What are we going to do when they don't count our votes again?

Colo. judge warily OKs voting machines

By COLLEEN SLEVIN, Associated Press

A judge on Friday chastised state officials for botching efforts to ensure electronic voting machines are tamperproof but cleared them for use in the November election, saying it was too late now to change course.

Denver District Judge Lawrence Manzanares said the secretary of state's office had violated state law by failing to come up with minimum security standards for the machines. He added that the office had done an "abysmal" job documenting which tests were performed on the machines and should not have allowed computer manufacturers to vouch for the security of their own products.

The judge said, however, that he would not bar the machines with the election just six weeks away and county clerks warning they might not have time to print enough paper ballots.

"The risks of decertifying them are greater than the risks of not using them," the judge said.

Many of the machines will be used in Colorado's most populous counties during the general election Nov. 7. A lawsuit filed by a handful of voters claimed the machines were not secure, suggesting the accuracy of election results could be in jeopardy.

Manzanares said the secretary of state's office still must issue new security guidelines after the election.

For November, he ordered the state to work with counties to come up with a plan to make sure the machines are kept under close watch.

After the hearing, attorneys for both sides met behind closed doors to talk about possible solutions. The state will submit a plan on Monday and lawyers for the 13 voters who filed the lawsuit will weigh in on Tuesday.

"I want to assure the voters that the machines are safe, their votes are secure, that they need to feel confident about their vote, and I encourage them to vote in November," Secretary of State Gigi Dennis said.

The lawsuit, filed by 13 voters, sought to have four types of the machines barred from use.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs argued the machines can be easily manipulated to switch people's votes, that state officials didn't take adequate steps to test or secure the machines, and that the state was under pressure from county clerks to approve the machines quickly.

They also argued they are not easily accessible to voters with disabilities.

Lawyers for the secretary of state's office said the machines have been approved by independent laboratories endorsed by the government and were reviewed according to state law. They also said the machines will print receipt-like paper ballots that can be used in case of a recount or audit.