Seven Counties Dismissed From California Voters Lawsuit to Block Use or Purchase of Electronic Voting Machines

Humboldt, Marin, Placer, San Luis Obispo, Trinity, Tulare, and Santa

Barbara Counties Opt for Paper Balloting Citing Cost, Accuracy and Security

Concerns



Apr 26, 2006, 01:00 ET from Voter Action

    SAN FRANCISCO, April 26 /PRNewswire/ -- California Voters marked their
 latest legal action today by lauding officials in seven California counties
 for their commitments to use or switch to all paper balloting rather than
 electronic voting systems. The Counties of Humboldt, Marin, Placer, San
 Luis Obispo, Trinity, Tulare, and Santa Barbara were dismissed today from
 the California Voters Lawsuit (Holder v. McPherson), supported by Voter
 Action, and filed in San Francisco Superior Court last month. The suit
 seeks to nullify Secretary of State Bruce McPherson's "conditional"
 certification authorizing purchase of the Diebold TSx electronic voting
 system -- which has a history of security, verifiability, and disability
 access problems -- for use in California elections.
     "We applaud the counties leading California "back to the future," by
 selecting verifiable, all paper balloting over electronic voting systems
 with significant security problems, and the risk of fraud and vote
 manipulation," said Lowell Finley, Esq., co-director of Voter Action, and
 co-counsel for the plaintiffs in the California Voters Lawsuit. "These
 counties appreciate the importance of transparency and verifiability in
 clean elections. Diebold TSx electronic voting machines contain technology
 that is easily hacked and nearly impossible to audit or recount, and which
 is illegal under the California Elections Code."
     "These California counties have made the right decision not to use
 touch-screen systems that put election integrity at risk and fail to
 accommodate voters with a range of disabilities as required by law," said
 John Eichhorst, co-counsel for the plaintiffs in the California Voter's
 Lawsuit, and a partner in the San Francisco law firm, Howard, Rice,
 Nemerovski, Canady, Falk & Rabkin, "No county benefits from risking
 election funds on expensive electronic voting systems that have
 acknowledged vulnerability and accessibility problems and fall short of
 satisfying legal requirements."
     "Voters concerned with the integrity of our elections are gaining
 tremendous traction and we are pleased to be supporting them in California
 and in similar efforts in New York, Pennsylvania, Arizona and other
 states," said Holly Jacobson, Co-director of Voter Action.
     The California Voters lawsuit was filed with support from Voter Action,
 a non-profit organization providing legal, research, and logistical support
 for grassroots efforts to ensure the integrity of elections in the United
 States. With members across the country, Voter Action recently led
 successful litigation in New Mexico to block purchase and use of the types
 of voting machines that are most error prone and vulnerable to tampering.
 For additional information, please visit www.voteraction.org.
 
 

SOURCE Voter Action
    SAN FRANCISCO, April 26 /PRNewswire/ -- California Voters marked their
 latest legal action today by lauding officials in seven California counties
 for their commitments to use or switch to all paper balloting rather than
 electronic voting systems. The Counties of Humboldt, Marin, Placer, San
 Luis Obispo, Trinity, Tulare, and Santa Barbara were dismissed today from
 the California Voters Lawsuit (Holder v. McPherson), supported by Voter
 Action, and filed in San Francisco Superior Court last month. The suit
 seeks to nullify Secretary of State Bruce McPherson's "conditional"
 certification authorizing purchase of the Diebold TSx electronic voting
 system -- which has a history of security, verifiability, and disability
 access problems -- for use in California elections.
     "We applaud the counties leading California "back to the future," by
 selecting verifiable, all paper balloting over electronic voting systems
 with significant security problems, and the risk of fraud and vote
 manipulation," said Lowell Finley, Esq., co-director of Voter Action, and
 co-counsel for the plaintiffs in the California Voters Lawsuit. "These
 counties appreciate the importance of transparency and verifiability in
 clean elections. Diebold TSx electronic voting machines contain technology
 that is easily hacked and nearly impossible to audit or recount, and which
 is illegal under the California Elections Code."
     "These California counties have made the right decision not to use
 touch-screen systems that put election integrity at risk and fail to
 accommodate voters with a range of disabilities as required by law," said
 John Eichhorst, co-counsel for the plaintiffs in the California Voter's
 Lawsuit, and a partner in the San Francisco law firm, Howard, Rice,
 Nemerovski, Canady, Falk & Rabkin, "No county benefits from risking
 election funds on expensive electronic voting systems that have
 acknowledged vulnerability and accessibility problems and fall short of
 satisfying legal requirements."
     "Voters concerned with the integrity of our elections are gaining
 tremendous traction and we are pleased to be supporting them in California
 and in similar efforts in New York, Pennsylvania, Arizona and other
 states," said Holly Jacobson, Co-director of Voter Action.
     The California Voters lawsuit was filed with support from Voter Action,
 a non-profit organization providing legal, research, and logistical support
 for grassroots efforts to ensure the integrity of elections in the United
 States. With members across the country, Voter Action recently led
 successful litigation in New Mexico to block purchase and use of the types
 of voting machines that are most error prone and vulnerable to tampering.
 For additional information, please visit www.voteraction.org.
 
 SOURCE Voter Action