Create Phony Conspiracies

Brunner damaged voter confidence by raising unnecessary doubts about electronic voting machines

The Columbus Dispatch: Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner’s stated goal is to restore Ohioans’ confidence in elections, but her call for hasty and sweeping changes in the machines and methods of voting is generating doubt instead of confidence.

Conspiracy theorists have seized on a recent study of touch-screen voting machines she commissioned as "evidence’’ that Ohio elections are dirty. Their conclusions are false, but the blogosphere, which drives much of the conspiracy talk, has an echo-chamber effect that makes minor glitches in voting sound like major problems. (“Wrong message,” The Columbus Dispatch, editorial, 1/6/08)

The Cincinnati Enquirer: What's worse, while Brunner says her aim is to "avoid any loss of confidence by voters," the study itself is likely to fuel a perception that Ohio's electronic votes aren't being counted accurately - even though it doesn't document instances of that happening, and doesn't even evaluate the likelihood of it happening. … We wonder whether, in short run at least, Brunner's frenzied solution is worse than the actual - not perceived - problem. (“Ohio election ‘quick fix’ is dicey,” The Cincinnati Enquirer, editorial, 1/7/08)

The Columbus Dispatch: The directive that Ohio's provisional votes be cast on paper ballots is a major step backward, based on the needless concern that Ohioans' votes won't remain secret. Had Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner not issued this order in May, Ohioans could continue to vote provisionally using touch-screen machines, a method far cheaper than the cumbersome process of storing paper ballots for later verification. (“The Wrong Direction,” The Columbus Dispatch, editorial, 7/26/07)

The Columbus Dispatch: Though Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner says she does not believe the 2004 election was stolen, the conspiracy-mongers are invigorated each time she casts doubt on the security of electronic voting, and they take heart from her efforts to replace electronic machines with paper-ballot systems. …

The state legislature was on solid ground when it balked at Brunner's request for $64 million to convert the 53 counties using electronic machines to paper ballots. That's an unnecessary and expensive step at a time when Gov. Ted Strickland is looking everywhere for ways to trim spending. (“Suspicions of Ohio's voting systems are unwarranted and shouldn't worry voters,” The Columbus Dispatch, 8/17/08)

The Wheeling News-Intelligencer: Brunner and some other state officials are concerned about a report that the touch-screen machines in use in many counties… are susceptible to tampering and errors. They have said the devices should be replaced, perhaps with paper ballots and optical scanning machines. That would be a major step backward, in our opinion. (“Don’t scrap voting machines in Ohio,” The Wheeling News-Intelligencer, 1/13/07)

The Cincinnati Enquirer: Elections officials who participated in the study doubted that "the poll worker or any other unauthorized individual could emulate one of the security attacks." They called the study "over-hyped," and said "some of the conclusions required leaps in logic that could not be related to the real world." (Peter Bronson, column, The Cincinnati Enquirer, 1/22/08)

The Columbus Dispatch: Only one in 10 county elections officials in Ohio thinks Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner's proposals to overhaul state elections, including scrapping touch-screen voting machines, should be implemented right away, a new Dispatch Poll shows. (“Voting officials oppose quick changes,” Mark Niquette, The Columbus Dispatch, 1/25/08)

The Columbus Dispatch: A Democratic elections officials said, “(Brunner) promised to restore trust in the election process, and I feel she has done just the opposite. This causes more confusion and distrust!” Another said, “She has created so much distrust of the system that voters will not have faith in (touch-screens). … The current directives of (Brunner are) a severe overreaction.” (“What they said,” The Columbus Dispatch, 1/25/08)

The Lima News: Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner tried to create a panic where none existed. She failed, so she should now let it go. ... Brunner was unable to scare enough people into seeing the need for technological regression. She did manage to force county boards of elections to waste a lot of paper, however. … Ohio voters chose technology. That's not surprising. People use computers all the time, transmitting personal information they trust will be secure, be it banking, shopping or taking classes. Brunner should join the rest of Ohio here in the 21st century. (“Panic for one?” The Lima News, editorial, 3/12/08)

Akron Beacon Journal: A tiny fraction of voters took advantage of the secretary of state's directive that paper ballots be provided as an alternative. Still, Brunner pushes for the elimination of touch screens by the fall election, substituting with paper ballots and optical scanners. Her pursuit remains an expensive and potentially disruptive proposition. (“Stifling dissent,” Akron Beacon Journal, editorial, 3/13/08)

Lima News: About the only thing Brunner managed to maintain was distrust in Ohio elections. (“Profile in fiction,” Lima News, 3/20/08)