigated the 2004 Ohio election, organizing, training and leading several forays into counties to photograph the 2004 ballots. She officially served at three recounts, including the 2004 recount. She also organized and led the team that audited Franklin County Ohio's 2006 election, proving the number of voter signatures did not match official results. Her work appears in three books.

Her blogs also address religious, gender, sexual and racial equality, as well as environmental issues; and are sprinkled with book and film reviews on various topics. She spent most of her working life as a researcher or investigator for private lawyers, and five years as an editor.

She graduated from The Ohio State University's School of Agriculture in December 2003 with a B.S. in Natural Resources.

All material offered here is the property of Rady Ananda, copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009. Permission is granted to repost, with proper attribution including the original link.

"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." Tell the truth anyway.

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
No comments

 

Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend


Copyright © 2002-2014, OpEdNews

Powered by Populum