WP: Ehrlich Wants Paper Ballots For Nov. Vote (MD)

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/20/AR2006092001356.html

A week after the primary election was plagued by human error and technical glitches, Maryland Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. (R) called yesterday for the state to scrap its $106 million electronic voting apparatus and revert to a paper ballot system for the November election.

"When in doubt, go paper, go low-tech," he said.

Linda H. Lamone, the administrator of the Maryland State Board of Elections, quickly denounced the plan to swap voting systems just seven weeks before the general election as "crazy." And Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. (D-Calvert) said it "cannot happen. It will not happen."

Ehrlich said that, if necessary, he would call a special session of the Maryland General Assembly to change the law to allow paper ballots. But Miller and House Speaker Michael E. Busch (D-Anne Arundel) dismissed the idea of a special session, saying elections officials should focus instead on fixing the current system.

"We paid millions. These are state-of-the-art machines," said Miller, who called Ehrlich's announcement a political ploy to energize his Republican supporters.

[arcos]

1. "We paid millions..."

So, even if they don't work they should be used because they "paid millions"?

[praeclarus]

2. damn luddite...

... I suppose he walked barefoot in the snow uphill
both ways to school too.

How quaint. Paper. Silly bugger probably wants to be
able to actually count votes - I agree with the Board
of Elections, the man is crazy.

[savemefromdumbya]

3. I guess he can burn democrats' ballot papers

MD voting machines aren't doing what erhlich tells them - besides Erhlich is on his way out.

[Kelvin Mace]

4. Dude, Erlich is actually the good guy in this

The Maryland Dems LOVE these crappy machines.

[marions ghost]

5. state of the art

machines :argh:Democrats in Maryland against paper ballots :wtf:

[hootinholler]

7. Yeah it's pretty surreal

I can't figure it out, but the blame lies in Linda Lemon and the State Senate.

-Hoot

[mom cat]

6. Fantastic! Hope they lead the way with Brad on this!

[marions ghost]

8. Gov. Erlich is a hero in this election fight re. e-voting

The following is a letter Republican (?!) Gov. Robert Erlich wrote on the subject this year. There ARE people in power trying to confront the unverifiable election situation, despite the fact that millions were spent on the DREs. This is a strong letter.
-------------------------------
February 15, 2006

The following letter from Maryland Governor Robert Ehrlich (pictured below at right) to Gilles Burger, Chairman Maryland State Board of Elections was released on February 15, 2006.

Dear Chairman Burger:

As you are aware, there has been widespread national concern about the reliability and security of electronic voting systems. Many states have decertified Diebold voting machines, including those similar to the ones used in Maryland, because certain components were never subjected to federal testing. In light of these recent national decertifications and the Maryland General Assembly’s decision to override my vetoes of bills implementing early voting and allowing voters to cast ballots anywhere in the state, I no longer have confidence in the State Board of Elections’ ability to conduct fair and accurate elections in 2006.

California, Pennsylvania, and dozens of local jurisdictions recently have decertified or denied certification to the Diebold voting machines pending further testing by federal authorities, citing, among other concerns, the potential for manipulation of election results due to the susceptibility to tampering of the vote-counting memory cards. In response, the Independent Testing Authority (ITA) has been reviewing Diebold voting systems and their electronic components for almost two months and has not released any findings. The State Administrator issued a letter to Diebold requesting daily status reports on the testing, but to my knowledge, no information has been shared with the State Board of Elections members, the Administration or the General Assembly about the implications for Maryland with regard to this testing.

It is imperative that I receive accurate information on the potential consequences that these test results may have on Maryland’s ability to conduct fair and accurate elections this year. In discussions with my staff, you have stated that members of the State Board of Elections have not received regular updates on the testing controversy. I believe that it is time for the Board to get aggressive in responding to citizens’ concerns over public confidence in the elections system.

I am also disheartened by the unresponsiveness of the State Administrator to the issue of voter verification. It is my personal belief that the voters of Maryland should be allowed to vote a paper ballot or have a voter verification paper-trail to electronic voting as reassurance to voters that their votes are being accurately cast. Therefore, I had requested that the Commission on the Administration of Elections chaired by George Beall, evaluate the potential for the introduction of this technology in Maryland. The Commission intended to rely on the report commissioned by the State Board of Elections and being compiled by Dr. Donald Norris of UMBC. That report was due to be completed in early December. I am sure that you share my disappointment that Dr. Norris’ report still has not yet been released and that the Beall Commission has been unable to complete its work.

I also continue to be troubled by the rapidly escalating costs of election administration in Maryland, especially in comparison to fiscal estimates that were prepared for the General Assembly. In 2001, Governor Glendening signed House Bill 1457 requiring the State Board of Elections to select and implement a uniform statewide voting system. At that time, the General Assembly’s fiscal note for House Bill 1457 estimated that the total cost would be $36,890,000. The actual cost, which has been financed by the State Treasurer was $65,564,674 – an almost 78 % increase from the original cost estimate. However, this misjudgment pales in comparison to the 1000% increase for estimates of the annual maintenance costs for this system. The 2001 fiscal note estimated such maintenance would be $858,000. For the upcoming fiscal year, the State Board of Elections requested $9,528,597 for these costs. The cost of Maryland’s Diebold voting machines has skyrocketed as our confidence in the system has plummeted.

In 2005, the State Board of Elections provided a fiscal estimate of $175,000 for the State costs associated with an early voting program, which will now be implemented because the General Assembly overrode my veto. Astonishingly, the State Administrator recently submitted a supplemental budget request that increases these statewide costs from $175,000 to $11.5 million. Ironically, the supplemental budget justification provided by the State Administrator focuses on the potential for voter fraud and strikingly echoes the findings of the Beall Commission and the concerns raised in the floor debate by those opposed to the legislation.

These repeated instances of inaccurate fiscal estimates damage the credibility of the State Board of Elections and makes an informed judgment by the General Assembly of the fiscal implications of electronic voting and early voting impossible. The State Board of Elections continues to pursue an electronic fix at a time when electronic technology for voter registration is untested in Maryland and could create more problems than it solves. I do not want to repeat the mistakes made in 2001 when Maryland adopted emerging technology without understanding fully the potential consequences of a new era of electronics in election administration.

At the least, we should re-evaluate our position as of February 2006 – just a mere seven months before the primary election. It is essential the State Board of Elections aggressively advocate its previously adopted position before the General Assembly that any early voting program be deferred until the 2008 election and that legislation be passed to enact this deferral.

I also direct the State Board of Elections provide me with a written report by February 28th that addresses each of the issues cited below:

Diebold Voting Systems

1. What specific electronic components are being tested by the ITA and how does it relate to the Diebold voting systems used in Maryland?
2. Have other jurisdictions decertified or failed to certify any version of the Diebold Optical Scan or Touch Screen (DRE) systems used in Maryland?
3. What does the Maryland Election Law statute provide regarding the certification of election systems? Under what circumstances does it require the State to decertify an elections system?
4. What is the State Board of Elections’ contingency plan if the current voting system is decertified, or otherwise found to be incapable of administering a 2006 election free of any charges of compromise?
5. Can new machines be successfully procured for use in the 2006 elections?
6. What are the likely mitigation steps necessary to ensure public confidence in our elections system?

Voter Verification Systems

1. When will the Voter Verification Study conducted by UMBC be available for review?
2. What is the State Board of Elections’ plan if the General Assembly requires the Board to purchase a voter verified paper audit trail or optical scan machines to replace the current system in time for the 2006 elections?
3. What voter verification system technologies are compatible with our current voting system?
4. Could we acquire and implement a statewide voter verification system for the 2006 elections?
5. What is the estimated cost to the State to acquire a voter verification system for the 2006 elections?
6. How do the costs of a statewide voter verification system compare to the costs of implementing a statewide optical scan system?

Early Voting (snip)

Signed Governor Robert Erlich
http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_conten...

[FreeStateDemocrat]

11. BS, his problem is that the repukes don't have control over the vote

counting process in Maryland, if they did he would manipulate it himself and keep his mouth shut. I really don't like another Democrat painting him as some kind of do-gooder, he vetoed and then fought against extented voting hours to suppress the vote so explain to me how he is a champion of free and open elections. This is the same bastard that vetoed an increase in minimum wage and has screwed the working class of Maryland every chance he gets. He ain't no fucking hero under any circumstances.

[marions ghost]

13. OK thanks for your opinion

I'm not from Maryland, but if the Governor of my state were doing this, I would call him a hero on voting issues, no matter what. If this is a ploy, it certainly is elaborate...but even if so, in my state it would be welcome.

AND SO IF the elections are more fair, then the voters can get rid of the governor if he's wrong on other issues...correct?

It seems to me he would be unwilling to fight MD Dems on this if he did not have bi-partisan support.

The Dems in every state are not angels either. Whole lotta face-saving going on over these DREs. I admire someone who is talking turkey about them. This letter he wrote is very to the point. Hopefully he can win over some Republicans and Dems on this. It's really a non-partisan issue.

On the issue of extended voting hours, the governor favors early voting. That could be why he was not in favor of extended hours on voting day. Early voting is absolutely the way to go IMO--not extended hours on one day, but make the voting period cover several days. Early voting is generally considered to be progressive. The following was also in the above letter:

Early Voting

1. What is the State Board of Elections’ plan for implementing Early Voting for the 2006 elections?
2. What is the position of the county and local boards of election on the implementation of early voting for the 2006 election?
3. What is the State Board of Elections’ plan for administering early voting in a secure manner if the State is unable to purchase electronic pollbooks for the 2006 elections?

[yellowcanine]

14. Uh - Ehrlich is not in favor of early voting. He vetoed it.

The legislature overrode his veto. He then filed a court case and the judge ruled against early voting on state constitutional grounds. I don't know when this letter was written but Ehrlich is definately NOT in favor of early voting. I think this paper thing is a ploy on his part. He knows there is probably not enough time to implement it so yes - I think it is a ploy.

[marions ghost]

16. Ok but what about the letter?--

which is clearly in favor of early voting and in effect is a strong letter to the State Elections Board. Do you know anything about where they stand, or why he's giving them a hard time (which in my state would be deserved, but maybe not in Maryland)? So he's doing this enlightened approach in order to 'look good' and it's all false? If he's doing it to get along with Dems who are in favor of election reform, well that would be OK with me at this point.

When did Erlich's over-riding of early voting occur do you know? Seems like it was before the letter--so then the letter would be an about-face? Seems like he wouldn't bother to pander that far if he was such a tough opponent in the first place.

About the paper ballots for November--why would there not be enough time to implement it as an option at least? Wouldn't they look bad for bringing it up and not getting it done?

This letter was posted on the website http://www.votetrustusa.org which is a progressive voting reform website, co-founded by Andy Stephenson. So I would think that this Erlich letter has some importance.
But you are telling me it's all a crock basically.

Sometimes it's hard to understand another state's internal politics. I am trying.

[yellowcanine]

18. I can't explain the letter. With Ehrlich it is hard to say. He isn't

exactly a straight shooter. He spent most of his first two years trying to get a slots bill passed in Maryland after promising the part a part of the state (Eastern Shore) that supported him most strongly that he would not allow slots in their part of the state, just elsewhere in the state, by coincidence many of the places that DID NOT support him.
But yet he was opposed to allowing a statewide referendum on the idea. How cynical is that?

[marions ghost]

19. what's up with this guy?

now I'm really intrigued. He sounds schizy. Playing off Repukes against each other? While alternately pandering to and angering the Dems? Is he that kind of chameleon?

I'm a little confused--the Eastern Shore did not want slots but he did it anyway?

[yellowcanine]

21. Ehrlich wanted slots mostly because the racing industry wanted them

and he kept saying that Maryland was losing slots money to Delaware and West Virginia. But the Eastern Shore has a lot of religious conservatives who did not want slots in their back yard. So he pandered to them - particularly to J. Lowell Stoltzfus, the Republican minority leader and an Eastern Shore religious conservative-by promising no slots on the ES. Ironically that meant that a lot of Maryland slots money would continue to go to Delaware because everyone on Maryland ES who wanted to play slots would have less distance to travel to Delaware than to any of the places in Maryland that Ehrlich was willing to allow to have slots. My take on Ehrlich is that he is not all that smart and that he is pretty much a rank opportunist and will say and do just about anything to get elected.

[marions ghost]

22. Thanks for the background

I'm familiar with the ES of Maryland and the other part of MD too...so I see how this split got going.

OK I've got the picture about Erlich--yeah well at least he's not too smart and will continue to seriously mess up it looks like--however somebody smart wrote that letter...there's a story behind that.

It will be interesting to see what will happen with the paper ballots. I think Marylanders should go right into their polling places and ask for one of the paper ballots that 'Gov Erlich promised,' and raise a ruckus if they are not there.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

15. The law was passed as early voting for four or five days prior to

the election, your hero vetoed it and it was over-ridden, Erlich then started a petition drive to delay it to referendum (so it wouldn't be implemented during his re-election attempt) and additionaly Erlich took it to court to have it over-turned. Erlich was never in favor of early voting that is complete BS as you can see by his actions. There is a 2-1 majority of Democrats in Maryland,Erlich is trying to suppress voter turnout because he is basically a bastard.

[marions ghost]

17. OK you sound like you live in MD or at least have an

insider's viewpoint. It is hard to reconcile what you are saying with the letter that was written in February, which makes this tangent all the more interesting. If the letter has a double meaning, then what is it's real purpose?

Kindly don't mock me with sarcasm like "your hero." It's not necessary to make your point. I call anyone who makes sense on these election issues a hero. Many Dems are surprisingly backward on it. I come from a very backward state and was under the notion that a Republican in Maryland might actually have a clue (because MD is fairly liberal). But I should think the absolute worst, then? Go ahead, tell me what to think about it.

I'm perfectly willing to accept that Erlich might be trying to suppress voting, given the evidence you cite. So then he puts out letters such as this and advocates paper ballots and that's all to cover up his actions? He's a kind of deranged push-me-pullyu? Interesting.

What's the story about his adversaries on the BOE?

See my post #16 also.

[pinerow]

9. At first blush..that does sound like a great idea...

but I think I'll wait for the other shoe to drop...hate to be so cynical.

[Arugula Latte]

10. I know ... It's like it's unimaginable these days that a Republican would

have pure motives. I always think there's some nefarious plot behind everything they do. Most of the time, there is. However, maybe not in this case .. We'll have to see.

[Rose Siding]

12. They're still finding primary ballots hidden in the machines!

This is so sad and enfuriating-

snip>
In Montgomery and Prince George's counties yesterday, election officials continued to count the thousands of paper provisional ballots that could determine the outcome of the 4th Congressional District Democratic primary race between incumbent U.S. Rep. Albert R. Wynn and challenger Donna Edwards. Prince George's officials cracked opened 26 machines yesterday and retrieved votes that had not been counted.

[Ignacio Upton]

20. Next time Freepers shout "liberal conspiracy theory" over Diebold

Point out there Ehrlich hates them too.

[marions ghost]

23. exactly!

n/t