Voting device pact at issue

Found on Bostom.com on Monday, 26 March 2007
Browse Legal-Issues

Diebold Election Systems Inc., one of the country's largest manufacturers of voting machines, is scheduled to argue in court today that the Office of the Secretary of State wrongly picked another company to supply thousands of voting machines for the disabled.

Weisberg said Diehold was so stunned it did not get the contract that it now believes "it's worth the time and money" of going to court to challenge the contract's award, even though the company at this stage has no hard evidence of unfair treatment.

"We want a judge to either order the contract awarded to Diebold, based on his review of the proposals, but if he does not want to go that far, to at least order a reopening of the competition," he said.

While price was a key consideration, other criteria were considered, such as the quality of machine, security, and service.

Their nerve is amazing: sueing Massachusetts because a competitor is better. You just need 5 minutes of research to realize that Diebold fails at quality, security and service. Not to mention that they don't allow security audits and make fun of known problems with their machines. Oh, and the chairman said he supports Dubya and "will do everything" to get him re-relected. How's that for a company that's supposed to guarantee a fair election?