The Washington Post reports:
Linda H. Lamone, Maryland's elections administrator, is featured prominently promoting a Diebold Election Systems product that caused delays in last year's elections.
Her appearance in the company's new marketing and sales brochure has critics asking whether she violated state ethics law by publicly promoting a vendor.
"Our election judges just love this product, and so do I," reads a caption attributed to Lamone and placed next to her photograph, referring to Diebold's "ExpressPoll-5000," an electronic poll book that debuted in Maryland in September's primary. "We in Maryland are extremely pleased with the performance of the system during the general election," the caption continues. Lamone is pictured in a state office, smiling and flanked by a Maryland flag.
Lamone wasn't paid for the appearance. However, I don't know why an official is conducting product endorsements for companies with contracts with the State. And, of course, there is the matter of the fiasco with the same machines on their first outing in the primary. Both Republican and Democratic legislators thought the decision to appear in the ad was questionable according to the Baltimore Sun:
"We're not to use public office to endorse a product," said Del. Elizabeth Bobo, a Howard County Democrat and critic of Diebold. "At best, this is an example of extremely poor judgment. And that doesn't even address my concerns with the content of her statements."
Sen. Andrew P. Harris, a Baltimore County Republican, agreed.
"Our top election official shouldn't be appearing to endorse a vendor's product," he said. "We've always approached procurement decisions in an objective fashion, and a vendor's literature would not be a place necessarily associated with objectivity."
Harris said, given that Lamone did not accept money in exchange for her praise, she shouldn't be punished. But, he said, someone "needs to tell her not to do that in the future."
