S.J. voting machines' fate up in air
No decision has been made on TSx system
Greg Kane     Central Valley Record       Dec 12, 2005

A statewide test in which a Finnish computer expert will attempt to hack electronic voting software would have little impact on San Joaquin County, state and county officials said last week.

 
California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson invited hacker Harri Hursti earlier this month to test the security of a memory card produced by elections equipment manufacturer Diebold. The test, which will be in Sacramento but has yet to be scheduled, is a response to criticism the cards contain a security flaw that allows outsiders to access and manipulate ballots. Hursti has performed similar tests on elections equipment in other parts of the country.

But those cards aren't used in the ATM-like touchscreen machines San Joaquin County bought from Diebold three years ago, said Deborah Hench, the county's registrar of voters. The county agreed to buy 1,625 TSx machines for $5.7 million in 2002, a fact Hench believes is an advantage over other counties rushing to meet a Jan. 1 federal deadline to have voting equipment accessible to people with disabilities.

"We're better off than a lot of other counties because we have the units," Hench said. Other counties "not only have to purchase the equipment, but it has to be manufactured and delivered."

The federal Help America Vote Act, adopted in 2002, requires counties to have at least one voting system that can be used by people with visual, hearing, mobility or other impairments. Electronic machines are believed to be more accessible than paper ballots, Hench said.

The problem is that TSx and several other electronic systems still haven't been certified by the state, said Kim Alexander of the Davis-based California Voter Foundation. Counties are left in a situation where they either own or need to purchase equipment to meet federal standards but aren't guaranteed the ability to use it for elections.

"This is a classic example of the federal government putting the cart before the horse," Alexander said last week.

McPherson told The Record in November that a decision on TSx certification would likely be made by mid-December. Nghia Ngyuen Demovic, a spokeswoman for McPherson's office, said last week officials are still reviewing the equipment. She couldn't say whether such a decision would be made by the new year.

McPherson "would rather do it right the first time than compromise the integrity and security of a vote," Ngyuen Demovic said. "He takes these testing and certification processes very seriously, and he's taking his due diligence to ensure the security of the voting machines."

The U.S. Department of Justice has threatened to sue if the disability requirements aren't met by the deadline, Hench said. It's not clear, however, whether states or counties would be targeted.

San Joaquin County voters used the TSx system in the March 2003 primary, but it was decertified soon after when other counties experienced problems. Its recertification isn't guaranteed: More than 50 people spoke against the equipment during a Nov. 21 hearing in Sacramento, calling it undependable and vulnerable to voter fraud.

Disability rights activists also said during the hearing the equipment is difficult to use for quadriplegic and blind people as well as those with limited reach. Alexander believes such criticism hurts the TSx's chances for certification but cautions it is difficult to accommodate all disabilities in one system.

"There is no voting machine that can provide for totally independent voting for every disability that exists," Alexander said.