Good. I hope they win big. On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 4:01 AM, mike [never forget] 532 < [email protected]> wrote:
> > Maryland Files Claim to Recover Voting Machine Expenses > http://www.truthout.org/122608VA > After years of problems with the state's touch-screen voting system, > Maryland has filed a claim to recover $8.5 million from the maker of > the machines, Premier Election Solutions, Attorney General Douglas F. > Gansler announced yesterday. > > The claim seeks costs the state incurred to correct security gaps > in the voting system that were uncovered several years ago by > independent investigations. The state has paid $90 million under a > contract with Premier, formerly known as Diebold, since 2001. During > that time, the two parties have had a sometimes-rocky relationship as > hitches in the voting system surfaced. > > > "Under basic contract law, this is money that should be paid by > Diebold or its successor and not by the taxpayers," Gansler said in > an > interview. "This is sort of the final chapter of the touch-screen > machines that we've had issues with in Maryland since we've gotten > them." > > > Last year, Gov. Martin O'Malley and the General Assembly decided > to eventually dump the touch-screen equipment and instead move toward > buying new optical-scan machines, which read paper ballots filled in > by voters with pencil or pen and allow for a manual recount. The new > system is expected to cost about $20 million. > > > Premier President Dave Byrd said in a statement that the state's > claim appears to be based on "inaccurate and unfounded assumptions." > He also said the 2008 election, in which Premier's machines were > used, > was one of the "smoothest" in the state's history, culminating what > he > called a "seven-year track record of success." > > > The "claim may be an attempt to retroactively change the rules of > the contracts, but it does not change or reflect the actual record of > successful performance," Byrd said. > > > State officials contend, however, that the November election came > off with few glitches precisely because they had spent so much money > on upgrades and technical fixes. According to the claim, the state > Board of Elections has implemented, largely at its own expense, > measures to correct flaws uncovered by assessments ordered by former > Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. and by the General Assembly. > > > Premier and the state haven't always been on the outs. After > warnings about security vulnerabilities from three computer experts - > Johns Hopkins University professor Avi Rubin and the two hired by the > state - a voter advocacy group sued in 2004. The group alleged that > the state should not have certified Premier's machines for use in > elections. The state defended Premier at the time, and won. > > > That history is not lost on Premier, which said its good > relations > with the state made the attorney general's recent claim "all the more > of a surprise," according to the company's written response. > > > The company said its system satisfies contractual security > requirements and that the state decided to incorporate additional > measures based on the reports it commissioned. The company's response > relied in part on the state's legal defense from four years ago that > contended no system is perfect and pointed out that there had not > been > a single report of a security breach. > > > Premier also said that it has provided additional services and > materials beyond what was required under the contract at no > additional > charge. > > > Other problems have surfaced that aren't addressed in the state's > claim. Diebold had to replace parts in voting machines used in the > 2004 election because of glitches in the "motherboard," the main > circuit board, that could cause the machines to freeze. Then in the > 2006 primary election, the state's new "e-poll books," electronic > check-in terminals made by Diebold that are distinct from the touch- > screen voting units, crashed repeatedly. > > > "Voter confidence and the integrity of the process were > undermined > by the use of these machines," Gansler said. "It took nearly 10 years > for us to figure out we shouldn't be using them, but during the > course > of that time we did everything we could to ensure reliability." > > > The claim now goes before a state procurement officer, whose > decision on the matter could then be petitioned to the Maryland State > Board of Contract Appeals. Until the dispute is settled, the state is > withholding payment on $4 million in bills for services Premier > provided for the 2008 elections. > > > > > > > > -- *~@):~{> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
