Our team recently spoke with Jeff O’Donnell to discuss his take on the SC primary and here is his overall take on his confidence in the results of elections after evaluating many systems across the nation.
Most Election Management Systems in America are NOT certified
By Laura Scharr, team leader SC Safe Elections Group
Gateway pundit ran this recent article on election machine certification or lack thereof. This is an issue that was brought up by many starting in November of 2020 and I personally testified about this to some of our South Carolina legislators last year in June. This past Thursday, June 23rd I again testified to this issue in a SCGOP hearing regarding irregularities in the June 14th primary. Here are the details:
First let’s state SC law with respect to system requirements.
S.C. Code §7-13-1640 establishes the requirements for voting machines used in South Carolina. South Carolina’s requirements adhere to the minimum requirements found in HAVA, the Help America Vote Act.
S.C. Code §7-13-1620 (A) further requires that: a voting system may not be approved for use in the State unless certified by a testing laboratory (VSTLs or Voting System Testing Laboratories) accredited by the Federal Election Assistance Commission as meeting or exceeding the minimum requirements of federal voting system standards
South Carolina is 1 of 12 states that require federal certification of voting machines. “Although participation in the program is voluntary, adherence to the program’s procedural requirements is mandatory for participants.”
HAVA, the Help America Vote Act is US Code that states that all rules and regulations as to Vote System Test Laboratories or VSTLs are put in place by the Election Assistance Commission or EAC. There are two main VSTLs Pro V&V and SLI Compliance. In order to meet its statutory requirements under HAVA §15371(b), the EAC has developed the EAC’s Voting System Test Laboratory Accreditation Program. The procedural requirements of the program are established in the Election Assistance Commission Voting System Test Laboratory Accreditation Program Manual. Even though the program manual is not statute. Statute dictates that the manual set the rules. The procedural requirements of this Manual will supersede any prior laboratory accreditation requirements issued by the EAC.
VSTL’s are VERY important because equipment vulnerabilities allow for deployment of algorithms and scripts to intercept, alter and adjust voting tallies. They also examine the use of COTS (Commercial Off-The-Shelf) components which are a huge potential source of vulnerability.
Certification of our systems in SC
In the 2020 general election our state used our new machines/election management system ES&S version 6.0.2.0.
It was certified by SLI Compliance which was issued a certificate of accreditation on 1/10/18 with an expiration of 1/10/21. Note that our new ES&S system and election machines were put into place in time for our primaries after that test date, in 2019.
According to the vote system’s test laboratory manual version 2.0 effective May 31st 2015 manual page 38, the certificates must not exceed 2 years and must be signed by the Chair of the EAC (not the Executive Director), thus the laboratory’s certification was invalid.
The labs that certified the machines were not in compliance as they had 3 year expiration and were not signed by the Chair of the commission.
Here is a copy of the certificate for the SLI Compliance lab.
The manual guidelines were not followed. Note that this was something that affected many states as these systems were used across the country. Furthermore, were there any materials or even minor changes that were made from 2018 until election day in November of 2020? If so, that would require an update to the certification/inspection to ensure the system was still compliant.
System upgrade to 6.1.1.0 that was then used in the June 14th primary
Our ES&S Election Management System was upgraded last year this time to version 6.1.1.0 and it was primarily updated to include Windows 10.
The 6.1.1.0 EMS was certified by Pro V&V, the other testing laboratory, and oddly enough that lab also was noncompliant. It had a certificate dated for the original certification of 2015 and the most recent cert has a 2021 expiration and is also signed by the Executive Director, not the Chair of the commission, so protocols and standards from the manual are not being followed.
Once We the People started to investigate these certifications in late 2020 suddenly a memo from Jerome Levato was issued. This memo blamed the delays and lack of certification updates on Covid. Why then? Why not prior to that when Covid was rampant? His mea culpa memo was issued in January of 2021 and he left the agency the next month. Note also that they changed the notation on the certificate to say “accreditation remains effective until revoked by a vote of the EAC.” Note that the manual still requires a 2 year expiration date.
Government contracts are normally highly scrutinized for compliance
Why couldn’t a small staff of people inspect a system and get the certification? These certifications don’t require a large staff that is in close contact with each other putting people at risk. We had real estate transactions and other contracts being signed during COVID but we couldn’t get our election system certified in an important election year? Seems very suspicious to me.
The test/certification for the 6.1.1.0 was in June of 2020 and they claim it was certified 7-27-20 prior to when it was upgraded in SC last year spring/summer 2021.
As a concerned citizen, I don’t feel comfortable with this process and these explanations. These are governmental contracts which should be under far more scrutiny than your private contracts. Why are we not following the rules? Are we a society of some rules count and others don’t? Do we just change the rules when we think they aren’t in our favor anymore? If the EAC changed the rules, why didn’t they change their manual to be consistent? If I had a marriage certificate that wasn’t signed by the right person would my marriage be legitimate? If I bought a house and the contract wasn’t signed by the correct person would that transaction be legit? The 2-year expiration timeframe is important as these systems are considered “critical infrastructure.” If they are so critical why was this process so lax and procedures not followed? And put your thinking cap on and ask yourself why these certifications weren’t done properly by BOTH labs? What might be the reason for that in critical election years?
SC primary off to a rough start as law is not followed and errors are made
In this video, a few members of our team discuss the issues with absentee ballots being viewed earlier than what our law states which is that they may begin examining the ballots no earlier than two days immediately preceding election day. Instead, the counties were directed via a calendar by the SEC to inspect these as they came in. This is apparently how this is how they have done it for years.
Absentee ballots are where a lot of fraud can potentially occur so these procedures are important to follow.
In addition, in Beaufort a gentleman who was running for a local race went to the polls to vote and his own race was not on his ballot! View his Facebook accounting of this here.
Apparently, the redistricting due to the census was not corrected so that the ballots reflected the appropriate races. This could likely affect all races where there was redistricting? Could mean there will be a lot of special elections post primary.
CISA admits machines are vulnerable to hacking
This article is a “mea culpa” from Cybersecurity and infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)—the agency that famously said that our 2020 elections was the most secure ever and that the machines or election management systems can’t be connected to the internet. Now, just prior to the Halderman report being issued they are saying that the systems are capable of being hacked and that there are vulnerabilities that could have potentially affected more than 16 states. The Halderman report cites the issue of USB flash drives being one way that malware or viruses can be launched onto the election management system. This was an issue that our cyber expert Burl brought up in our recent whitepaper on ES&S. (And make no mistake ALL of these systems are vulnerable not just Dominion as they have similar architecture and software and are derivatives of the prior Diebold election system.
This is concerning as our ES&S systems across the state were updated last year to upload Windows 10 (they were purchased with Windows 7 in 2019). The method of upgrade was that ES&S representatives came and inserted flash drives into each machine to update the software. How do we know that these flash drives weren’t corrupted? Note that we have asked our election commission to provide evidence of penetration testing to ensure the security of our systems and there were no records responsive to our request. How can we be confident in our election infrastructure when we hear reports like this? We also know that political leaders on both sides of the aisle have complained about the fact that these election systems can be hacked. Here is a video of democrats doubting election results.
All machines can be hacked even if they are air-gapped. Early voting for 2 weeks only gives nefarious actors more data to know how much to cheat. We need to move to paper ballots and hand counting. Scrap the machines.
Election Machine vulnerabilities and potential for fraud even in RED states
Are current South Carolina Election security procedures and processes adequate to ensure that the citizens have confidence in their vote? Is our election system transparent and secure?
The attached whitepaper was prepared in response to the various concerns about the certification and vulnerabilities of the ES&S election management system that South Carolina used for the 2020 election and will use for the upcoming 2022 midterms and general elections.
This paper is meant to raise the awareness of the ongoing issues with electronic voting systems. ES&S, Dominion and Hart Intercivic which are the main voting system manufacturers all have similar architecture and thus similar potential vulnerabilities.
This paper focuses on ES&S which is used in approximately 20 other states so the inherent problems discussed in the paper could be pertinent to these other systems around the nation.
As the paper states no electronic voting system is impenetrable. That is why IT experts recommend a paper ballot system with strong protocols to protect against fraud.
The citizens of South Carolina have seen too many examples of fraud –whether it be ballot stuffing through the movie 2000 mules, votes flipped in front of our eyes on election night, boxes of ballots being brought out from tables in GA, election data being erased in Mesa and Maricopa County or ballot marking devices switching our vote as we vote in real time, our trust in the process has been diminished. Our vote is our voice and if there are ineligible votes like what we found in our canvassing efforts that cancel out our individual and collective vote, we start believing that our officials are “selected” not elected. Our overall mission is ultimately to enhance trust in the system so that everyone believes it transparent, honest, fair and safe. Every legitimate vote should count.
Until we are confident that our election management systems are secure, we should not be utilizing the machines for any election. Our system has not been properly certified up to the current standards which is required by law. This leads to credibility issues with the results of the elections.
It is our hope that the appropriate measures such as penetration testing and other security provisions can be made to reduce the probability of intrusion. We provide several recommendations to do so. Until then we should vote using paper ballots or delay the primary until we can ensure our vote is safe and accurate.
Another way to evade any potential issues with the election management system is for the citizens to vote “en masse.” This is especially critical in primaries which have particularly low turnouts. If we overwhelm the system with the passion of our voices we can prevail.
Small steps you can take to help with the elections
Many of you are concerned about the integrity of our election process but feel powerless to do anything. You CAN help in many ways this election season. First and foremost, remember to vote in person on election day as late as you possibly can. Don’t vote absentee and don’t vote during the early in person 2 week period prior to election day! This will minimize the potential for fraud.
Whether you just are going to vote and want to observe what is going on around you during that time or can spend a day or more monitoring the polls, here are some suggested steps that our team is recommending. Please read and consider doing at least one of these important actions:
SC SAFE ELECTIONS
Strategies For Voter Integrity
3 Ways To Get involved and be a part of the election process:
1) POLL WATCHER
We need all hands on deck to protect our votes in the upcoming Primary and General Elections.
Poll Watcher: A volunteer position that requires minimal training. They are assigned to a polling place by a candidate or a political party in the Primary Election and by the political party in the General Election. A poll watcher observes and documents the election process and make sure that everything is done according to SC laws and procedures.
How to become a poll watcher:
1) Contact your local party for their poll watcher training schedule and sign-up with them for training.
2) Also contact Tammy (see her info below) to get on our master poll watcher list so that we can send you additional training information and possibly assign you to polling locations for the primary election to represent a campaign. http://scvotes.gov/poll-watchers
You will also need to contact your local party to get basic training.
2) MYSTERY VOTERS
Mystery Voters: are voters that sign-up with us to pay attention to the voters in front of them while they are going through the voting process at the poll. They will have a list of questions that they will fill out and return to us. They will be watching to see if they are checking voter identification; if voters in front of them have to fill out provisional or emergency ballots; if the voters in front of them had any trouble with the voting machines. This is a simple action item that takes very little time and we encourage EVERYONE to participate in it.
Please contact Tammy to sign-up to be a Mystery Voter at your polling location.
3) ELECTION EYES REPORTING–if you see something say something
Election Eyes Reporting Voters: are voters who are alert to their surroundings when they go to vote. They keep their eyes and ears open for any unusual issues that may be going on around them. These issues can then be reported to “ELECTION EYES” by:
- Calling 6072-V-WATCH (enter code SC) or
- Go to electioneyes.us to fill out a form You must still maintain the privacy of the voters around you and not be intrusive or interruptive to the voting process in any way.
- Launch a formal complaint with our election commission here http://www.scvotes.gov/title-iii-complaint-procedures
Please spread this info far and wide so we can maximize our eyes on the election process this important primary season and beyond.
Thanks,
Tammy P.
Final election reform bill for SC passes House and Senate
The SC legislature has passed election reform legislation in the final week of session. Our team has scoured the bill and here is the good, the bad and the ugly of this bill. If you want to read the full bill yourself here is the link:
https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess124_2021-2022/prever/108_20220511.htm
Looks like election reform bills dead this session
The House passed on the senate version of 4919 and instead took their version of the bill and added to another totally unrelated Senate bill. It appears with only 3 days of session remaining any attempt at election reform is now dead. At this point, we prefer the status quo.
House of Cards South Carolina Style Part 2
In this video, SC Safe Elections members Laura, Cryste, and Leslie discuss election bill 4919, the history of the reason the advice and consent was added and what we believe will be the end result.
Our team has scrutinized the bills and listened to the debates and we believe that the senate bill should be passed as is. There is not much time left in the session so hopefully our legislative body can come to a consensus and get a decent election reform bill passed.
The people want accountability and centralizing control of the elections under an organization that only is overseen by the governor doesn’t seem wise given the history that Leslie so eloquently outlines in this video.
Senate 4919 isn’t ideal but it is a good first step especially given the amendments that were added. See our previous blogs on this topic.
Here also is a one-page summary of why we like the bill:
In addition, here is the Fitsnews article that breaks down the behind the scenes drama (along with incriminating emails) going on at the SEC as Marci Andino was heading out. Note that Wells is now the Chairmen of the commission.
Action items: Call your senate and house members and ask them to pass 4919 as is–to include accountability for the South Carolina Election Commission.
Watch this great clip from Senator Massey debating the bill. Some great comments by Senator Chip Campsen as well regarding inaccurate voter rolls.
Note that the issue of the witness signature issue where the senate sued DID go to the US supreme court. Luckily they won. That was a close call. Luckily our state didn’t enter into a consent decree nor did the legislature change the law. Per Sen. Massey, we were close to being GA! THIS IS A MUST WATCH!