The severity of ES&S's defective voting machines cannot be over exaggerated. 22,619 ES&S iVotronic touchscreens taking in approximately 100 ballots per machine results in a total of 2,261,900 individual ballots during one election. In an election with just 5 races, the cumulative number of votes counted for all 5 races would be 11,309,500. A 20% error rate of missing and flipped votes results in 2,261,900 individual lost or flipped votes in one election.
o
Why 20%? Previous studies determined an undervote rate of from 17.63% to 24.9% in their analysis of election results from several counties where ES&S touchscreens were the primary method of voting as compared to non ES&S counties where only a 2% to 3% undervote for the same race was recorded. This means the undervote error rate is actually 15% to 22% once the standard 3% undervote it taken away. An even 20% error rate is assumed for the projections in this article. This 20% error rate does not include the vote-flipping phenomenon (both error types may eventually be determined to be facets of the same problem). It should also be noted this 20% error rate could actually be lowball when applied to a condensed set of machines that are known to be defective. Other studies analyzed all ES&S iVotronics touchscreens used statewide, not just the defective ones.
o
While this is not meant to be a scientific projection, perhaps it is more reliable than the voting machines themselves.
oO
Count the Machines:
Considering the numbers of iVotronic touchscreen failures reported in 2008 and 2009, the publically known number of 22,619 defective machines is low. Moreover this particular batch of defective machines was replaced with a new batch of machines that also proved to be defective.
o
A county by county inventory of machines is not available. We may know the types of voting machines a county uses, but not necessarily the numbers. And definitely not the numbers of defective machines unless the voting errors are documented. However when a statewide study of all ES&S iVotronic touchscreens in the state reveals a 17.63% to 24.9% undervotes compared with 2% to 3% undervotes for all other machines including ES&S scanners, one might consider all Florida's touchscreens were defective. In which case the number of touchscreens balloons. Or defective touchscreens actually produce a much higher error rate that is flattened down when averaged in with the numbers of other machines. (Lost Votes in Florida's 2006 Election Part 2 An Investigation into Excessive Undervotes on the iVotronics in the Attorney General's Race January 2008 by Kitty Garber Research Director.)
o
References & Other Required Reading, Listening, Viewing:
Senate Panel to Examine Sale of Diebold Voting Machine Division, Kim Zetter
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
