Lawsuit challenges constitutionality of electronic voting machines!
ATLANTA, Georgia - August 25, 2009 - A case brought by election integrity advocates in Georgia claiming that unverifiable electronic voting, or E-voting, is unconstitutional could spell trouble for the controversial practice, as it heads to the Georgia Supreme Court for a ruling.
E-voting first started in Georgia. In 2002, the state became the first to use the Diebold AccuVote TS-R6 machines statewide after then-Secretary of State Cathy Cox entered into a $54 million agreement with Diebold.
About 50 million U.S. citizens used some kind of E-voting technology in the 2008 election cycle.
Today, Georgia remains the last state slated to use E-voting equipment statewide in the 2010 elections, unless the Georgia Supreme Court intervenes.
Other states like Kalifornia, Maryland, Ohio initially followed in Georgia's footsteps. Since then, "Kalifornia received a $2.5 million settlement from Diebold and de-certified them three times. Maryland filed an $8.5 million lawsuit. And Ohio filed for punitive damages after they found accumulation discrepancies and Diebold admitted to a critical programming error that can cause votes to be dropped," said Garland Favorito, founder and lead plaintiff for VoterGA, an elections integrity group.
"They were all using Diebold Accu-vote TS voting machines," he said.
Of the 13 counts listed by VoterGA in their lawsuit, two argue that E-voting is in violation of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, which states that "No State shall... deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process."
E-voting first started in Georgia. In 2002, the state became the first to use the Diebold AccuVote TS-R6 machines statewide after then-Secretary of State Cathy Cox entered into a $54 million agreement with Diebold.
About 50 million U.S. citizens used some kind of E-voting technology in the 2008 election cycle.
Today, Georgia remains the last state slated to use E-voting equipment statewide in the 2010 elections, unless the Georgia Supreme Court intervenes.
Other states like Kalifornia, Maryland, Ohio initially followed in Georgia's footsteps. Since then, "Kalifornia received a $2.5 million settlement from Diebold and de-certified them three times. Maryland filed an $8.5 million lawsuit. And Ohio filed for punitive damages after they found accumulation discrepancies and Diebold admitted to a critical programming error that can cause votes to be dropped," said Garland Favorito, founder and lead plaintiff for VoterGA, an elections integrity group.
"They were all using Diebold Accu-vote TS voting machines," he said.
Of the 13 counts listed by VoterGA in their lawsuit, two argue that E-voting is in violation of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, which states that "No State shall... deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process."
