More grist from Sarasota

Two items:

Voting machine maker says time prevented fix

Touch-screen voting machine maker says time prevented ‘issue’ fix

By JEREMY WALLACE

Even though a voting machine manufacturer told Sarasota County and state officials they were working on a software update to fix an “issue” with touch-screen voting machines for the 2006 general elections, the company never followed through on that promise.

A spokesman for Election Systems & Software said they couldn’t get the work done fast enough to get the system fixed, so the patch was never submitted to the state for approval and the issue was never raised again in correspondence between the company, the county and the state.

Company spokesman David Fields downplayed the “issue” ES&S had identified in earlier memos, saying the delayed response times voters may have experienced in selecting a choice in each race on the ballot was not responsible for the undervote problems that arose in Sarasota County.

Read more.

*** *** ***

BREAKING FL-13: NEW UNDISCLOSED LETTER OF AGREEMENT FROM ES&S TO STATE UNEARTHED!
Terms of ‘Independent’ State Run Audit, Source Code Review Dictated by Voting Machine Company to Florida State Election Director Prior to Tests of Failed Touch-Screen Voting Systems from Contested Jennings/Buchanan Election!
The private voting machine company which manufactured the touch-screen hardware and software used during Sarasota, Florida’s contested District 13 Congressional election between Christine Jennings (D) and Vern Buchanan (R) sent a letter in December of 2006 to David Drury, the chief of the state’s Bureau of Voting Systems Certification, dictating the terms of the state-run audit convened to investigate the causes for massive undervote rate which seems to have tipped the election.
The extraordinary 3-page letter (posted in full at the end of this article) from Electronic Systems & Software, Inc. (ES&S), Vice President, Steven Pearson, is described as an “agreement” and instructs Drury on what may and may not be disclosed in the state’s final audit report regarding the investigation.
The letter includes a long, bullet-pointed and very narrow litany of specific dictates concerning what may and may not be done and/or discussed by the state-convened panel of investigators in their final report…
FULL REPORT, COMPLETE LETTER &
NEW QUESTIONS NOW RAISED IN ITS WAKE:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *