From The Columbus Dispatch, 8/17/06:
http://www.dispatch.com/?story=dispatch/2006/08/17/20060817-A1-00.html

Can we trust the voting results?

Diebold defends touch-screen machines, but a study fans debate over
their reliability

Mark Niquette
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH


Diebold and many elections officials yesterday downplayed an
independent study that questions the accuracy of touch-screen machines
used by more than half of Ohio voters, saying the units are sound.

But critics and the study's director say more review is needed to
answer a fundamental question:

Can Ohioans trust results from those Diebold machines, especially when
there's a close election or recount?

"We need to further investigate, and only when we have the outcome of
that investigation will we know," said Steven Hertzberg, founder of
California-based Election Science Institute.

Hertzberg said such a review cannot be completed before Ohio's
nationally watched Nov. 7 general election, and it was unclear
yesterday what additional investigation might be done in coming weeks.

Cuyahoga County commissioners hired the independent, nonpartisan
consultant to review the results from the May gubernatorial primaries
in the county; the ESI determined that the electronic vote totals from
the Diebold touch screens did not always match the paper record.

Hertzberg said he cannot say whether it was human error, machine error
or both without a forensic analysis.

____________________________________________________________

It'll be an interesting election.

From The Columbus Dispatch, 8/17/06:
http://www.dispatch.com/?story=dispatch/2006/08/17/20060817-A1-00.html

Can we trust the voting results?

Diebold defends touch-screen machines, but a study fans debate over
their reliability

Mark Niquette
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH


Diebold and many elections officials yesterday downplayed an
independent study that questions the accuracy of touch-screen machines
used by more than half of Ohio voters, saying the units are sound.

But critics and the study’s director say more review is needed to
answer a fundamental question:

Can Ohioans trust results from those Diebold machines, especially when
there’s a close election or recount?

"We need to further investigate, and only when we have the outcome of
that investigation will we know," said Steven Hertzberg, founder of
California-based Election Science Institute.

Hertzberg said such a review cannot be completed before Ohio’s
nationally watched Nov. 7 general election, and it was unclear
yesterday what additional investigation might be done in coming weeks.

Cuyahoga County commissioners hired the independent, nonpartisan
consultant to review the results from the May gubernatorial primaries
in the county; the ESI determined that the electronic vote totals from
the Diebold touch screens did not always match the paper record.

Hertzberg said he cannot say whether it was human error, machine error
or both without a forensic analysis.

____________________________________________________________

It'll be an interesting election.

Harry