DNC Announces Unprecedented Election Protection Project

[madfloridian]

Source: PR Newswire

Democrats to conduct nationwide survey of administration of elections
as part of an ongoing commitment to protecting the rights of every American

WASHINGTON, Aug. 2 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- As the 42nd anniversary
of the signing of the Voting Rights Act approaches, the Democratic National
Committee today announced its unprecedented 50-state election protection
effort to prepare for the 2008 election. When signing the Voting Rights Act
of 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson said that the "right to vote is the
basic right without which all others are meaningless. It gives people,
people as individuals, control over their own destinies." But nearly 42
years after the signing of this legislation, the right to vote is still
under assault.

Through its 50 State Strategy, Voting Rights Institute and National
Lawyers Council, the DNC is conducting an in-depth nationwide survey to
collect critical data on voting practices and procedures at the local
level. The goal of the project is to map the often confusing and complex
sets of administrative practices and decisions governing election
administration in every state. Working with local election boards, the DNC
is examining the election mechanics in each state, flagging potential
problems and election administration issues that threaten to deprive
citizens of their right to register, vote and have their vote counted. Once
these issues are identified, the DNC will work to resolve potential
problems well in advance of the 2008 election. Election laws, while written
on the federal and state level, are often subject to interpretation at the
local level. This decentralized process results in varied administration
and supervision of the elections themselves, which can be potentially
problematic considering that in 2008, there will be at least 13,000
elections run by localities.

No organization has ever undertaken a project of this magnitude. This
project is made possible through the DNC's 50 State Strategy, which has had
staff on the ground in every state for almost two years. With very specific
questions, the survey covers topics such as voter registration, centralized
voter databases, voting systems and absentee voting, provisional balloting,
polling place procedures and Election Day preparation. This survey is just
one part of a comprehensive program on the part of the DNC to ensure that
every American's right to vote and have that vote counted is protected.
Data collected from the survey will be analyzed to determine the needs of
each election locality and next steps for strengthening the election
process in that locality. In addition to this project, the DNC will
continue its efforts to resolve the identified issues throughout next year,
continue to organize its network of lawyers in the states through the DNC's
Voting Rights Institute/National Lawyers Council and will run the most
extensive voter protection program throughout the country for the 2008
general election.


Read more: http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/08-02-2007/0004638209&EDATE=

[IndyOp]

1. This is crucial work! I know that Dem lawyers made a difference in

Indianapolis in November 2006 -- when lots of precincts did not open on time, when machines did not work -- the lawyers were all over the Rethuglican County Clerk like white on rice. It was really good to see!

We need lots more than just the Dem lawyers on election day - we need to change the laws and equipment and personnel that are causing the problems -- still the lawyers are key players in making any election system operate as well as possible.

:applause:

[debbierlus]

2. Uh - we HAVE the information - now STOP them

[madfloridian]

3. I was waiting for someone to say something like that.

To throw cold water on a very worthy project.

Thanks a lot.

[NV Whino]

4. Well if debbierlus hadn't said it, I would have.

We know how the elections are being corrupted. Faulty machines, machines that can be hacked every which way, caging lists, corrupt election officials (Sec of State Black in OH is an example) to mention a few. We have the means to stop this and we need to stop it now.

An immediate, easy and cheap solution is paper ballots and pencils. It's not the only solution, but it would get us through the next election and give us the time to deal with the corrupt officials (remove them from office maybe with an accurate vote count provided by paper ballots... what a concept) and the caging lists.

[madfloridian]

6. The DNC can't change that stuff. Talk to congress.

This makes me so furious with voting activists. Stopped the Holt Bill, complained when it was stopped, then blame congress.

I say good for the DNC. They are doing what they can do. This is why I gave up on trying to work with voting activists.

They are never satisfied.

Makes me sick. Glad you guys are so perfect, cause most of are don't go to the election forum because we don't understand it.

:puke:

[disndat]

13. Holt's bill

allowed DREs supposedly with "close auditing." If you believe that, there's a bridge in Brooklyn, I'd like to sell you. There is a manufacturer of DRE machines in his Congressional District which should go a long way to explain his love of discredited DREs.

[madfloridian]

16. Well, now we don't have it. We don't have anything.

And people are criticizing the DNC efforts.

Why?

I was not for or against the Holt bill, I got so confused I backed off.

I don't make calls about things I don't understand.

Why are so many criticizing the DNC efforts.

I am starting to wonder.

[Cookie wookie]

83. You are repeating an undocumented smear against Rep. Holt.

There is no evidence whatsoever that Avante and Rep Holt are in any way involved in anything nefarious. If you read the Holt Bill, HR811, as it came from committee (and before Hoyer's manager's amendment), you'll see that the bill was intended to make it impossible for states to buy new DREs, to use the toilet paper roll, to use DREs with thermal paper (which Avante's machines do!), etc. So that smear doesn't even make any sense.

Everyone else got this -- Republicans got it. I've been to DC and talked with some and also at my state level. They said the couldn't support HR811 because there wasn't currently any DRE technology that would meet the law, thus states who needed to buy new systems would have to go to optical scan or paper ballots systems. Election officials got it, which is why they protested the bill.

[madfloridian]

7. Tell me what the DNC can do about voting machines. Details please. Now.

If you are going to ask them to do something....then explain how. That would come from Congress.

Read the whole release.

[NV Whino]

8. Paper ballots and a pencil

fuck the voting machines.

[madfloridian]

10. The DNC is NOT congress. Or did you not know that?

What is wrong with you?

This is a wonderful start for what Congress is refusing to do.

The DNC is doing something and you bash them.

:puke:

DU is fill with stuff like this.

The good stuff goes unnoticed, the complaints against the party get all the attention.

[shance]

12. Bingo. Its that simple.

n.t

[madfloridian]

15. Answer the question. How can the DNC do that? DNC not Congress.

Or you just trying to muddy up something really good the Dems are doing.

Shance, you never used to be this way.

Trying to put down something really good is not something you used to do.

Unless it is because I posted it.

[Turn CO Blue]

37. Nope. It's not. It's not that simple. These kinds of posts infuriate me!

Here are some questions:

What kind of ballot? What's the preferred layout?
What kind of paper?
What about the mail-in ballots? Are they different? The same? Are they numbered to prevent counterfeiting and stuffing?
What kind of printer ink?
What kind of pencil/pen/marker? (Pencil is erasable, but some inks run and ruin if barely exposed to moisture, some inks start to fade within months, some types of paper hold up better (non-acidic) than others)
What is the exact procedure to protect the ballots and to store them (so the ink doesn't run, so that they're not altered, so they can be recounted,in case of flood or fire, etc.?)
What types of boxes?
How should they be sealed?
Where should they be counted?
When should they be counted?
When should results be revealed?
When and how should they be counted or recounted and by whom, with what type of witnesses?
How long should they be stored and in what type of facility to protect from tampering, moisture, bugs, rats, termites, fire, etc ?

You know, it flat out amazes me how many people out there do not appreciate how complicated even simple processes are. Trust me, I've been everything from an office manager to secretary to six sigma analyst, and everything out there is complicated and THE PROCEDURES and THE RULES all will HAVE to be spelled out.

Here's a lesson I have learned. Even the simplest process or procedure is complicated enough that no two people would do it the same without an agreed-upon procedures manual of best practices or of rules. Don't believe me? Get four friends and have each of you write out the process map for: DIRECTIONS FOR MAKING A CUP OF TEA. You will have 5 enormously and completely different versions, and some will be iced tea, some will be hot tea, some will use the microwave, some will use the stove, the differences in detail and the process will be entirely, almost violently DIFFERENT. Now take that example and extropolate it out to federal elections over 50 states...

Again, this is not simple. These are our votes. The processes and procedures (as well as the rules and penalties) have to be spelled out so that a third grader could run a federal election and get everything exactly right and exactly CONSISTENT from ward to ward, district to district and state to state!

Sorry for the rant. It's not you.
tcb

Edited for clarity and I'm sure there are still typos...oh well.

[live love laugh]

74. Not only do the procedures and rules have to be spelled out, they have to be sanctioned.

The DNC cannot necessarily do that. But they can do what is within their realm as I know you understand.

Good points!

[OnTheOtherHand]

96. oh, well said

I don't claim to be an expert on election administration, but it's just amazing how many people seem to have convinced themselves that actually there is nothing to know about it.

Maybe you could repost this 'rant' on ER at some point.

[TreasonousBastard]

98. Coupla other things you didn't mention...

First, having been an election inspector, I get there at 5:30AM, the polls close at 9PM and then the counting starts. We have lever machines here, and the count takes a good half hour so we're lucky to get out by 10PM after all the stuff we have to do-- and we don't get paid for any extra hours. Paper ballots will just take that much longer to count and add to the fatigue factor and some very pissed off inspectors if we have to sit there all night finding missing ballots when the tallies don't add up.

And, paper ballots might have been inviolved in more frausd and mistakes than every other system combined. I'll admit that these Joker Poker machines refitted as ballot boxes have the potential to commit fraud a lot more easily, but paper ballots are often unreadable and because of that are subject to modification and rejection while being counted. Poll inspectors have been caught with pencil lead, tacks, and other things glued to their thumbs before.

There is nothing that has no potential for fraud and abuse, so best we look to minimize it, not eliminate it. And paper ballots will not do that.

[Turn CO Blue]

108. Excellent points, and I appreciate your expertise

I do not claim to have any expertise, but I am very good at asking questions, which is how all good organizers or analysts begin...

You should put up a post in ER about all these points of how paper ballots are also subject to fraud and what procedures would help minimize it.

I think we should look at the whole methodology for pollworkers and inspectors - what a tedious job, with little training and compensation, requiring accounting skills at 11 o'clock at night! Reconciling anything at night gives me a headache!
Thanks!

---
tcb

[TreasonousBastard]

111. Thanks, but I'm not that much of an expert, just...

been a bit closer than a lot of people are to the poll sites. I've never even seen an optical scan voting machine, for instance, and don't know how they actually work.

I've said all this before, and it had little impact, but I might just say it again.

[Turn CO Blue]

31. pencil is ERASABLE! gotta be ink. Pencils are for grade school

It has to be ink or indelible marker.

[lonestarnot]

42. paper penetrating ink!

And all those questions you thought of, there are simple answers. Could fix it in 1/2 hour.

[NV Whino]

46. Not only are there simple answers,

the simple answers have been around a long time. Think, people. What did we do before the infernal machines raised their ugly, code-protected heads?

[liberal N proud]

45. As in a purple finger?

[Cookie wookie]

81. They could press legislators to enact laws that protect

our votes from theft by electronic voting, like getting HR811 out of the trash, putting the Hoyer manager's amendment in the trash, and getting the bill passed ASAP. Then press Feinstein to rewrite her bill to make it serious about amending HAVA so that our elections are transparent, secure, and verifiable.

They could do that. We don't need any surveys. We have all the information we need.

[mopinko]

38. i think you are being a little too touchy.

it is true that we know this, and we have been screaming about this, and a lot of us are frustrated. i think that is all she was trying to say.
go dr dean. we love you. we are behind you. i screamed at the dnc fundraiser last time they called, but for this i will get out the credit card.
thank you thank you.
better late than never.

[madfloridian]

44. No, I disagree. I don't think I am being too touchy at all.

I think there are several groups who yell and scream no matter what the Democrats on our side try to do.

They don't go after the ones who are actually against us on this in our party.

No, I think there has to be limit sometime to the constant attacks on the people who try to work with us.

If certain groups get to where they are so demanding that nothing is acceptable....the leaders will tune them out.

That hurts all of us.

[jazzjunkysue]

59. This is supposed to be friendly conversation, not the inquisition.

It's not about being right. It's about the airing out of information and answering questions.

There is a learning curve and many of us are working to catch up. Let's not scare anyone out of here just because they're not up to your level of knowledge.

[madfloridian]

60. The conversation has been anti-Democratic party.

So now I am supposed to be friendly?

[jazzjunkysue]

66. There's content and there's form. Have your say without the heavy-

handed demands. Democrats have always disagreed with each other while accepting that all of our hearts are in the right place. Different roads to the goal, and all that.

[madfloridian]

67. Yes, since you say so, I will become meek and softly spoken

and fall in line so as not to hurt feelings of those who are putting down such a great effort.

There is one thing that simply does not matter to me anymore....what people think of me personally.

If they think I post things that are true and factual, that is enough for me.

The group that is going for 3rd party here.....is not nice at all about Democrats.

But then that's ok, as long I am nice in return.

Yes, I am angry, and it should show. This is a powerful effort being dissed at a Democratic forum.

You play nice, I will tell the truth.

[live love laugh]

75. You GO madfloridian! Your conviction is commendable as is your composure. n/t

[mopinko]

62. no really,

you are being too touchy. i didn't yell, scream or attack the party.
chill.

[madfloridian]

65. And I did not criticize you.

:shrug:

You know what is going here perfectly well.

[mopinko]

86. i know, mad

just, don't stroke out on us is what i'm tryin' ta say. k.
and people who saw what hava was about half way through the introductory press conference have been howling in the wilderness a long time. lots of us have been getting dnc issue surveys where we had to write in election protection. we have yelled at phone solicitors. we have called our elected dems, and we have been treated like the crazy uncle. so we can't help a little but of "what took ya?"
i'm sure you have a better idea than i of who the clowns in this thread are. i know they are here.
peace

[Cookie wookie]

84. You are right that we need to stop bashing Democrats

in general.

To answer your question, though, members of the DNC really can put pressure on legislators to enact laws to amend HAVA and protect our elections. And it's up to us as citizens to make it clear to DNC leadership (and I love Howard Dean), that no surveys are needed at this point. If they think more research is needed it means they haven't read the Brennan Center Report, the Conyers Report, the GAO report, the ESI report, the NIST report, the Cal. Top to Bottom review, for starters. Even parts of their last DNC report.......

I know for a fact that they can pick up the phone and call Congressional members on the right committees and say: citizens want this bill passed.

If the DNC needs to raise money for Dems, at least use it to get Dems elected, and not waste it on redundant or useless surveys.

[madfloridian]

94. Did you even read the press release? No, you say?

Then you do not even realize it is being done at local levels throughout the country.

It is a real life survey in real time.

God, I feel sick.

[OnTheOtherHand]

99. hang on, hang on

Don't assume Cookie wookie is against you on this.

[madfloridian]

102. I don't know who is against anything anymore.

I think it is great to be going down to county level, to confront locally. Perfect? I don't know perfect.

I don't even know what is right anymore.

I actually had the nerve to think people would think it was a good idea.

But then what the hell do I know?

The election activists can say and do anything, but I am being told to be nice and not upset anyone.

[madfloridian]

5. The press release contains many details of previous suppressions.

Long press reliease and had some instances I had not heard about.

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/08-02-2007/0004638209&EDATE=

[yowzayowzayowza]

9. Thx madfloridian!

Good stuff.

K&R

[madfloridian]

11. I think it is great, but the usual suspects do not. This is getting local.

I tried to work on voting issues for a long time. Then I found myself not knowing who to trust. Then I found one voting activist was saying one thing while another was saying just the opposite.

I think I am pretty smart, but I gave up and unsubscribed from all voting activism lists.

Now this I understand. Get local and question those in charge of the voting.

:hi:

[mzmolly]

14. We need to involve people at the local level who will advocate when someone is told they can't vote

as well. If we don't have something at the "people" level, the "after the fact" legal wrangling doesn't matter. Glad to see Dean is being pro-active, I knew he would be.

[madfloridian]

18. Nice post.

It is all about getting local. over 3000 counties

[Demeter]

17. DEAN! DEAN! DEAN! The Doctor Is IN!

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

19. Is there a Democrat left in this country who doesn't love this guy?

If I weren't a middle-aged male, I swear I'd bear that man's children.

[Demeter]

20. I Can Think of a Few.....

Rahm, Hillary, et al....probably the whole Senate, the way they vote.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

22. True...

But I was thinking about normal people.

[redqueen]

43. He said "Democrat"

:rofl:

I slay myself!

[yardwork]

21. Thank the goddess for Howard Dean. He gets it.

[Zorra]

23. Doc Rocks! However, they need a "think tank" of experts and lawyers

to not only figure out how republicans have already circumvented the voting system, but to project on whatever previously unused nefarious tactics republicans will use to cheat in the 2008 election.

The republicans have been using think tanks to analyze the system and figure out every way possible to make sure Democratic voters cannot vote or ensure that their vote does not count.

One thing is for certain: Republicans will have new and improved methods for screwing Democrats out of their vote in 2008.

[blondeatlast]

26. Actually, reading DU's posts on the subject would be an excellent start. nt

[madfloridian]

28. That is what they are trying to do in this effort.

It is getting right down to the county level.

It is a very big start, I think. Considering that all the money basically is going to the candidates for prez, millions and millions over a year ahead of time....and the congressional committees are being courted by K Street....then I think this is a great beginning.

The DNC is not especially a favorite of big business, and Democratic activists are funding other things....I think it is an outstanding effort.

[tblue]

24. Seven years too late but, hell, I'll take it. Thank you, Gov/Dr/Chairman Dean nt

[ooglymoogly]

25. Howard Dean has got my support on this

Those denigrating this effort need to get a grip. kick and nom

[madfloridian]

29. I agree with you.

Thanks for the k&r

[JDPriestly]

27. I will volunteer. I did that in 2004, and I feel that my small

contribution made a difference. Volunteer to work on election protection if you possibly can.

If you live in a place where voting rights might be a problem, volunteer to work at the polls.

[wisteria]

30. This is good news, but it should have been done in 2004. However,

I suppose it is better late than never.

[Le Taz Hot]

32. I can appreciate that the DNC is FINALLY addressing this

issue but I see all kinds of flaws here. First off, they're polling election officials -- those same election officials that have been complicit in election fraud since 2000. I know in our own area our election official is as Republican as they come. We've notified them for YEARS about Republican registration booths throwing away Democratic registrations or simply changing registration from D to R. They'll be asking these same corrupt official to tell the truth on a survey?

[madfloridian]

34. Never enough. Always too little too late.

That is the story of DU right now.

[Le Taz Hot]

35. Now, now.

You KNOW I am an avid Dean enthusiast but these are legitimate concerns that people are bringing up. Again, I appreciate the spirit of the effort but I don't see this as a particularly productive endeavor. They're assuming that reporting will be truthful -- it won't and it doesn't address the DRE problem -- A monumental element in election fraud.

[madfloridian]

41. Dean and the DNC can NOT address that problem of DREs

That is my issue.

They are doing what they can on limited funds while the candidates are loaded with money.

Sorry, but I believe in realism.

Addressing it at local levels is a very good step.

I don't think some know what the DNC does.

[Cookie wookie]

89. Madfloridian, sorry you stopped your involvement

with the election integrity movement as I always thought you were doing a terrific job.

However, I respectfully disagree that Dean and the DNC can not address the problem of DREs, as I said above.

Moreover, what people are saying here about surveying election officials across the country is very true. Sadly, election officials in the states, whether they are Democrats or Republicans, support unverfiable electronic voting. It makes conducting elections easier for them. They've already purchased equipment and don't want to have to tell their bosses that they made monumentally and vastly expensive mistakes. It would require a huge effort to change to verifiable voting sytems. In many cases, they have actually broken or skirted state election laws or provisional ballot laws, which are federal, in order to be able to conduct timely elections on electronic voting systems. They need to protect themselves from being held accountable to the law for doing so.

For example, if a state law requires that their voting system adhere to EAC Voting System Standards, those standards have specific regulations on how machines are certified. In order to conduct timely elections, it is not possible to adhere to those standards.

Here's an example of what happens:

"(Kathy Rogers, former election director, GA) brought up the recent Rolling Stone article by Robert Kennedy Jr., which quotes Chris Hood (who used to work with her) on the updating of the Diebold machines in Georgia with uncertified patches, just before the November 2002 election. Apparently they were really scrambling to get the machines ready for the election, and discovered that a large number of them (I think she said as many as 20%) were suffering from "screen freezes" during the voting process. Diebold provided a patch, which there was no time to certify. They tested it themselves, and went with it. There was really no other option. The updated system was subsequently resubmitted for certification, which it received."

http://vote.caltech.edu/Elections2006/Atlanta/RivestGApollwatch11-7-06.pdf

That quote indicates that the state of Georgia's election division broke state law (which requires they follow a set of established procedures related to software/patches) in order to be able to conduct the 2002 election on Diebold DREs.

The bottom line is that in order to sustain electronic voting systems, crimes must be committed or at the very least, ethical violations. No election official is going to admit that. In some cases, such as with Kathy Rogers above, these people move from their state elections jobs into very lucrative jobs with vendors, so there strong incentives toward ensuring that these voting systems continue to be used.

These problems are not localized. Activists throughout the country can cite long lists of examples like this, and worse, from their states that involve election officials. A DNC survey that uses these people as a source is more than highly unlikely to be productive in any way toward getting verifiable accurate elections. It will be a waste of money. This is not to say that pollworkers are corrupt. I believe from my experience that they are, at least in my state, dedicated and ethical for the most part, but they trust information from election officials and vendors.

I didn't mention the problems with voter disenfranchisement, another subject of their survey, but let's be realistic, how many of these officials can we expect to say, "Yes, we put more machines in white republican districts than we do in black democratic districts" or "Yes, we delete people from our elections database based on race or political party" .....

[madfloridian]

91. Oh, I get it. Since election officials are often corrupt, we should not confront them.

This is exactly why I totally gave up. Completely.

This is what activists have been SCREAMING about.....voter suppression, caging.

But when the DNC wants to do something, you all disagree with them.

:puke:

[Senator]

49. I don't think "getting lied to" enters into it

While I agree with your general "nice but ineffective" description of this, I don't think they're even looking for reports of foul play or known deficiencies -- the kind of thing election officials would "cover up."

It seems more rudimentary -- that they're just mapping the existing procedures at precinct level nationwide.

Yes, it seems sad that the DNC hasn't long had this info. Yes, they could likely get it all in short order from a series of consultations with Election Reform activists. But there it is.

Still, it will be "raising awareness" among party rank and file. It does "send the right signal" I suppose.

At least it's money being better spent on people doing things than squandered on over-priced strategerists strategerizing.

--

[Cookie wookie]

92. To do the mapping, they could just go to websites incuding

http://www.verifiedvoting.com and find everything they need for the cost of the effort/hours for those doing the research. States also have their election laws posted online. If their election policies and procedures aren't posted online, the could be made available from states via mail.

Sorry, but this survey, which seems to be getting some publicity, seems to be using election reform as the basis for fundraising.

I'm not blaming Dean. He obviously doesn't fully understand what's happening with election officials at state levels, or his name is being used on this but others came up with the concept.

[NoFederales]

33. How do people get involved locally? Is it possible? The article didn't

mention anything about needing assistance--how are they going to administer the survey?

NoFederales

[ChiciB1]

40. Well, Let Me Just Say This!!!

I live in Sarasota County and WE HAVE been trying to have FAIR elections for quite some time. Christine Jennings is NOW sending out statement asking us to contact her "loser" opponent to ensure fair elections!!!

It WOULD be nice if something could be done locally. Our Supervisor of Elections even stated AFTER we canvassed and GOT signed petitions for a paper trail on our electronic machines that she WAS NOT going to spend more money for those type of machines. The County Commissioners voted against us, but a judge ruled that it was to be voted on in the last election. The amendment passed, Charlie Crist, the now Governor of Florida says EVERY county WILL have a paper trail, HOWEVER the last statement I've heard from Kathy Dent is that she doesn't care.

Now, I may not be up to snuff on this because I have simply WASHED my hands of it all some time back, but Even though this news seems like GOOD NEWS... from me to you.... until I ACTUALLY SEE ACTION, it means NOTHING to me.

I'm very supportive of Howard Dean and the DNC, although NOT THE DLC, DCCC OR DSCC and I don't want to seem extremely negative, but I just don't know.

[Senator]

48. You can simply go to your state Dem party and volunteer

The "50 state strategy" is an effort to revitalize state party organizations -- particularly in "red states" where they've been virtually ignored by DC. This program is being run through that "structure."

I don't know where you are, but you can always go "hook up" with the state party. They might even have some paid position available. But more likely you'll be able to volunteer your time.

Just tell them that you're interested in this effort. Bring the press release with you.

---

[NoFederales]

80. I was disappointed with the Missouri effort/attitude after '04.

I'll check with the Sec. of State's office to see what is known there. I like the idea of revitalizing the state party organization; we need it.

Thanks.

NoFederales

[tom_paine]

36. Way to go, Dems. It's a start! n/t

[Uncle Joe]

39. Kicked and recommended

Thanks for the thread madfloridian.

[mother earth]

47. This is a start, it's not at all the answer to ensure our vote is

safeguarded. We have nothing if we continue to use the machines! We will never ever have confidence in the power of our vote if we don't have a paper/audit trail...no extraordinary science there folks, just think "paper can be audited" and nothing else is acceptable.

As far as the DNC not being responsible for the machines, guess what they can also voice the fact that we need an audit trail, everyone needs to be educated. The machines have been proven to be unacceptable and easily modified - what's not to understand?

Why not fund whatever organization is going to make a public campaign to safeguard the vote with an audit trail before 2008? Lawyers are great, but we had them doing this in 2004 & it didn't mean much, because we know what took place. :banghead: (Note to DNC: nice gesture, but we want more!)

Or shall we all wait for Feinstein and 2010? :grr:

Kicking & recommended for our very salvation.:kick:

[MasonJar]

50. Howard scores again; boy, does he make the former DNC chairmen

look incompetent.

[zehnkatzen]

51. k&r n/t

[Kip Humphrey]

52. When this survey is used to standardize all federal elections using

inter networks for centralized voter registration and vote tabulation (maybe, with Internet voting, eh?) and local control instantly disappears... Oh, and the resurrected Holt bill institutionalizes the very voting systems (and their vendors) used to manipulate elections in 2002, 2004, and 2006...

When this survey surfaces in Congress as the stimulus for "election reform" ("deform" is more likely) legislation in order to "clean up the chaos" we will forever lose our democracy.

So,
Thank you, DNC, for your magnanimous endeavor, but you could, instead, take all of the money you are about to spend to federalize our elections and spend it to lobby Democratic members of Congress to pass Dennis Kucinich's paper ballot legislation. Why would you do that???

[youngharry]

55. Kucinich's Bill

You are absolutely correct. The Holt Bill institutionalizes the very voting systems (and their vendors) used to manipulate elections in 2002, 2004 and 2006.

Is everyone so stupid that they don't know we have a Democrat Majority in the Senate by less than 2500 votes nationally. If you add the number of votes Jim Webb won by and then add the number of votes Jon Tester won by, the total is around 2500 votes. THINK OF IT---2500 VOTES---ONLY--- HAS ALLOWED US TO BE THE MAJORITY PARTY IN BOTH HOUSES.

The only thing Carl Rove didn't plan on with his manipulative voting machines, is that so many democrats would turn out. He only jimmied the machines in key precincts by 4% and it should have done by 7%.

GET A CLUE.

I'm from California and our great SOS Debra Bowen tested ALL THE ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES IN THE STATE---DIEBOLD, ES&S, ETC. EVERYONE OF THEM WAS HACKABLE.

But then you say, but she had all the "secure machine info" and it was easy for her team to hack the machines. YES, YES, YES, AND WHAT DO YOU THINK ANYONE THAT WANTS TO HACK THE MACHINES WILL HAVE?

Go to paper ballots if you want to save democracy. IT'S THAT SIMPLE.

[youngharry]

53. Democrats and 50 State Election

If anyone knows anything about elections and electronic voting, they would know that Howard Dean is full of crap. The only way we will have election protection is if we go back to paper voting. Sorry, Howard, nice try, but do your homework with what the Democrats are really facing with electronic voting machines. MOST ESPECIALLY TELL HOLT TO INTRODUCE A REAL BILL THAT WILL PROTECT OUR DEMOCRACY, NOT SOME FARCE THAT IGNORES THE FACTS.

SECURE VOTING REQUIRES MORE THAN JUST PAPER TRAILS.

[AtLiberty]

54. Who is the contact person for this initiative?

???

[tbyg52]

56. I am so happy to hear this.

Ihad been worried for some time that they didn't get it, but Dr. Dean does!

[madfloridian]

57. To those in this thread who think the DNC can change voting laws.....

who think they have something to do with how congress votes....let me know where you get your information.

I think you have confirmed to the doubters here that there is a group at DU who will condemn the Demcratic party efforts no matter what.

I think it is getting serious here.

Some can not stand that we were glad to see some good news, and it IS good news.

Some are so determined to start a 3rd party they try to diminish anything our leaders do.

Now feel free to alert on my post to the administrators. I hope you do.

[Fearless]

63. You do have something

The same trend can especially be seen throughout many of the Democratic primary based threads. We're being far too cutthroat. Otherwise, I spent three days about a month ago trying to defend Ted Kenney against (?) fellow democrats calling for him to resign?? I swear someone's infiltrated us. I'd stake anything on it. They're trying to break us apart.

DON'T LET THEM.

[madfloridian]

64. Well, if only one speaks out....it will continue.

I get so tired of being a target because I point it out.

Yes, there is a group trying to infiltrate and hurt the Democrats. Can't say who, get in trouble for that.

We have a great party overall....we have some working too closely with the Republicans. But those are not the ones the people here attack. I have no gripe with pointing out the ones who vote too often with Republicans.

Thanks for your comment.

[Fearless]

70. By no means...

I don't mean that there are people that are leaning republican, I mean that there are people who are republican disingenuiously posing as democrat (or liberal in general) as a means to divide us. I'm sure of this, but I won't cite names or anything, they do have their right to their opinion where ever they may choose to post it providing it adhears to the same set of rules we must adhear to. However, I will continue to argue with them as I find them on a case by case basis with the intention of honest debate. And naturally I wouldn't accuse them of anything, but I can't claim not to recognize an increasing amount of odd positions found in amongst what is generally considered a liberal community in Democratic Underground. Of course I could just be paranoid. Mind you a paranoid man need only be right once, whilist a cynical man need only be wrong once.

Cheers, NTF

[windy252]

72. If it helps

I remember hearing about freepers posing as DUers before the 2004 elections and then outing themselves upon Bush's reselection.

[madfloridian]

73. I think we are saying the same thing.

The ones I meant acting like Republicans were the more conservative Dems like the Blue Dogs who are working with the Republicans to undermine the Dem agenda.

The ones here attacking the party may have a more left leaning agenda.

:hi:

[Fearless]

76. I went back and reread the thread just to make sure...

I know what this is and I don't think it has very much to do with what kind of political stance they have. Originally, it seems, that they tried to point out that it seems that it could be a conflict of interest if the DNC was able to modify voting methods themselves. However, this of course is not true, that they are merely researching voting issues, if they had bothered to read the article they might have understood that. Personally I'd just chalk this whole thing up to misunderstanding. This is exactly the same sort of thing that happened in the Ted Kennedy thread that I mentioned a bit ago. Where one guy, who apparently was on his email list, took issue for one line of the email and used it to call Kennedy, essentially, out of touch and should resign. Personally I feel very strongly for Kennedy and defended him...

Anyways, the difficulty with arguing along these lines, as I figured out, was that it's utterly pointless but if you stop they win or at least appear to. I don't know what to tell you, it's just frustrating, other than that :shrug:

NTF

[madfloridian]

88. You are nicer than I am.

There has been so much of this here that one does wonder.

I am not up to date on the voting machine stuff....I flat out gave up when we started hearing conflicting info from different groups. I was unable to tell who was right, and they were all screaming at one another. So I don't do voting machine issues anymore.

But this is about confronting local officials..saying we are gong to be watching you...we have your number.

How in the world can any Democrat object to that....unless they don't want to see it addressed. Which makes me wonder.

This has nothing to do with voting machine issues, it has to do with being there with local support at county level.

[Cookie wookie]

95. Unfortunately, any implied threat of "we are going to be watching you"

is really useless. That's why our founders made the rule of law so important to democracy. It's laws and their enforcement that keep things honest. Since election officials break laws or act in unethical ways (like running elections and being Republican re-election chairs simultaneously) and aren't held accountable, why would they be concerned about threats or idea that the DNC is watching? That's a paper tiger. Laws passed at a federal level that make it illegal to do the latter and that are enforced are the only way t o effect change.

It's like civil rights. Asking states nicely or even saying, "We're watching you," didn't stop states from keeping African-Americans from voting. The Civil Rights act, and enforcement of that act, is the only thing that effected change.

The Dems have a little power now and need to be pressed to use it on voting issues. Yes, we still have a corrupt federal AG's office, so voting rights laws are being circumvented, but if we get the power to vote by passing laws while the Dems have some power, then they have a chance to win the presidency and more power in Congress in 08 and then they can clean up the AG's office.

The DNC needs to focus like a laser beam on helping to ensure that this happens.

[madfloridian]

97. So you are saying no need to go local. Got it.

I posted in GDP asking why so many are against this plan.

I think it is vital to confront this head on.

[OnTheOtherHand]

101. "going local" seems too general

I thought Cookie wookie was saying that it's about passing and enforcing laws, not about evoking a generalized fear of surveillance -- because it's too easy for bad actors to get away with stuff even when they are seen doing it. (And, yes, she would like to see stronger federal laws.)

I don't know the right answer(s) to this. Intuitively, going county-to-county won't help with the outright corruption (unless it gives some hints about where to send the lawyers), but it may help with some of the innocent administrative chaos, may help to identify likely trouble spots, and conceivably could forestall later claims of ignorance.

An example, somewhat tangential: Right now in Ohio, people are livid because various BoEs claim they didn't know that they had to keep their unused ballots from 2004. Well, did they know they had to keep their unused ballots? At least one county board said that their staff was explicitly following a policy document with the wrong information about retention/destruction schedules. In principle, that could have been discovered before the 2004 election, not in mid-2007. Or if the board was obviously uncooperative, that might be good to know, too.

Or, think of all the Ohio pollworkers who asked people for identification when they shouldn't have. I betcha SOME of those pollworkers thought they were doing the right thing.

So, it seems to me that the DNC effort could maybe reduce genuine confusion and plausible deniability. Based on limited information, I could argue the likely outcomes either way -- sheer futility, or actual benefit.

[madfloridian]

103. Then why should any Democrats bother to do anything at all...

if there is nothing going for them.

:shrug:

They should do what they like and not bother since no one seems to understand if they do something good.

[OnTheOtherHand]

106. that's not my view

I'm confident it isn't Cookie wookie's, either. It's about a judgment, which may be right or wrong (or in between), about whether a particular tactic is likely to yield dividends, or what the highest priorities should be. I know there are some people who seem rarely to miss an opportunity to take a shot at the DNC. C_w wasn't doing that.

But C_w is a reasonable person, so if you explain something that s/he missed, s/he will grant the point, learn from it, and move on. Folks like C_w can make a discussion forum actually rewarding. Unfortunately, in a polarized atmosphere, it can sometimes be hard to tell the reasonable people from the kinder-and-gentler dogmatists.

[Cookie wookie]

107. No, I'm not saying no need to go local. I think my ability to put

my perspective in writing is at fault here, and also my inability to focus this morning on the op and directly address that in a clear, consise manner in what I'm writing. First, "going local" to get candidates elected, Dean's 50 state plan, is brilliant and I support it 100%.

However, this is a different issue, that of ensuring protection of voting rights & accurate elections. From the op:

"Working with local election boards, the DNC is examining the election mechanics in each state, flagging potential problems and election administration issues that threaten to deprive citizens of their right to register, vote and have their vote counted."

Local elections officials are not the population to survey to find problems & admin issues. The problems, like for example, GA's continual battle to require voter ID or the state's use of paperless DREs, are broadly known already. How will local DNC workers do anything about these problems unless it is through laws & law enforcement? If local DNC workers contact the Republican SOS, who chairs the State Election Board, or other members of that board (majority Republicans), and says it's wrong to have voter ID, SOS Handel will say it's needed because of "voter fraud". What will DNC workers do then? Their lawyers could take it to court. The ACLU is already fighting voter ID laws in the courts, but the DNC's lawyers could join them and that might help.

But what about the project's goal of protecting and ensuring that citizens have their vote counted? If the DNC's state workers tell the SOS that paperless DREs is wrong, she will just say election procedures make them secure. What do they do then? How does anything change? This scenario will apply to most other states that have electronic voting or that are guilty of using electronic methods that could be tools of voter suppression -- like statewide voter databases that are used to encode voter access cards.

"Once these issues are identified, the DNC will work to resolve potential problems well in advance of the 2008 election."

How can local DNC workers resolve potential problems in advance of the 2008 election? The DNC has no power or authority over state election officials or how they conduct elections or over state legislators and what laws are written. Getting new state laws takes time and if you ask anyone who has tried to get good election law regarding electronic voting, it's hard to do. The assertion that this will make a difference in 2008 is really the sticking point for me here. However, I'd like to contact them to see if their attorneys could help advance a couple of legal cases we have here. If funds from the DNC were used to do that locally, especially to get us Democratic lawyers, now that I could wholeheartedly endorse. We have not been able to get one Democratic lawyer with any clout to help with our e-voting cases in the state, including those affiliated with the ACLU. I'm sure activists in other states are in the same boat.

"Election laws, while written on the federal and state level, are often subject to interpretation at the local level. This decentralized process results in varied administration and supervision of the elections themselves, which can be potentially problematic considering that in 2008, there will be at least 13,000 elections run by localities."

It is not interpretation of the laws or variety of laws that is at the heart of the problem. Rather, it is violation of the laws that goes unpunished; laws that don't ensure secure elections; as well as the desperate need for amendments to HAVA to stop paperless & unverifiable voting in states, enacted into law in time to be put into effect in states before the 2008 election.

"This survey is just one part of a comprehensive program on the part of the DNC to ensure that every American's right to vote and have that vote counted is protected."

Many of us in states have worked hard as pollworkers, poll watchers, set up hotlines, investigated evidence that indicated malfeasance, etc. for years. We've tried to work with election officials and legislators. DNC workers doing more of the same is going to get the same results (even if their attorneys help us with our legal cases) if we're talking about 08 because we will still be voting on hackable, unverifiable, nontransparent voting systems.

"...continue to organize its network of lawyers in the states through the DNC's Voting Rights Institute/National Lawyers Council and will run the most extensive voter protection program throughout the country for the 2008 general election."

This is good and needed, but after the fact, not something that will safeguard the 2008 election. The legal system is what we use to enforce the laws, but if we get law that federally mandates verifiable, transparent election systems nationwide, those attorneys can help see it is enforced before and after the fact.

The remainder of the article goes into detail about republicans record of denying and suppressing voting rights. Unfortunately the DNC's goal as stated by Brazile & Dean: "The goal of this unprecedented project is to protect and ensure our voting rights..." can not be met by "by working now to identify and attempt to resolve election administration issues that threaten to deprive citizens of the right to register, vote and have their vote counted."

• The NIST White Paper and the Ca. Top to Bottom review indicate clearly that election policies and procedures can not ensure that electronic voting systems will not be compromised.
  
• The DNC will not have the authority to stop disenfranchisement of voters by the use of electronic databases or force states to obey their laws.

So what I am saying is that this DNC effort is a misdirection of money, energy and time if the Democrats are to meet the stated goal by 08.

I apologize if I've still done a poor job of articulating my perspective. It's for lack of skills not effort.

[madfloridian]

113. Useless effort?

I disagree. I think it will end up being since it is being ripped apart here so badly.

Kind of sad.

I used to be an activist about voting and elections. Then I got to where the confusion was overwhelming. I could not tell the good guys from the bad guys.

This is getting down to working with local officials, and it is a good thing.

Not an effort to be dismissed like is being done here.

[Cookie wookie]

114. Madfloridian, I didn't say it was a useless effort

but attempted to provide a broader perspective on the project from the stated goals in the op.

It's just my perspective, and I could be wrong. I do have a tendency to come on too strong at times.

I hope that I am wrong, and that it will be a successful project, as we need all the help we can get in the states in trying to ensure the sanctity of the 2008 election. I should try to contact the DNC to see what they might be planning for my state. Also to see if they could help with legal matters.

[Fearless]

115. I agree

I don't see a problem with what they are doing as all they can actually do is suggest improvements not oversee them. I would like to see these suggestions and take them on a case by case basis just as I would if the Republican Party had proposed them. Of course, it's a tiny bit more likely that I'll agree with more Democrat ideas, but it is what it is.

I think that local support is definitely needed especially after the voter issues after the last few elections, particularly amongst minorities. I would be stupid to think that they could fix everything, yet I hold out hope that at least some voting issues will be taken care of.

[madfloridian]

58. Ok, remember when we were told to liower our expectations?

That the discourse would be lowered here? Remember?

Helloooo...it is happening. The discourse is getting lower and lower and lower and lower. My skin ain't thick enough yet.

And I have lowered my expectations until they are on the floor.

:puke:

Thanks Governor Dean and the DNC for trying.

[madfloridian]

61. So now when others put down the effort of the DNC....

I am told I am not being friendly.

Lowering expectations....lowering...lowering.

[madfloridian]

68. Video of his Yearly Kos speech where he addresses this more.

http://www.yearlykosconvention.org/node/724

[madfloridian]

69. He speaks of passing an improved Holt Bill, to get rid of DREs.

Says we have to do that.

[youngharry]

77. GETTING RID OF DRE'S

Right. They need to get rid of all electronic voting machines and tabulators.

[windy252]

71. Finally! n/t

[Divine Discontent]

78. K&R 45

This reminds me of Howard Dean's 50 state plan. Even if there are those that feel this isn't going to solve all the problems - this amount of commentary on the subject that truly is at the heart of the 00 and 04 election thefts, is only a good thing. We cannot handle another 8 years of Republican cronies gouging the trillion dollar piggy bank for mansions and piles of gold for their offspring.

:hi: madfloridian! It's been a crazy year in FL. And can everyone believe we're just about half year or so from the primary?

[tiptoe]

79. K & R 49er

[bonito]

82. K&R

[TrogL]

85. Ok, so let's see them endorse open-source election code

[Joanne98]

87. What part of rigged software don't they understand!

GEEEEZZZZEEE!!!!Four fucking years of screaming and they still don't get it! Shit like this makes me feel like just giving up!

[madfloridian]

90. SO...you are saying no voter suppression exists? Oh, my.

Stuff like that just makes me furious. The DNC is NOT congress, or did you not know that.

Did you know the DNC can not really vote on or do anything about rigged software? But they can confront voter suppression?

Posts like yours make me feel like giving up.

:shrug:

[Joanne98]

100. Are U saying NO rigged voting machine software exists?

I want them to address BOTH problems BUT they only address ONE! I have a theory why if you want to hear it. I believe that because CORPORATIONS are stealing votes we can't talk about it. It's the same old problem. If a corporation does it then it must be okay! The Dems are TOO CLOSE TO WALL STREET! Cut the ties or RESIGN!

[madfloridian]

104. You don't know what the DNC is, do you?

That's what i thought.

[Joanne98]

105. Yes I do know! I don't care if they're not Congress....

The LEAST they could do is stop ignoring the e-voting issue. They won't even discuss it.

[OnTheOtherHand]

110. see #109 n/t

[madfloridian]

112. ooops....just gave yourself away..

.

[OnTheOtherHand]

109. fact check

You:

I want them to address BOTH problems BUT they only address ONE! I have a theory why if you want to hear it. I believe that because CORPORATIONS are stealing votes we can't talk about it. It's the same old problem. If a corporation does it then it must be okay!

Sure, that makes perfect sense. The Democrats don't mind losing elections, as long as some corporation somewhere benefits. :shrug:

OK, so, what does the DNC actually say about this?

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and DNC Voting Rights Institution Chair Donna Brazile issued the following statement in support of the "Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act":

"Few issues are more central to safeguarding our democracy than ensuring public confidence in the integrity of our election process. That confidence has been badly undermined by the serious and valid concerns about the reliability and security of electronic voting systems.

"This bill represents a giant step forward in improving election administration in this nation and in restoring the confidence of our citizens in the way our elections are run. Every eligible voter must not only be allowed to vote, but be assured that his or her vote will be counted accurately. We applaud the tireless work of Democrats who have developed and sponsored this bill and acted to move it through Committee and we urge the 110th Congress to move quickly to enact this critically important measure. We hope that the Congress will also act quickly provide the necessary funding and call on Republicans and the Bush Administration to support this legislation, which will restore confidence in our Democracy."

http://www.democrats.org/a/2007/03/dnc_statement_o_14.php

Can Dean and Brazile count on your apology? Or does it not count as "addressing" unless they say every damn thing you think they should say?

[madfloridian]

93. DNC wants to investigate voter suppression at county level...

and gets blasted at a Democratic forum for wanting to do so.

That is the most amazing thing I have heard.