On the issue of paper ballot vs DRE (Direct Recording Electronic) with VVPR (Voter Verified Paper Record) for New York State
AVANTE has long taken the position that DREs with a properly engineered VVPR is the best voting solution for the United States on the basis of meeting all of the requirements. It’s the only method that can help to eliminate voter errors.
The caveat is that the DRE and VVPR must be properly engineered so that commonly observed errors and privacy concerns are not introduced. We believe the dramatic failures of some of the DREs with VVPR have nothing to do with the concept of the system but everything to do with problems in engineering and design. We have published several white papers with this opinion.
AVANTE knows that its position is not the same as some of the activist groups. It is particularly true on the virtue of DREs with VVPR vs Precinct-base Optical Scan voting solutions. In many ways, the “devils” or potential problems of DRE with VVPR are well known and have been studied over the last few years. They have been addressed in election codes as well as in certification requirements.
However, one cannot say the same of optical scan system. The “devils” and problems of paper ballot tampering were known decades ago when New York and New Jersey changed from paper balloting to the current direct recording mechanical lever voting systems. But the problems have been forgotten. The current optical scan system and relevant processes have not been improved over the last twenty or more years.
AVANTE has advocated that a proper name for the optical scan system may be best described as “direct recording optical scan electronic” (DROSE).
The current crop of optical scan systems scan the paper ballot and tell the voter if there are any over-voted or under-voted contests. It does NOT tell the voter how the system is actually reading and recording the deciphered ballot. Upon acceptance by the voters, even though they have no idea of how the system is registering their votes other than by faith, it then records the electronic data directly into the tallies. The tallies are recorded in flash memory and used as transfer medium. The vulnerabilities of using such transfer media are known and been proven by Harri Hursti and Thompson to be easily changed without a trace . While it may be true that there are paper ballots marked by the voters stored in the ballot box, there is no corresponding process control in the current New York State or any other State Election Codes. Some state laws even forbid manual reviewing of the paper ballots. Paper ballots whether they are precinct-based or central counts, can be tampered with and substituted. No fault absentee ballots are subject to even more potential integrity issues.
The mentioned optical scan voting problems and potential lack of proper control with paper ballot handling is also inadequately addressed by the EAC Voting System Standards. The reason? All of the human resources in this field have been committed to eliminating the problems in DRE voting systems.
Is there an optical scan system solution that will address these issues? Yes. Mr. Harri Hursti has explained such a system in “Black Box Voting’s” website. An optical scan system should capture digital images of all of the ballots as they are submitted to form an electronic audit trail of the paper ballots. It is a “reverse” of the VVPR to the electronic ballots. AVANTE believe it should also provide the voters with the display of exactly how the system is recording the paper ballot as deciphered by the optical scan electronic system.
On the issues of AVANTE suing the “big three” for patent infringement
AVANTE spent millions over seven years to develop and promote the use of VVPR, digital imaging of paper ballots, ballot marking devices, and other related technologies and applications. As a business entity, we are prudent enough to invest in intellectual property to protect our interests. Protecting private property, including intellectual property, is a founding principle of our nation and a rule followed by successful business organizations. It is one of keys that make this country strong. The patent infringement suit brought by AVANTE exerts our rights to recover the value of our intellectual property after all amicable efforts failed.
It is not the intention of the Company to drive any other company out of business or jurisdictions from using their chosen voting solutions. AVANTE has offered licensing to all of its competitors but was universally ignored.
In any case, one may wonder why and how such legal action and protection would be an issue to anyone interested in voting system integrity, accuracy and transparency?
On the issue of AVANTE being located in Mercer County, New Jersey, the home State of Congressman Holt
AVANTE, as a company has not contributed any money to any politician including Congressman Holt. None of the owners have donated more than $100 to any national figure or party.
The fact that the company and Congressman Holt happen to reside in Mercer County NJ is coincidental. The coincidence also applies to Mercer County based Princeton University and many of their professors involved in election integrity. For the record, the company and its founders have been residing in Mercer County for at least 27 years and more than 37 years in the State of New Jersey.
As a company, we have not received any favorable treatment from our home State of NJ or from any national elected officials. This fact is self-evident.
For the record, AVANTE intentionally keeps an arm-length relationship with those involved in election integrity as to avoid potential allegations such as those we are seeing today. We will continue to provide help to those that make requests. That includes things like loaning a DRE with VVPR and facilities free-of-charge for a Newsweek article on Ms Rebecca Mercuri when she was a pro DRE with VVPR expert few years ago.
It is also fact that AVANTE has not paid anyone involved in the election integrity business in any way including donations or consultancies or even as paid expert witnesses.
AVANTE has long taken the position that DREs with a properly engineered VVPR is the best voting solution for the United States on the basis of meeting all of the requirements. It’s the only method that can help to eliminate voter errors.
The caveat is that the DRE and VVPR must be properly engineered so that commonly observed errors and privacy concerns are not introduced. We believe the dramatic failures of some of the DREs with VVPR have nothing to do with the concept of the system but everything to do with problems in engineering and design. We have published several white papers with this opinion.
AVANTE knows that its position is not the same as some of the activist groups. It is particularly true on the virtue of DREs with VVPR vs Precinct-base Optical Scan voting solutions. In many ways, the “devils” or potential problems of DRE with VVPR are well known and have been studied over the last few years. They have been addressed in election codes as well as in certification requirements.
However, one cannot say the same of optical scan system. The “devils” and problems of paper ballot tampering were known decades ago when New York and New Jersey changed from paper balloting to the current direct recording mechanical lever voting systems. But the problems have been forgotten. The current optical scan system and relevant processes have not been improved over the last twenty or more years.
The current crop of optical scan systems scan the paper ballot and tell the voter if there are any over-voted or under-voted contests. It does NOT tell the voter how the system is actually reading and recording the deciphered ballot. Upon acceptance by the voters, even though they have no idea of how the system is registering their votes other than by faith, it then records the electronic data directly into the tallies. The tallies are recorded in flash memory and used as transfer medium. The vulnerabilities of using such transfer media are known and been proven by Harri Hursti and Thompson to be easily changed without a trace . While it may be true that there are paper ballots marked by the voters stored in the ballot box, there is no corresponding process control in the current New York State or any other State Election Codes. Some state laws even forbid manual reviewing of the paper ballots. Paper ballots whether they are precinct-based or central counts, can be tampered with and substituted. No fault absentee ballots are subject to even more potential integrity issues.
The mentioned optical scan voting problems and potential lack of proper control with paper ballot handling is also inadequately addressed by the EAC Voting System Standards. The reason? All of the human resources in this field have been committed to eliminating the problems in DRE voting systems.
Is there an optical scan system solution that will address these issues? Yes. Mr. Harri Hursti has explained such a system in “Black Box Voting’s” website. An optical scan system should capture digital images of all of the ballots as they are submitted to form an electronic audit trail of the paper ballots. It is a “reverse” of the VVPR to the electronic ballots. AVANTE believe it should also provide the voters with the display of exactly how the system is recording the paper ballot as deciphered by the optical scan electronic system.
On the issues of AVANTE suing the “big three” for patent infringement
AVANTE spent millions over seven years to develop and promote the use of VVPR, digital imaging of paper ballots, ballot marking devices, and other related technologies and applications. As a business entity, we are prudent enough to invest in intellectual property to protect our interests. Protecting private property, including intellectual property, is a founding principle of our nation and a rule followed by successful business organizations. It is one of keys that make this country strong. The patent infringement suit brought by AVANTE exerts our rights to recover the value of our intellectual property after all amicable efforts failed.
It is not the intention of the Company to drive any other company out of business or jurisdictions from using their chosen voting solutions. AVANTE has offered licensing to all of its competitors but was universally ignored.
In any case, one may wonder why and how such legal action and protection would be an issue to anyone interested in voting system integrity, accuracy and transparency?
On the issue of AVANTE being located in Mercer County, New Jersey, the home State of Congressman Holt
AVANTE, as a company has not contributed any money to any politician including Congressman Holt. None of the owners have donated more than $100 to any national figure or party.
The fact that the company and Congressman Holt happen to reside in Mercer County NJ is coincidental. The coincidence also applies to Mercer County based Princeton University and many of their professors involved in election integrity. For the record, the company and its founders have been residing in Mercer County for at least 27 years and more than 37 years in the State of New Jersey.
As a company, we have not received any favorable treatment from our home State of NJ or from any national elected officials. This fact is self-evident.
For the record, AVANTE intentionally keeps an arm-length relationship with those involved in election integrity as to avoid potential allegations such as those we are seeing today. We will continue to provide help to those that make requests. That includes things like loaning a DRE with VVPR and facilities free-of-charge for a Newsweek article on Ms Rebecca Mercuri when she was a pro DRE with VVPR expert few years ago.
It is also fact that AVANTE has not paid anyone involved in the election integrity business in any way including donations or consultancies or even as paid expert witnesses.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
