Unfortunately Barbara Boxer doesn't seem to get it

[garybeck]

Today's email from her new PAC says we should support the Count Every Vote Act:

"We must restore the confidence of the American people in our federal elections system -- and this legislation would help to do just that."

NO IT WON'T.

the legislation is falsely titled. it does not propose to count every vote. it only calls to count 2% of the votes.

Any confidence it restores in the public would be nothing but false confidence.

I have nothing but respect for her and what she did on 1/6. But I'm sad to say that she doesn't get it. And I just don't understand why the democrats are not addressing this issue with any sense of reality. it doesn't take a brain surgeon to see that leaving up to 98% of the votes left to DREs with nothing checking their accuracy would be not much better than what we have now, and it certainly should not restore any confidence to anyone.

I tried calling her DC office but the line was busy. Anyone else want to join me in trying to set them straight?

Washington D.C.
112 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
[phone]

San Francisco
1700 Montgomery Street, Suite 240
San Francisco, CA 94111
[phone]
[phone] fax

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

1. Baby steps.

When you're in the minority, you do things a little at a time. 2% today, another 5% tomorrow, soon enough, you get the reform you need. It won't happen all at once though.

[tinanator]

2. yeah it will, sorta

but it wont happen through that august body.

[Dancing_Dave]

24. We've gotta fight this out one State at a Time!

Obviously, a Republican dominated Congress and a Republican White House will NEVER slit their own throats by eliminating the election fraud so many of them owe their positions to.

Maybe B.B. is trying to slip through something that would work like part of an improved exit vote polling system...something that would at least help us to see where something had gone wrong.

:yourock:

[tubbacheez]

3. Exactly. 2% is better than what we have without this bill. n/t

[garybeck]

5. better is not good enough

do you want to live in a democracy or not?

Failure to even propose fixing the system signifies a real problem.

Someone give me one reason why not a single democrat has even proposed a bill that will prevent DRE machines from stealing the next election?

[tubbacheez]

9. Did you hear me say "Stop trying after this bill"?????

Goodness, there's a process unfolding here. Hop some lilypads to get to the other side.

You sound like my old roommate's mother, slamming him when he couldn't finish his first triathalon, "You just aren't good enough!"

He didn't finish the following year either. But last summer, he completed his fifth.




I don't want rigged elections anymore than you do. But there are many ways to cheat. And getting some bills passed that close off these methods gives us a consistency argument for passing more bills along these lines.



Don't turn on your own, just because their first step isn't the same first step you would've taken.

It's just a first step.

[garybeck]

11. I don't think you realize

you said

"And getting some bills passed that close off these methods gives us a consistency argument for passing more bills along these lines."

the fact is, the bill does not close off any method at all. Every opportunity they had to use DRE machines to steal or switch votes will still be there.

No I did not hear you say that we should stop after this bill and I don't think I implied that you said that. In fact I gave an example and compared it to allowing drilling in 98% of alaska and then cutting it to 96% the next year. So in fact I acknowledged that you said to keep going after.

So I acknowledge 100% that you do not say to give up after this bill. But I disagree with your reasoning. I don't think there are precidents for this type of legislative action - proposing more and more restrictive rules every year. usually this type of action is written into a single bill, where they say the first year one thing is done and the next year it is taken a step further - all within the same bill.

This bill is being presented as the end all, fix all. Read the transcripts of the press conference, or even watch the video, I have the link if you want it. They say this will fix the system, and they call it the count every vote act.

I don't know anyone knowledgeable in this community that is saying audit trails are a solution. It's only the democratic party that seems to think they are.

The point of all this is that we can't rely on federal legislation. if you want democracy, don't waste your time supporting these bills. get involved on the state level and demand paper ballots. Or work to get Diebold ESS and Sequoia out of the voting machine business. These tactics actually have a potential to improve the system.

[tubbacheez]

12. I agree DREs are untouched by this.

Sorry to hear that your top priority isn't touched by this bill.



I don't know the nuances of politics in Congress. I hear that sometimes the best approach is to get the opposition to agree to some obvious principle before nailing them on a specific issue.

Sometimes this works. Other times, who knows?

The impression I am strongly getting, however, is that politics is far more art than science. And that the human factors involved, rightly or wrongly, make the direct path next to impossible. So politicians often, but not always, approach their goals in a zigzag fashion.


Is that what Boxer is doing? I have no clue. This might be part of some strategy, or it might be a simple indication of inability to do anything more.




Having said that, I can appreciate the small things while continuing to work for bigger things.

[garybeck]

13. DREs are the problem!!!!

I can tell you what Boxer is doing on this...

The fact is, she has admitted that she doesn't understand the electronic voting problems. If you think this bill is part of a bigger effort to get them to concede to principles or something like that, forget it. She, and all the democrats, simply do not understand what the problem is and they are not proposing any solutions. I have her admitting this on video. She said she was not aware of any problems in the election outside of Ohio. The evoting problems are everywhere.

As I've said, there are good things in the bill. I hope it passes because it's still better than what we have. But to call it the count every vote act and speak publicly about how it is going to fix our election problems, that is very unfortunate and needs to be addressed.

[tubbacheez]

15. Ok, if Boxer needs to see more evidence or persuasion on DREs,

then let's send her some.



In any case, our work isn't finished. And nobody I know is even close to considering it finished... regardless what happens to this bill.





I agree with you that the bill's title overstates things. I don't like the way most bills are titled these days.

And yes, I think some people could get lulled into a false sense of security by this title, especially if they weren't very educated on these issues in the first place.

This lack of awareness is a bigger problem than the title of the bill, in my view. Even a perfectly accurate title wouldn't suddenly appraise voters of the situation.

We still need to continuously raise awareness, in the public, in the Senate offices, even in the media (if we can swing it).




Again, our campaigning must go on... for so many reasons.

[Peace Patriot]

30. Hey, tubbacheez! Are you old enough to have seen that old 1970's...

(I think it was) animated feature entitled, "Bambi Meets Godzilla"?

"I don't know the nuances of politics in Congress." --tubbacheez

Very short movie. (splat!).

(Moral: There are no political nuances in this Bush Cartel-engineered Congress.)

-----

I'm with garybeck. I just can't stand it any more--these namby-pamby bills and Dem leader statements ("Please give us an honest election. Please! Pretty please! Okay, you don't want to? Okay, okay. Well, can we verify, say, 2% of the votes that you're stealing?).

Clueless, suicidal, or corrupt and collusive Democrats--and even intelligent, good-hearted, trueblue Democrats like Boxer....it's beyond comprehension, how they let this fraudulent election system get set up in the first place, why they didn't scream bloody murder about it before the election, and their blank-eyed stares at the mention of "election fraud" now.

I've thought and thought and thought and thought and thought about it. It's given me many a sleepless night. And I don't get it.

This bill is a danger if it's touted as "the answer" (sounds like it is), and if it isn't, it's harmless, I guess, as a little, tiny Bambi step toward democracy.

I'm with garybeck on this also: We have to SEIZE our democracy back at the local/state level. This fascist Bush Cartel Congress DESIGNED this election system FOR fraud, and it reeks of corruption in both Dem and Repub political circles. They WILL NOT fix it. It is the scandal of the world. It is the scandal of history. And they will DO NOTHING (or make it worse).

Local/state action! Get busy!

[garybeck]

4. please...

Democracy is not something that we take baby steps towards. The legislation is never even going to make it out of committee anyway, so there is no reason to not propose something that really fixes the problem. No reason at all.

They are also making false claims by saying it will "count every vote". Also, there is nothing whatsoever to indicate that they plan to try for 5% after this passes and then more. They think this will fix the problem all by itself, or at the very least, they want us to think that.

It is very misleading to call it the count every vote act, and it is very misleading to say it should restore confidence.

I think you're being a little too generous in saying this bill is part of an extended plan to eventually count all the votes. Do you have anything to substantiate this theory?

Barbara Boxer said on camera (I have the video if you want it) that she wasn't aware of any problems in the election outside of Ohio. This is a red flag folks, and another red flag is this Count Every Vote Act and how they're selling it.

Either they don't understand the problem, or the don't want to fix it. there is no other possible explanation.

I don't see them saying, "let's let them drill in 98% of the Alaskan refuge, and next year we'll propose another bill to cut it to 96%." With all due respect, that approach is ridiculous and there is no way any of them are thinking that way on election reform.

There is lots of disagreement in our community but there is a general consensus that none of the federal legislation adequately addresses the problems with computer voting. It's our job to not allow people to be falsely lulled into thinking that any of these bills will fix our democracy because they won't. Well, actually they will "fix" our democracy, but not the type of fixing that you and I want.

As I've said many times, Hillary's bill and some of the others do have other measures in them that are good and for that reason they should be supported. But we should not allow them to falsely state that they will correct the problems with our system, and it should not be called the Count Every Vote Act.

Reminds me of the Clear Skies Initiative.

[FreedomAngel82]

6. I don't like it either

I don't like it either. :\ This will be a way for the republicans to still steal elections and people might throw away the trails. They'll still find a way to get around this and say that the voting machine's work. THEY DON'T! We have to get rid of them!!! Paper trails aren't going to cut it. Paper ballots have to go to every single county and every district. No machine's.

[Mistwell]

8. "NO" machines?

I mean, come on now. I am all on board with getting rid of computer voting...but no machines at all, in any way? Gimme a friggen break. You know how long that takes, and how much it costs? What better opportunity can you offer someone who wants to defraud the vote than to give them literally WEEKS to mess with the system by paying off bribes and stealing and switching uncounted votes in a stack. And why on earth would THAT be more accurate than a faster non-computerized counting machine?

The answer isn't to go back into the stone ages, it's to get REAL checks and balances in place. You can use a mechanical machine (that yes, actually might use some electricity even) to at least assist with vote counting. There is no reason to go 100% anti-tech all of a sudden. No cause to join the uni-bomber in a hole in the ground just because some machines were misused.

[garybeck]

10. I never said no machines

You need to learn about what an audit trail is and what a paper ballot is, and you will realize that these bills are worthless.

Virutally every voting rights activist I know of agrees on one thing- audit trails are not enough, and all the bills fail to fix the election problems.

read this article and hopefully you'll get it:

http://www.solarbus.org/election/articles/0313-ballots.shtml

I'm not talking about the stone age, my friend. I'm talking about your democracy.

Also check out the Open Voting Consortium and their proposal. It is highly techical, and involves computers, so you will like it. But it goes FAR beyond what Hillary's bill calls for, which is just audit trails on DRE machines, which is completely worthless.

If you care about your democracy, I'd ask you to learn about the technicalities of electronic voting and realize it's not just about computers or no computers.

As stated in my original post, my problem is with audit trails. audit trails are not a solution by any stretch of the imagination. I never said there should be no computers or that we should go back to the stone age.

[Mistwell]

20. Yeah I know..hence my reply was not to you

"I'm not talking about the stone age, my friend. I'm talking about your democracy."

And I'm not talking about your post at all my friend. Note who I replied to...FreedomAngel said "No machine's" (sic), and my reply was to them.

:)

[marions ghost]

16. Are you talking about using paper ballots

with "precinct count" optiscan machines (and random hand-counting) as an alternative to DRES? It's roughly one-fifth the cost of a DRE system. I'm assuming this is what you mean.

[garybeck]

19. yes, that is one way to use computers

and still have real paper ballots. the question of having safe opscan machines is still to be answered, but paper ballots with opscans are definitely more secure than DREs. With DREs, which the Clinton bill allows, anyone can walk up to a machine and appear like they're voting while they're actually manipulating the vote. Taking away DREs takes away access to the voting system by any person.

[Mistwell]

21. I just meant ANY sort of machine

Heck, all I meant was that you need some kind of machine to assist with counting to make it go faster. Even if the machine is a mechanical lever method that involves no computers (or even electricity) at all. My response was purely to the "No machines" comment.

[Zan_of_Texas]

28. You don't need machines.

You all have been sold expensive, flashy machinery to do something that these machines do very poorly.

The best way to count votes is in precincts of around a thousand or so. By hand. In the precincts. Nobody leaves until everybody agrees to the result.

With TECHNOLOGY of video cameras taping the entire day of voting, and the few hours it takes to count. And, taping the locked ballot boxes all day too.

Canada votes with simple paper ballots -- they're done counting in a few hours, even in big places like Ottawa. Lots of places in Europe do it.

Paper is better for some things. It's cheap. You can't change it easily, like you can change electrons...without a trace.

I'll guarantee you probably have a paper dollar bill somewhere near you -- you use paper every day. It's not hopelessly old-fashioned. It's matching appropriate technology for its intended use.

The nation's computer experts, over 2000, at least endorse a paper record if a district insists on using DREs.

The results speak for themselves. Canada has national health care. Lower drug costs. Gay marriage. A lower murder rate. And, they don't spend all the taxpayers' money on being the world's most violent bully.

For those who will throw a hissy fit if they don't have some machine involved, optical scan is probably the best bet. But, the votes are counted WITH SOFTWARE that is programmed by vendors who we don't know and don't check their work. Then, it is sent on its way electronically and tabulated with SOFTWARE we didn't check.

Any serious reform has to deal with this stuff, or not bother.

[John Q. Citizen]

23. It also allows a recount of actual paper ballots that can then be used

to change or overturn an erroneous vote total.

[Zan_of_Texas]

27. I'm with you, garybeck.

ANY BILL that promises to increase voter confidence is not particularly what I'm interested in.

I don't want to be sold damaged goods better. I want the real goods. I want real democracy. I want my vote to count. Really. Not to just believe that my vote counted.

OF COURSE they all have to want us to believe this crap. Because if we don't, the whole flim-flam falls apart.

Did anyone notice what happened in Ohio? In Ohio, there WERE paper records of almost all of the counties' votes -- only a few had DREs, because of the great work of the Ohio activists to hold off the DRE flood. But, even with paper, there were every kind of flaw and fraud going on (some preventing the voters from even voting at all) and EVEN WITH RECOUNTS the election officials did stuff in secret, and in cahoots with vendors.

Sure, I'll take 2% of democracy compared to 100%. But, not for long. And, not from our admired Senator who at least carried the Ohio contest of election.

Who can get in to explain to her?

[Cocoa]

7. have ANY dems drunk the BBV Kool-aid?

I sure hope not.

[garybeck]

14. they all have....n/t

[marions ghost]

17. ditto to everything you have said, garybeck

in response to Boxer's request we need to contact her and hammer the flaws in this bill re DREs, once again. Your arguments here are helpful for doing that, thanks. And your point about working at the state level as well, can't be said too much either. Seems like we just have to keep saying all this over and over and over and over.... supporting bills that promote DREs is NOT now, and not ever a good strategy...if you really want to see a return to paper ballots.

[Lost Texan in NC]

18. Confidence in the Election System

:smoke:

You cannot restore confidence in a system that is corrupt. I have people in the state of Florida that told me, in some democratic districts, the police were stationed nearby to arrest voters with as little as unpaid traffic tickets. In my state (NC), there are places that the local media reported more votes than voters. And then there's Diebold. I heard, with my own two ears, the president of Diebold (the makers of the majority of the electronic voting machines in this country), say, "I will do what ever it takes to reelect George W. Bush." The Republicans have figured out how to steal close elections. so we must put forth the best candidates to win these elections by large margins to take back power. We must stop voting for these people who have convinced us they are entitled or they tell us their idea's are the best, without telling us what they are.

[garybeck]

22. it doesn't matter if it's close

04 was not as close as you think. exit polls showed kerry with 314 electoral votes and a 3 million vote nationwide victory.

when you control virtually all of the vote counting, it doesn't matter how close it is.

you are correct about the phantom votes. check these fact sheets for more:

http://www.solarbus.org/election/articles/voting-facts.pdf
http://www.solarbus.org/election/articles/facts-ohio.pdf
http://www.solarbus.org/election/articles/facts-florida.pdf
http://www.solarbus.org/election/articles/facts-newmexico.pdf
http://www.solarbus.org/election/articles/facts-washington.pdf
http://www.votersunite.org/info/ElectronicVotingInBrief.pdf

peace out

[John Q. Citizen]

25. Rule #1 in politics is to always ask for more than you think you can

get, because the opposition will try to whittle back whatever it is you ask for.

We need to find a sponsor for a "model bill" which is written by us and then start looking for and signing up co-sponsors, as well as find community group coalition allies. This means working with the alter-abled community, people in all political parties and independents.

I agree the Boxer Bill won't get out of committee and neither would our own "model bill" but that's not the point, as you pointed out in an above post.

Also when we write, talk to, or lobby any potential allies we need to be courteous yet firm.

You are also correct that we need to work on the local, state and Federal levels simultaneously to get back to where we can again have at least minimal confidence in the integrity of the electoral system.

[marions ghost]

26. good idea

to come up with a model bill, since we're not seeing one we can support on the issue of DREs. Useful for lobbying purposes to project what is preferred, and use it to get support.

[politicasista]

29. Why down on Miz Boxer?

She is a favorite of mine for at least having courage to challenge the Ohio electors.