image © Utah Count Votes

Utah: Count Votes!

Information & Help America Vote Act (HAVA) law text - Take Action! and
View News Reports

Stay Informed - Please Sign Up for our Email Announcements (be sure to reply to the confirmation email) and Check your voter registration at least a month prior to the November election.

Summary: Main Points We Know About Utah Elections and Summary of Our Election Law Change Request

NEWS! Request for Election Law Changes and Contributors to it. Please ask your Utah Representative and Utah Senator to co-sponsor this bill because Utah has Significant Problems with Utah Election Laws and Procedures that make it impossible to detect most types of accidental vote miscount, deliberate ballot tampering or substitution, ballot box stuffing, and voter disenfranchisement.

The film UNCOUNTED documents what happened here in Utah to former Emery County Clerk Bruce Funk who uncovered security flaws in the Diebold/Premier voting machines. See this Preview Clip.

Ohio uses the exact same make and model of voting system as Utah uses. Jennifer Brunner, the Ohio Secretary of State, filed a Counterclaim In Lawsuit With Premier Election Solutions, Documenting Equipment Malfunctions in counties using Diebold/Premier voting systems. Four counties are part of the Ohio lawsuit against voting machine maker due to the voting system failing to count hundreds of votes in each of 11 counties.

Press Release US Count Votes filed a complaint in US District Court against Lt. Governor of Utah Gary Herbert and Summit County, Utah seeking public release of voter registration and election records that Utah has been keeping secret since adopting electronic-ballot touchscreen voting systems. Exhibits for the Federal complaint

Our Response to University of Utah Political Scientist Thad Hall Criticisms of California’s “Top to Bottom” Voting System Review. The California Secretary of State Debra Bowen decertified and conditionally recertified Diebold voting systems to prohibit the use of Diebold digital recording electronic (DRE) touch-screen machines on Election Day except for one Diebold DRE machine per polling place to meet federal requirements for voters with disabilities. Secretary Bowen is requiring manual audits of 100% of Diebold DRE touch-screen paper ballot records; and requires confidence level election audits of optically scanned paper ballots (where the audit amount is adjusted to ensure correct election outcomes, increasing automatically in close elections). Read the California examination findings and new measures to secure election integrity: CA SOS Top-to-Bottom Review and Diebold Election Systems Withdrawal of Approval/Conditional Reapproval

Utah must adopt the same measures that California has adopted if Utah wants fair and accurate election outcomes. California source code reviews and red team penetration tests found that "the Diebold software contains vulnerabilities that could allow an attacker to install malicious software on voting machines and on its central election management systems, which could cause votes to be recorded incorrectly or to be miscounted" and that "some threats would be difficult, if not impossible, to remedy with election procedures". The Diebold Source Code Review Team found that "both the electronic and paper records of the Diebold TSx direct recording electronic voting machine contain enough information to compromise the secrecy of the ballot". Diebold voting system violates the Utah constitution which requires a secret ballot.

Utah Association of Counties (UAC) Legislative Coordinating Committee pushed counties to pass anti-election reform resolutions (opposing federal election reform legislation HR811 that would require independent manual audits of machine tallies and paper ballots) and would fund replacing all inaccurate, hackable Diebold DRE machines by 2010. Utah should SUPPORT HR811 instead. Salt Lake County Council voted to pass the UAC anti-HR811 resolution on June 26, 2007 at its 4 p.m. meeting. Kathy Dopp was the only person who attended and spoke against the resolution and for the interests of Utah taxpayers and voters. All Republicans present, plus Democrat Joe Hatch voted in opposition to federal election reform legislation.

Support Federal Election Reform Legislation - Important Facts About The Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act and a Cato Institute scholar supports HR811 and explains problems with E-Voting

Most states, other than Utah, allow the public to investigate the integrity of the electoral process because our forefathers wrote the U.S. constitution based on the principal that we are a government for the people and by the people and have a right to peacefully overturn our government by selecting our own representatives. Here is a May 7, 2007 article on the Diebold TSx digital recording electronic (DRE)voting system that Utah uses: First U.S. Scientific Election Audit Reveals Voting System Flaws But Questions Remain Unanswered. Other articles on the voting system that Utah uses are available at

On February 8, 2007 at 11:15 a.m. there was a public hearing before the Utah State Records Board to see whether or not Utahns would have access to election records that are necessary for citizen oversight over the accuracy and integrity of the electoral process. The citizens of Utah lost, and the private companies and election officials who secretly count our votes without any independent scrutiny won. Here is what the State Records Committee Said: Utah State Records Committee Decision and Order. Here is the our hearing brief filed by Kathy Dopp in the case of Dopp versus Summit County. Summit County Attorney ignored repeated requests for an electronic version of their hearing brief. Utahns have lost their right to citizen oversight over elections under the current Lt. Governor Gary Herbert. Any records having to do with elections can now be kept secret and then destroyed after 22 months. However, the Utah legislature just altered Utah election code to make elections more secretive. The National Election Data Archive is seeking donations to bring a court case to obtain access to public records and overturn Utah election code.

Here is a proposal for a Utah Election Audit based on the most advanced election audit principles. On the other hand, the internal audit implemented by the Office of the Utah Lt. Governor is a sham audit according to Utah Count Votes and the Desert Green Party.
    Utah purchased Diebold voting machines which are designed ideally for undetectably rigging elections, but are otherwise a design disaster, and use uncertified operating system software which was not federally tested. The office of the Lt. Governor Herbert helped Diebold coverup the evidence that it had sold Utah a combination of new and used, rejected voting machines, for the price of new ones, and helped retire the county clerk who discovered the fraud. The federal testing lab which tested the Diebolds was not recertified by the US Election Assistance Commission.

    View this September 2006 video on Diebold Security Flaws by Princeton University Computer Scientists:
Read the full Princeton study on Diebold voting machines and
Diebold Press Release and Responses to Diebold

The Election Science Institute study of Cuyahoga County, OH Diebold election found that none of the four records of votes in Diebold (two electronic and two paper) matched! See the section Comparison of Ballot Data

Utah Election Officials appointed a "vote audit and recount committee" that lacks anyone who is an expert in the field of election audits, despite there being such an expert available right here in Utah (See The audit procedures of the Lt. Governor do not even require that the data be committed prior to the audit and Utah election officials refused to publicly release the electronic vote tallies on each DRE machine, so that the manual audit was just a song and dance where the manual counts were never compared to the electronic tallies. (Later it was learned in Cuyahoga County, OH that the Diebold voting system is not capable of printing a report of individual DRE machine tallies, and so entire precincts would have to be audited in order to compare manual and machine tallies.) Some counties leave opaque brown plastic covers hiding the voter verifiable paper rolls, so that voters are unlikely to check their paper roll ballot records and machine errors would not be detected by manual counts of these paper records. Diebold recommends "auditing" elections by having a computer program read bar codes on the paper rolls to see if they match the invisible electronic ballots, neither verifiable by the voter.

Click Here to Tell Utah Governor Jon Huntsman to Stand With Bruce Funk! Contact Utah Governor Huntsman and Utah Attorney General and Your Utah Representatives to file a complaint.

BlackBoxVoting covers the Utah story. March 18, 2006 Utah Diebold Voting System Examined by Experts.
May 5, 2006 DIEBOLD Threat (Discovered in Utah) described as 'National Security Risk'! and brought a lock-down on all Diebold systems in Pennsylvania.
Letters From Utah Count Votes Founder Kathy Dopp about the Utah Diebold cover-up: to Governor Jon Huntsman and to Legal Counselor to Governor Huntsman, Mike Lee and to Utah Legislative Joint Government Operations Chairman Doug Aagard and an earlier response from Governor Huntsman
PLEASE SIGN UP TO HELP US KEEP OUR FORUM UPDATED WITH RECENT ARTICLES! Public Election Forum - Please sign up. Special Diebold News Forum Please Post any news about Diebold voting machines here.
Utah Lt. Governor Selected Diebold E-Voting Machines Which Are Inaccurate, are Highly Susceptible to Election Tampering, and Do Not Yet Meet Help America Vote Act (HAVA) for Disabled Voters or Error Rates!
NSF-funded Project ACCURATE Computer Scientists Make Recommendations
Utah Lt. Governor Gary Herbert Misled our Press and County Commissioners & Council Members
UtahCountVotes 8/2/05 response to Lt. Governor Herbert and to Chief of Staff Demma
Accessibility Handout and Verified Voting Foundation Access Charts and HAVA Error Rates U.S. E.A.C. Advisory and Discussion of the US EAC Jul 20, 2005 Advisory
Utah uses Diebold Voting Machines which Should Not Qualify Yet for HAVA Funds and are not the best available machines for the disabled.
Computer Scientist Doug Jones on The Case of Diebold FTP Story
What Measures Would Ensure Accurate Vote Counts? Longer Advice on Diebolds
Comparison of Diebold & ES&S Voting Systems
Utah Lt. Governor Herbert responds to questions from Joycelynn Straight - reveals that Diebold has been changing the serial numbers on its voting machines in Utah! Joycelynn maintains a web site
Irrefutable Photographic Evidence of Diebold Touchscreen Flaws
Public Input was not permitted by the Utah Legislative Joint Government Operations Cmte in either April or May! Contact Your Utah Legislators!
Feb. 22, 2006 Diebold Voting System Security Study.
Governor Ehrlich R-MD Letter Blasting Diebold Voting Machines
Governor Richardson D-NM Letter to all 50 State Election Directors urging that Paper Ballots be used in elections.
Senator Debra Bowen D-CA Blasts Diebold Voting Machines
Novices Guide to Why Current Voting Systems Allow Insiders Freedom to Tamper with Vote Counts, and Measures to Effectively Ensure Accurate Vote Counts.
VOLUNTEERS are Needed to Update this Web site; to help write Press Releases; and to organize events and lobbying efforts. Please contact kathy at
This Nation-wide effort to Ensure the Accuracy of U.S. vote counts needs your help and donations.
Utah's PhD computer scientists at both Brigham Young and Utah Universities warned Utah's Election Officials in writing on October 20, 2004 - Against Purchasing DRE voting machines
Computer Professor David Dill spoke at the University of Utah
List of Scientific Studies on Diebold/Premier Election Solution Voting System Flaws 2003 to 2007

Accuracy requires a way to detect and correct errors. Diebold voting machines provide no practical way to detect or correct errors due to the flawed design of its paper roll record of ballots. It adds another step for the voters. A manual count of its paper roll would be an unbelievably complex process. Voters have no way to know if the electronic and barcode records of our votes are accurate. If we hire Diebold to count the paper rolls for us using paper-roll advancers, laptops, programs and scanners, it is not an independent check of accuracy. Paper rolls are not a legal ballot in Utah.

Please speak with your county and city election officials, attorneys and commissioners or council members and convince them not to go along with the state's choice Here are some materials to give them. You may want to include News Articles as well as this discussion of the possible consequences of implementing systems which do not meet HAVA error rate standards.

Please join us Park City, Summit County(435) 608-1382

Schedule of County Meetings 8/29-9/9

On August 15th - UT's Lt. Governor Gary Herbert, spoke to Summit County Commissioners and spread much misinformation about the Diebold touch-screens. Is he really unaware of all news about Diebold's malfunctions?

August 18th - Please attend the Park City Council Meeting & give your input.

Apr 21, 2005 there was a public hearing Thur 6-8 p.m. First Floor Auditorium of the State Office Building - The Lieutenant Governor listened to computer experts and the public. Over 15 persons requested that Utah select the paper ballot Op Scan AutoMARK option, many of whom were computer experts. However, the Lt. Governor was overheard after the meeting saying that he was not going to listen to which voting machine the public had favored, and was going to allow the two computer "experts" on the voting equipment selection committee decide, even though the credentials of many of the public at the hearing were much better than those of the two "computer experts" on the committee.

Comments were accepted in writing at the meeting and via email to ending at 5:00 pm on Tuesday, April 26, 2005.

Utah's MOCK ELECTION was March 30,2005 ES&S AutoMark Op-Scan system for voters, and Diebold DRE paper-rolls-under-plastic voting systems were displayed. It had been announced that voters would be asked to fill out surveys giving their opinions on the equipment, but after a certain number of required surveys were filled out, many voters reported being told that there were no more surveys, so many voters were not able to give their input.

Utah Count Votes advises that voting systems follow Best Practices recommended by computer scientists and that politicians ask for hand-recounts of randomly selected precincts. Utah Count Votes recommends the purchase of optical scan systems that produce paper ballots that are auditable by Utah's election officials. DRE voting machines using electronic ballots cause electronic failures, errors, or manipulations to corrupt election results and DREs are not independently re-countable by Utah's own officials.

On October 20, 2004 Computer Scientists Submitted a Summary Letter to Influence Utah's Voting Equipment Selection - Utah Voting Equipment Selection Advice, and both Kathy Dopp, UtahCountVotes Founder, and BYU Associate Professor of Computer Science, Phillip J. Windley testified before the Utah Legislature on Utah's Voting Equipment Selection.

USCountVotes urged Lt. Governor Herbert to restart the voting machine selection process and to this time solicit the advice of voting system experts to help Utah select voting equipment. We had hoped that Lt. Governor Herbert would set Utah in motion to adopt an open source voting system with a voter verifiable paper ballot, and a wiser direction for the selection of Utah's voting equipment than his predecessor. Alas, instead he selected the worst possible choice of voting systems that Utah was considering.

Michael Burkhart comments on voting machine testing. Email for more info.

Under Former Lt. Governor McKeachnie, Utah considered bid proposals for DRE voting machines from Diebold and ES&S despite all advice from dozens of computer scientists who advised against DRE voting machines. McKeachnie's Election Director had planned to finalize a contract for voting equipment in December, until the incoming Lt. Governor Gary Herbert requested that they delay the purchase of voting equipment so that Herbert could make the decisions that would affect his administration. Lt. Governor Gary Herbert came into office in January 2005.

Utah Voting Equipment Selection - Timeline Under Former Lt. Governor McKeachnie.

Why so much Secrecy of Utah's Election Office? According to Utah computer scientists , Utah's voting equipment selection criteria is so vague as to be essentially secret. Utah's vendor bid proposals are secret. Will Utah hire reputable computer scientists to evaluate security? We do not know. Will Utah hire testing engineers to competently test the voting machines it is considering? We do not know. Will Utah hire one of the only three computer scientists in America who publicly support paperless computerized voting (Michael Shamos, Brett Williams, or Glen Newkirk) to rubber stamp its selection? We do not know. Utah's design and the security features for its electronic voter rolls are unknown. What safeguards will prevent legal voters from being disenfranchised? The programs which cast and count votes are proprietary or secret. (See short section below on the problems with publicly disclosed proprietary softare.)

Utah selected a voting machines where ballots are "secretly counted" because the programs counting votes are proprietary rather than open source, but are "publicly cast" because paper rolls store ballots sequentially. If cut, curled up paper are even more difficult to store, handle, and re-count. If no paper is used, then ballots would be "secretly cast, and Not Counted" due to possible election rigging, hacking, program errors, or electronic failures altering election results.

Solution: Preserve Utah's reputation for honest, accurate elections. Rather than purchase flawed equipment, Utah could join multi-state efforts to develop and deploy open voting systems that permit voters, including voters with disabilities, to verify privately cast paper ballots

STAY INFORMED. Please join "Utah Count Votes" email announcements list HOME
Kathy Dopp's Blog