For Immediate Release:  San Francisco, CA, September 14, 2006 – A group of California voters, including civil rights leader Dolores Huerta and several disabled persons, vowed to continue its lawsuit, filed on March 21, 2006, to block the State’s use of Diebold TSx DRE touch screen electronic voting systems, while expressing disappointment over today’s ruling by the California Superior Court in San Francisco, that permits the machines to be used in this November’s elections. 
"Although the Court was not willing to interfere with Respondent counties' plans now that less than two months remain before the November election, we remain confident of our legal position and will continue to press forward with the case.  We look forward to the opportunity to develop and present evidence of the failings of the Diebold system without the pressure of concerns that granting relief will prevent counties from being able to administer an election," said John Eichhorst, partner in the law firm of Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk & Rabkin in San Francisco, and co-counsel for the California voter plaintiffs.
“As recently as last week in several state primaries, Diebold electronic voting system breakdowns have wreaked havoc, disenfranchising thousands of voters trying to participate in the direction of our government at this critical point in time,” said Lowell Finley, co-director of Voter Action and co-counsel for the plaintiffs. “The near certainty of election-day chaos, combined with serious security flaws inherent in the Diebold technology – confirmed in a study by Princeton University computer security experts released this week -- make it hard to understand why the California counties would proceed at such high risk.  There are no remedies that can make Diebold electronic systems reliable or secure.”  
The new study, conducted by faculty and researchers at the Center for Information Technology Policy at Princeton University, and released on September 13, 2006, confirmed many of the severe security problems with Diebold touch screen technology and software previously documented by computer security expert, Dr. Harri Hursti, and others.  The TS technology, which the Princeton experts tested, is very similar to the newer TSx technology used by counties in California, Colorado, Arizona, Pennsylvania and many other states.  The full report and an executive summary demonstrate undetectable hacking that requires 1 minute of access to a memory card slot and changes only enough votes to produce a fraudulent winner.  Additional information is available by visiting http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/ 
“We may have not won this first ‘skirmish,’ but the battle for transparent, accessible and secure voting is gaining momentum in the wake of pervasive problems with Diebold systems at the polls,” said Holly Jacobson, co-director of Voter Action.  “Concerned voters will continue to seek legal relief in California and other states. Paper balloting is a more secure and less expensive option, which is why more than half the counties across the country are using it.  Eight California counties have pledged to move to paper balloting with opti-scan systems in response to the evidence in the California voters’ lawsuit, and more will follow when they experience a Diebold-related crisis on Election Day.”
 Voter Action, www.voteraction.org is a not-for-profit organization providing legal, research, and logistical support for grassroots efforts to ensure the integrity of elections in the United States.  Voter Action supported successful litigation in New Mexico to block the purchase and use of direct recording electronic (DRE) computerized voting systems.  Voter Action is currently supporting similar efforts in Arizona, Colorado, New York, Pennsylvania, and other states.  Voter Action is a project of the International Humanities Center, a 501(c)(3) organization.
###