Skip to content

Shoup Voting Machine Corporation

An American manufacturer of mechanical lever voting machines that later operated under several successor names before going out of business as Advanced Voting Solutions, Inc. in 2015.

Last updated August 26, 2026

AI crawler reads

No AI crawler has read this profile since Oct 28, 2026.

Overview

Shoup Voting Machine Corporation was an American voting-equipment manufacturer founded in New Jersey in 1905 by Samuel R. Shoup. It became one of the two principal American producers of mechanical lever voting machines, alongside the Automatic Voting Machine Corporation. Its machines were designed around a tabular ballot arrangement: political parties occupied columns and elected offices occupied rows. Most units were supplied with a privacy booth that could be folded into a relatively compact package for transport and storage. The business initially operated on a limited scale. Its position improved substantially with the development and sale of the Model 2.5 during the mid-1930s, which reportedly transformed the company into a successful and profitable operation. By the late 1920s, the machines of Shoup and its principal rival were sufficiently widespread that approximately one in six registered American voters cast ballots using one of the two manufacturers' systems. Shoup ultimately sold about 100,000 lever machines. Many remained mechanically serviceable for decades; approximately half of the company's machines were reported to still be working and used during the 2000 United States presidential election. The company changed its corporate identity several times. It was known as the R. F. Shoup Corporation during the 1950s, and a new Shoup Voting Machine Corporation was incorporated by General Battery and Ceramic Corporation of New York in 1961. Its voting-machine operations were sold in 1965, after which an S corporation was formed. The company made its first reported foreign sale to Trinidad in 1968. In 1969, aerospace company Macrodyne-Chatillon Corporation acquired Shoup Voting Machines for an estimated $6 million, primarily in stock. The investment was written off and the subsidiary was deconsolidated effective March 31, 1972, amid criminal proceedings involving alleged bribery and fraud and a federal tax lien. Shoup's mechanical products had an unusually long service life. Lever machines ceased production by 1982, but remained in election use long afterward. Rhode Island used Shoup equipment from 1936 into the 1990s, while Louisiana's first voting machines were Shoup models used for more than five decades beginning in the 1940s. New York City continued using mechanical Shoup machines for roughly half a century and was reported in 2010 to be preparing to replace them. The corporate successor adopted the name Shoup Voting Solutions, Inc. in 1992 and Advanced Voting Solutions, Inc. in 2001. Under the latter name, it supplied WINvote electronic voting machines. In 2015, Virginia decertified all 3,000 of the state's Advanced Voting Solutions WINvote machines after renewed public attention to previously documented security weaknesses. The machines used unpatched Windows XP Embedded software and had a hardwired Wi-Fi password reported as 'abcde', among other vulnerabilities. Advanced Voting Solutions subsequently went out of business in 2015, ending the company's long corporate succession from the original Shoup enterprise.

History

The origins of the Shoup business belong to the early development of mechanical voting technology in the United States. Safemaker Jacob H. Meyers created the Automatic Voting Machine in 1888 and established the Automatic Voting Machine Corporation in 1898. Samuel R. Shoup followed this path by constructing his own lever voting machine and founding Shoup Voting Machine Corporation in New Jersey in 1905. For its early years, Shoup operated on a limited scale. The company gained commercial momentum with the development and sale of the Model 2.5 in the mid-1930s. Shoup and Automatic Voting Machine became the dominant competitors in the American market. Their machines used different orientations of a tabular voting layout. Shoup generally assigned each party a column and each office a row, while the rival system reversed those relationships. Shoup machines commonly incorporated a privacy booth that folded down for transportation and storage. The company's equipment became known for longevity. Shoup sold approximately 100,000 lever machines, and a substantial proportion remained functional many decades after manufacture. Mechanical Shoup equipment was used in Rhode Island from 1936 into the 1990s and in Louisiana for more than fifty years beginning in the 1940s. New York City also retained its mechanical machines for approximately half a century before moving toward replacement around 2010. Production of lever machines ended by 1982, although election authorities continued using existing units well after production ceased. Corporate ownership and naming changed repeatedly. The company was called the R. F. Shoup Corporation in the 1950s. In 1961, General Battery and Ceramic Corporation of New York incorporated Shoup Voting Machine Corporation. Voting-machine operations were sold in 1965 and an S corporation was formed. Shoup made a reported first foreign sale to Trinidad in 1968. Macrodyne-Chatillon Corporation acquired Shoup Voting Machines in 1969 for an estimated $6 million, primarily in stock. The acquisition was followed by legal and financial difficulties. In 1971, federal prosecutors announced indictments involving Shoup, its Southern Municipal Sales subsidiary, company executives and other individuals. The charges concerned alleged bribery, mail fraud and conspiracy in connection with sales to public authorities. The company later entered a no-contest plea and was fined $45,000 in one matter. A related Louisiana case involving former state official C. H. 'Sammy' Downs produced a hung jury in 1973. A federal tax lien reported at $2.3 million, together with the criminal proceedings and resulting adverse publicity, contributed to Macrodyne-Chatillon writing off its investment and deconsolidating Shoup effective March 31, 1972. The successor organization continued under the name Shoup Voting Solutions, Inc. from 1992 and Advanced Voting Solutions, Inc. from 2001. This later business moved beyond mechanical equipment and supplied WINvote electronic voting machines. In 2015, Virginia removed all 3,000 of its WINvote machines from certification after security flaws received widespread attention. The machines reportedly used an unpatched Windows XP Embedded environment, included a hardwired Wi-Fi password and contained additional vulnerabilities. Advanced Voting Solutions went out of business in 2015, marking the end of the corporate line associated with the original Shoup company.

  • 2015

    Advanced Voting Solutions ceases business

    [1]

    Advanced Voting Solutions went out of business after Virginia decertified its WINvote machines.

  • 2001

    Name changed to Advanced Voting Solutions

    [1]

    The company adopted the name Advanced Voting Solutions, Inc. and supplied electronic WINvote systems.

  • 1992

    Name changed to Shoup Voting Solutions

    [1]

    The successor business adopted the name Shoup Voting Solutions, Inc.

  • 1972

    Macrodyne-Chatillon writes off and deconsolidates Shoup

    [1]

    The parent company wrote off its investment and deconsolidated Shoup effective March 31 amid legal and tax problems.

  • 1969

    Acquired by Macrodyne-Chatillon

    [1]

    Macrodyne-Chatillon Corporation acquired Shoup Voting Machines in a transaction estimated at $6 million, primarily paid in stock.

  • 1968

    First reported foreign sale

    [1]

    Shoup made its first reported foreign sale to Trinidad.

  • 1961

    Shoup Voting Machine Corporation incorporated under General Battery and Ceramic

    [1]

    General Battery and Ceramic Corporation of New York incorporated a Shoup Voting Machine Corporation.

  • 1935

    Model 2.5 drives commercial growth

    [1]

    The Model 2.5, developed and sold during the mid-1930s, helped turn the company from a limited-scale operation into a profitable business.

  • 1928

    Shoup and AVM machines achieve broad market penetration

    [1]

    By this time, about one in six registered American voters reportedly used a machine made by Shoup or Automatic Voting Machine.

  • 1905

    Shoup Voting Machine Corporation founded

    [1]

    Samuel R. Shoup founded the voting-machine manufacturer in New Jersey after developing his own lever voting machine.

Products and positioning

A specialist election-equipment manufacturer focused first on durable mechanical lever voting machines and later on electronic voting systems.

  • Mechanical lever voting machine · 1935

    Shoup Model 2.5

    Introduced during the mid-1930s, the Model 2.5 was the product credited with moving Shoup from limited-scale operations into a successful and profitable phase. It used the company's characteristic tabular arrangement, with party columns and office rows, and was typically paired with a foldable privacy booth.

  • Election equipment

    Shoup mechanical lever voting machines

    Shoup's principal product family consisted of mechanically operated lever machines used for recording votes in polling places. The equipment was designed for repeated public use and remained in service for decades after production ended. Approximately 100,000 units were reportedly sold, with use continuing in several American jurisdictions into the 1990s and 2000s.

  • Electronic voting machine

    WINvote

    WINvote was an electronic voting-machine line supplied by Advanced Voting Solutions, the later corporate successor to Shoup. Its systems attracted scrutiny because of reported security weaknesses, including obsolete unpatched software and a hardwired wireless password. Virginia decertified its entire installed fleet in 2015.

Controversies

  • 2015

    WINvote security failures and decertification

    Virginia decertified 3,000 Advanced Voting Solutions WINvote machines after security flaws were publicized, including a hardwired Wi-Fi password, obsolete Windows XP Embedded software and other documented vulnerabilities.

  • 1973

    Louisiana procurement case

    Former Louisiana official C. H. 'Sammy' Downs faced a bribery prosecution tied to the procurement of Shoup equipment. The 1973 trial ended with a hung jury.

  • 1972

    No-contest plea and financial distress

    The company changed its plea to no contest in one criminal matter and was fined $45,000. The period also involved a reported $2.3 million federal income-tax lien and the seizure of certain assets by the Internal Revenue Service.

  • 1971

    Federal bribery, mail-fraud and conspiracy indictments

    A Philadelphia grand jury indicted Shoup, its Southern Municipal Sales subsidiary, executives and other individuals over alleged schemes involving sales of voting machines to public authorities in Florida and Texas.

Read more

Brand decisions

  • 2001

    Transition to Advanced Voting SolutionsStrategy

    Background

    The successor organization sought to operate under a modernized corporate identity and participate in electronic voting technology.

    Action taken

    The company changed its name to Advanced Voting Solutions, Inc. and marketed WINvote electronic voting machines.

    Aftermath

    The WINvote line later faced security criticism, and Virginia decertified all of its machines in 2015.

  • 1969

    Macrodyne-Chatillon acquires Shoup Voting MachinesM&A

    Background

    Shoup was acquired as part of the expansion of aerospace and related industrial interests by Macrodyne-Chatillon Corporation.

    Action taken

    Macrodyne-Chatillon purchased Shoup Voting Machines for an estimated $6 million, primarily in stock.

    Aftermath

    The investment was written off and Shoup was deconsolidated in 1972 after criminal proceedings, adverse publicity and tax problems.

    Estimated acquisition value. $6,000,000 (1969)

Sources1 sources

Cite this profile: Cite the canonical profile. /brand-wiki/shoup-voting-machine-corporation · Editorial policy · How profiles are compiled