August 16, 2011 – 9:52 am
The State Election Commission has admitted that Lancaster County failed to keep any of their November 2010 election files for an audit. Below is the State Election Commission’s explanation as to why this happened in Lancaster County, which once again highlights our system is too complicated to operate.
“Under normal circumstances, one database would be used to prepare Personal Electronic Ballots (PEBs – devices used to load ballots on voting machines) and the central vote tabulating computer. If both are not prepared from the same database, the automated vote tabulation process will not work, and paper results tapes from each precinct must be used to manually enter votes into the system.
When the Lancaster database was originally created, it contained the names of all certified political parties. However, all parties did not nominate candidates in Lancaster County, and those that did not needed to be removed. read more »
August 16, 2011 – 9:23 am
Sussex County, New Jersey uses the same complicated ES&S system as South Carolina. Please read this letter from ES&S describing how their technician caused precinct votes to double. ESS report
South Carolina accepted funds from the Federal Government under the Help America Vote Act, referred to by the acronym HAVA, to purchase and maintain the current ES&S voting system.
The Federal Election Commission and HAVA set minimum standards for voting systems, including acceptable error rates. We have in several jurisdictions found significant numbers of errors so does the current system meet these standards. read more »
November 5, 2010 – 3:23 am
The Sumter Item in Sumter, SC has an article about malfunctioning voting machines in Sumter County in the November, 2010 election. Channel Five in Charleston has a report on similar troubles in Charleston County in the same election.