Suit targets voting machines

Complainants say computerized devices can be tampered with

Ann Imse, Rocky Mountain News

Published September 20, 2006 at midnight

Text size

More Airlines & Aerospace

Fear of fraud in the November election will be confronted head-on in a Colorado courtroom today when a lawsuit goes to trial on whether computerized voting machines should be banned because they are too susceptible to tampering.

The state will argue that voting on computer screens is safe because a person's ballot also is recorded on a printout, allowing spot checks for fraud and miscounts after the polls close.

However, the backup cited by the state is not available everywhere. The machines in Jefferson County, which has 375,000 voters, can't produce printouts.

If Denver District Court Judge Lawrence Manzanares sides with plaintiffs and bans computerized voting, every county in Colorado will be scrambling to find a practical and legal way to run the election seven weeks from now. Some counties rely on computer voting extensively, while others use it just for disabled voters.

"The ramifications for the counties are huge," said Gary Van de Stouwe, technical director for the Jefferson County clerk. "We haven't come up with a scenario where you could throw enough money at it. It would be physically impossible."

The controversy in Colorado is part of a growing nationwide clamor over the possibility of election fraud, fueled by continuing anger over problems from the 2000 presidential election, which George W. Bush won by only a few hundred votes in the deciding state, Florida, and after a Supreme Court decision.

In response, Congress mandated changes in voting nationwide. All punch-card and lever machines had to be replaced by last January. Colorado counties have been allocated $15 million of federal funds to help pay for the equipment.

In today's lawsuit, a bipartisan group of voters is arguing that Secretary of State Gigi Dennis used an unqualified staffer to certify the machines and that he did little security testing as required by state law.

The four types of computer systems in question are manufactured by Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia and Hart and are used in some fashion by every county in the state, affecting hundreds of thousands of voters.

Princeton University computer experts last week released a study, saying they can reprogram machines made by Diebold to distort votes with just a screwdriver, a tiny flashdrive loaded with software and one minute of time.

Diebold spokesman David Bear responded that worries about tampering have not been borne out in reality. "There has never been a factual issue with a touchscreen," Bear said.

He denied the plaintiffs' claims that tampering cannot be detected.

In use for more than a decade, "the technology is proven," he said.

Last year, Colorado passed a law requiring computerized voting machines to produce printouts of each ballot. The printouts are kept in the machines, creating a paper trail that can be used for recounts in case of discrepancies or tight races.

But the law applies only to new machines. Jeffco already had computerized voting machines without paper backups and does not have to retrofit its equipment or replace it until 2008, Van de Stouwe said.

If the judge bars computerized machines, each county would have to work fast to find a solution. In Jefferson County, "We either break state law or we break federal law or we don't have an election," Van de Stouwe said.

Dennis, an appointed Republican, is not running. State Treasurer Mike Coffman, a Republican, is facing state Senate Majority Leader Ken Gordon, a Democrat, in the secretary of state's race.

imsea@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5438

Subscribe to the Rocky Mountain News