Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News Thursday, 10/20/05

[Wilms]

All members welcome and encouraged to participate.

Please post Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News on this thread.

If you can:

1. Post stories and announcements you find on the web.

2. Post stories using the "Election Fraud and Reform News Sources" listed here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x371233

3. Re-post stories and announcements you find on DU, providing a link to the original thread with thanks to the Original Poster, too.

4. Start a discussion thread by re-posting a story you see on this thread.


If you want to know how post "News Banners" or other images, go here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=371233#371391

Link to All previous Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News thread:

http://www.independentmediasource.com/DU_archives/du_2004erd_el_ref_fr_thr_calenders.htm


Please "Recommend" for the Greatest Page (it's the link just below).

[Wilms]

1. Kemp Says Ex-Felons Should Be Able to Vote

Kemp Says Ex-Felons Should Be Able to Vote

By JEFFREY McMURRAY, Associated Press Writer

Tue Oct 18, 2005

WASHINGTON - Jack Kemp, the former Republican vice presidential candidate and HUD secretary, urged Congress on Tuesday to require states to restore voting rights for felons once they complete their sentences.

Kemp, who was Bob Dole's running mate in 1996, made the recommendation during the first in a series of hearings about the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits literacy tests, poll taxes and other infringements on minority voting.

Some key provisions of the 40-year-old law expire in 2007. One requires areas with a history of discrimination to get federal approval before changing their election laws.

snip/more

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051018/ap_on_go_co/voting_rights

[Wilms]

2. GA: Judge Blocks New Photo ID Requirements for November 8 Elections

Voting Rights Advocates Hail Court Decision in Georgia Photo ID Case

October 18, 2005

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: [e-mail]

Judge Blocks New Photo ID Requirements for November 8 Elections, Says Plaintiffs have a "Substantial Likelihood" of Succeeding in Court

ATLANTA - In a major victory for Georgia voters, a federal judge today blocked a controversial new law that dramatically restricts the types of photo identification that may be used when voting. The decision is in effect while a legal challenge to the law, brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and a coalition of voting rights advocates, continues.

"We are pleased by the court's decision today. We have always known that this law unconstitutionally burdens the right to vote for thousands of properly registered Georgia voters," said Meredith Bell-Platts, a staff attorney with the ACLU Voting Rights Project in Atlanta. "This decision is especially important for those Georgians who would have been turned away from the polls all across the state on November 8."

In granting the preliminary injunction, the court held - among other things - that the plaintiffs have a substantial likelihood of succeeding on the merits of their claims that the photo ID requirement is an unconstitutional burden on the right to vote and constitutes a poll tax.

In his decision, U.S. District Court Judge Harold Murphy wrote that, "In reaching this conclusion, the Court observes that it has great respect for the Georgia legislature. The Court, however, simply has more respect for the Constitution."

snip/more

http://www.aclu.org/VotingRights/VotingRights.cfm?ID=19277&c=32

[Wilms]

3. Did a reporter with GOP ties suppress a story...?

Saving Ohio

Did a reporter with GOP ties suppress a story that could have cost Bush the White House?

By Bill Frogameni

President Bush's reelection may have been made possible by a Toledo Blade reporter with close ties to the Republican Party who reportedly knew about potential campaign violations in early 2004 but suppressed the story.

According to several knowledgeable sources, The Blade's chief political columnist, Fritz Wenzel, was told of potential campaign violations by Tom Noe, chair of the Bush-Cheney 2004 campaign for Lucas County, as early as January 2004. But according to Blade editors, Wenzel never gave the paper the all-important tip in early 2004.

snip/sign up

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/10/06/ohio/index_np.html

[Wilms]

4. Diebold says its voting machines are bulletproof. Hackers say otherwise.

Knocking the Vote

Diebold says its voting machines are bulletproof. Hackers say otherwise.

By James Renner

Published: Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Ion Sancho wants to get things right this time. As supervisor of elections for Leon County, Florida, he stood at the epicenter of the election fiasco of 2000. Voter confidence, he realizes, is paramount. That's why he's let a computer hacker have a go at one of his new machines.

The apparatus in question is the Accuvote 2000 Optical Scan, a boxlike computer that reads ballots as they are inserted. The data is collected and stored on a memory card that's later uploaded into a central tabulator. Diebold, the machine's Canton-based manufacturer, claims that the memory cards cannot be altered to influence votes. Sancho figured he'd find out for himself.

In May, he gave Dr. Herbert Thompson access to an Accuvote 2000. As hackers go, Thompson doesn't quite fit the mold of a pasty-faced kid playing Warcraft in Mom's basement: He's the chief strategist at Security Innovation, a Florida tester of online security for IBM, Microsoft, Google, and other large businesses and government agencies. If anyone can uncover a problem, it's this guy.

But not even Thompson could have expected this: He was able to manipulate a memory card using homemade devices. When he inserted it into the Diebold machine, 10,000 votes were awarded to one candidate, and the Accuvote detected no sign of fraud.

snip/more

http://www.clevescene.com/Issues/2005-10-19/news/news.html

Thanks to Algorem

Editorials & Other Articles:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x166125

Election Reform
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x397637

[Wilms]

5. Steve Freeman: Presentation to the American Statistical Association

Research and Commentary on the 2004 US Presidential Election

Steve Freeman

Presentation to the American Statistical Association, Philadelphia:

Polling Bias or Corrupted Count? Accepted Improbabilities and Neglected Correlations in 2004 US Presidential Exit Poll Data

October 14, 2005 Text Slides Handout

and more

http://www.appliedresearch.us/sf/epdiscrep.htm

Thanks to Melissa G

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x397502

[Wilms]

6. CA: Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Chooses Promises Over Evidence

Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Chooses Promises Over Evidence

Media Release

For Immediate Release

Contact:
John Gideon, Information Manager
[e-mail]
[phone]

Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Chooses Promises Over Evidence

19 October 2005 - The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors agreed yesterday to allow the County Clerk, Gail Pellerin, to enter into a contract with Sequoia Voting Systems, a recently purchased subsidiary of Smartmatic, Inc. which is a Florida-registered, Venezuelan-owned, company.

The 94-page report Pellerin presented to the Board contains 69 pages of information supplied by citizen opponents of the purchase, including documented failures of the systems in past elections, analyses showing the higher operating cost of the system, and testimony by disabled individuals explaining the difficulties they had using the system.

Read the report here:

http://sccounty01.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/bds/Govstream/BDSvData/non_legacy/agendas/2005/20051018/PDF/047.pdf

One member of the Public Advisory Committee established to provide counsel to the current voting systems evaluation and selection process states the following reasons why the Sequoia system is not a good choice:

• It is only conditionally certified in California and is not certified for the primary election.
• It currently provides no features to allow manually disabled individuals to vote independently as required by HAVA.
• Blind voters have complained about the audio interface of the Sequoia DRE since 2004, and while Sequoia promised at that time to fix those problems, it has not yet done so.

snip/more

Thanks to JohnGideon

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x397627

[Wilms]

26. Update here:

http://www.votersunite.org/info/releaseSantaCruz10-19-05.htm

[Wilms]

27. CA: Attorney General Lockyer Files Suit To Ensure That The Disabled

Attorney General Lockyer Files Suit To Ensure That The Disabled In Kern and Santa Cruz Counties Have Access To Polling Places And Can Exercise Right To Vote
Lawsuits Filed After Pervasive Violations Found Over The Course Of Four Elections

October 17, 2005

05-090 View Attachments
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
[phone]

(SACRAMENTO) – Attorney General Bill Lockyer today filed lawsuits against Kern and Santa Cruz counties in state court which seek to compel the counties to comply with state and federal laws protecting the right of voters with disabilities to access polling places. The lawsuits stem from lengthy investigations which found nearly three out of every four Santa Cruz polling places surveyed had at least one barrier that could make disabled access especially difficult, hazardous or even impossible; and that more than nine out of 10 polling sites surveyed in Kern had an accessibility violation.

“The right to vote is the key to our democracy and it is my legal duty to protect this fundamental right for all Californians,” Lockyer said. “Extensive surveys conducted over the course of four separate elections revealed that barriers impeding or blocking disabled access to Santa Cruz and Kern county polls were pervasive and are unlikely to be fully corrected without strong action. I hope these lawsuits will help ensure that all California voters, including the disabled, are able to freely and equally exercise their right to vote.”

The two lawsuits allege that by failing to ensure that the polling sites they select satisfy applicable disabled access standards, local election authorities have violated the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and state elections law. Specifically, the ADA requires that polling sites be readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities on election day. Under California law, local elections officials are authorized to select polling places of their own choosing, so long as they comply with standards issued by the Secretary of State which require that they be accessible to the disabled.

During the March and November statewide elections in 2002, the Attorney General’s Office, with the assistance of the Independent Living Centers, conducted informal surveys of randomly selected polling sites throughout California to assess compliance with accessibility laws. These informal surveys revealed that Kern and Santa Cruz counties both appeared to have an exceptionally large number of disability access violations at their polling sites.

snip/more

http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/release.php?id=1228

[Wilms]

7. OH: You Can Vote,But The Elections Over

You Can Vote,But The Elections Over:County election board forum gives electronic voting skeptics chance to rant,but little else

The Cleveland Free Time

October 20, 2005

By Charu Gupta

MONDAY’S CUYAHOGA COUNTY Board of Election forum at Myers University on electronic voting had all the trappings of a public hearing: an attentive panel, a podium and microphone for citizens to speak, video cameras and a court reporter. But what it didn’t offer — a chance to influence the board — weighed heavily on the minds of many in attendance.

The forum, filled with appointed and elected public officials, representatives of a voting machine manufacturer, reporters and activists, was largely an effort by county election officials to justify their actions. But if anything, the event underscored the continued lack of confidence many Ohioans have in their election officials, electronic voting and Cuyahoga County’s vendor of choice, Canton-based Diebold.

The CCBOE and Diebold focused much of a morning session on telling a 60-member-plus audience why electronic voting is the best choice for Cuyahoga County. In the afternoon, about 20 people took the mic for the public testimony phase (time ran out before 14 more could speak). Most questioned Diebold’s integrity, the security of its machines and cost analyses. Few, if any, left satisfied.

THE HISTORY
Two systems are vying to replace traditional methods of voting: optical scan systems, and Direct Recording Equipment (DRE).
In optical scan systems, voters darken a circle next to the names of their candidates. Ballots are then electronically scanned and tabulated. Some computer scientists prefer optical scan systems because they have built-in, paper-based voter verification. But many researchers and veteran election officials maintain that optical scan systems are fraud-prone, because a simple mark added later can easily invalidate a ballot.

snip/more

http://www.freetimes.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=2688

Thanks to Algorem

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x397631

[Wilms]

8. CA: Some counties testing electronic vote machines

CAMPAIGN 2005

Some counties testing electronic vote machines
Equipment verifies ballot choices and aids disabled voters

Greg Lucas, Chronicle Staff Writer

Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Sacramento -- California voters may notice changes at their polling places during this year's special election as several counties test electronic voting equipment that will be required in 2006 to verify ballot choices and allow the disabled to vote unassisted.

Seven counties, including Monterey County, are using new technology that lets voters double-check their selections before casting a ballot electronically.

State law requires all counties using touch-screen voting systems -- 14 of the state's 58 -- to offer voters this option starting with the June 2006 primary.

"This is the perfect opportunity for us to introduce these printers to voters. It gives us an opportunity to find out if there are any problems with the units and start to make voters familiar with how they work," said Kari Verjil, registrar of voters for San Bernardino County. "And if we have the units, why wait for the June primary? Let's roll them out."

Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, said the counties are doing the right thing.

"Many counties are wisely choosing to implement this new equipment sooner rather than later so they and their voters and their poll workers can gain experience with it," Alexander said.

Local election officials aren't worried about introducing the new devices next month in part because it's a simpler ballot than next year's primary, but they do worry they may be saddled with the $44.7 million tab for conducting a statewide election.

snip/more

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/10/19/BAGP7FAO3E1.DTL

[Wilms]

9. NC: Voting machines must be replaced

Voting machines must be replaced

October 19,2005

BY Charlie Hall View stories by reporter

Sun Journal Staff

BAYBORO - Pamlico County had no ballot-counting glitches in the 2004 election, but the county still will have to scrap about $108,000 worth of voting machines.

Commissioners expressed their displeasure Monday night with the legislature's Aug. 26 law that requires counties statewide to use machines with a paper trail back-up.

Even with about $106,000 in state money to buy a requested 39 new machines and software, the county still must ante up about $50,000.

Working with a current budget that was cut to the marrow amid tight economic times for the county, the board will have to find revenue to pay for the new machines.

snip/more

http://www.newbernsj.com/SiteProcessor.cfm?Template=/GlobalTemplates/Details.cfm&StoryID=24182&Section=Local

[Wilms]

10. NC: Buncombe County deciding how to handle paper

AP State News

October 19. 2005 12:08AM

Buncombe County deciding how to handle paper record of votes

The Associated Press

The Buncombe County elections director said she's not sure the county will be able to retrofit its 500 voting machines to generate a paper record of each ballot that the voter can see or if it will need to buy new machines.

Elections Director Trena Parker told county commissioners Tuesday that the equipment must be operating correctly in time for the May 2006 primary elections. Counties plan to select machines to purchase by January, she said.

"It's a tight schedule as you can see," Parker said. "It's going to be a very busy December."

Legislators approved a law this year requiring a paper record of each vote after problems in Carteret County when an electronic voting machine lost more than 4,400 votes in last year's election.

http://www.the-dispatch.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051019/APN/510190506&cachetime=5

[Wilms]

11. US Gov't Considers New Vote-by-Phone Plan

CIO News Alerts

Oct 19, 2005

Eric S. Crouch - PC World.com

US Gov't Considers New Vote-by-Phone Plan

Casting a vote may soon be as easy as checking voice mail for some voters. The Department of Defense is considering a new vote-by-phone technology for military and overseas voters, according to a DOD spokesperson.

"Voting by phone offers a future possibility and alternative to the by-mail process for these absentee voters," said Polli Brunelli, director of the Federal Voting Assistance Program, in an e-mail interview.

The phone voting system was demonstrated to the public in Vermont earlier this month. Vermont is the first state to announce that it will offer telephone voting next year. Brunelli was present at the demonstration and says she liked what she saw.

"Voter instructions were clear," said Brunelli. "The system allowed me to make candidate selections, review my choices, change my selections, write in a candidate, and verify my choices before casting my ballot."

snip/more

http://www.cio.com/blog_view.html?CID=13312

[Wilms]

12. Voting activists think the future of accurate electronic voting lies in...

Machine Politics

Voting activists think the future of accurate electronic voting lies in paper

Writer: MARTY LEVINE Pittsburgh City Paper 19 October 2005

“Everything is stupid-simple on this machine,” enthuses Victor Schulte, standing over the Accupoll Voting System 1000, an electronic voting machine he is demonstrating in the Beaver County Courthouse. “Your IQ has to be below 80 to have a problem working on this.”

Schulte enthuses a lot.

“It’s impossible to leave the poll and be disenfranchised,” he says. “Im-possible.”

The Accupoll touch-screen voting machine has never been used in a national election. But a 2002 federal law, and promised federal money, will force Beaver and every other Pennsylvania county to purchase a whole bunch of these (or some other brand of machine) by the end of 2005. They’re all supposed to go into use starting this spring at around $3,000 a pop. Allegheny County alone runs more than 1,300 polling places, each with multiple machines: Stocking them all will cost about $16 million.

Crowding the small courthouse rotunda in beaver, five voting-machine companies vie for public favor and public dollars. The firms here include the mammoth Diebold as well as the less well-known Advanced Voting Solutions and Election Systems and Software. Most of these machines resemble huge Palm Pilots on stilts.

snip/more

http://www.votersunite.org/article.asp?id=6183

[Wilms]

13. More on Georgia ID Decision

Wednesday, October 19

Equal Vote

More on Georgia ID Decision

I've had a chance to read through U.S. District Judge Harold Murphy's 123-page order, which blocks the State of Georgia's recently enacted photo ID law (HB 244). That law required voters appearing at the polls to show government-issued photo ID, but allowed mail-in absentee voting without any such requirement. Georgia's one of only two states to require photo ID in order to vote. (The other is Indiana, whose recently enacted photo ID law is also being challenged.) Here are some of the highlights from Judge Murphy's opinion:

- The order relies heavily on the lack of evidence that voter fraud at the polling place is common. In fact, the evidence includes a statement from the state's chief election official, Secretary of State Cathy Cox, that she "cannot recall one documented case of voter fraud ... that specifically related to the impersonation of a registered voter at the polls." In other words, the only problem that the Georgia law purports to deal with is a non-problem. This supports the conclusion that the voter fraud arguments we've heard so much about are a pretext for disenfranchisement.

- Judge Murphy also notes that, at the time of enacting its new photo ID requirement, the state also raised the minimum fee for a five-year photo ID card from $10 to $20. That may not be much for most people, but is a lot for those on fixed or otherwise limited incomes. While the state says it will provide free ID cards to those who declare that they are "indigent," one can easily imagine that some would feel it embarrassing or insulting to their dignity to make such a declaration. Others don't believe themselves "indigent," while still needing to spend that $20 elsewhere -- say to pay for groceries for their children or pay the rent. In fact, the opinion notes that plaintiffs filed in evidence numerous declarations from such people.

- The opinion notes that there is some evidence of fraud with mail-in absentee ballots over the years. This is understandable, given that it's practically impossible to monitor who's actually completing absentee ballots, or to ensure that the privacy of the ballot (which protects against vote buying and selling) was preserved. By contrast, a voter who goes to a polling place pretending to be someone whom she's not is taking a big gamble -- it's a high risk, low reward strategy. The irony is that Georgia's law actually makes it easier to cast an absentee ballot, while imposing an ID requirement for in-person voting where fraud is much less likely.

snip/more
http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/blogs/tokaji/2005/10/more-on-georgia-id-decision.html

[Wilms]

14. Brad: Bob Ney (R-OH) up to Eyeballs in DeLay, Abramoff, Corruption Probe

10/18/2005

Bob Ney (R-OH) up to Eyeballs in DeLay, Abramoff, Corruption Probe

Tied to Gambling, Illegal Favors and TeleCom 'Election' Fixing Investigations...

In an extremely detailed 2891-word page one Washington Post report today by James V. Grimaldi and Susan Schmidt, Congressman Bob Ney (R-OH) is tied to at least four different aspects...

In an extremely detailed 2891-word page one Washington Post report today by James V. Grimaldi and Susan Schmidt, Congressman Bob Ney (R-OH) is tied to at least four different aspects of ongoing probes being carried out by criminal investigators looking into the corruption of GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff and former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom Delay -- both of whom have been indicted recently on charges relating to the various investigations.

Ney has not yet been indicted, but the WaPo exposé ties him to several different scandals including the SunCruz casino boat fraud/murder investigation (for which Abramoff has recently been indicted), several illegally funded overseas vacations, support of Indian gaming in apparent trade for favors received in the form of cash contributions and other gifts from Abramoff and -- yes -- the apparent "fixing" of an election administered by Ney of telecommunications companies to determine who would receive a large contract at the U.S. Capital building.

snip/more

http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00001930.htm

[Wilms]

15. A look at vote-counting mischief and the potential for more

MONKEY BUSINESS

A look at vote-counting mischief and the potential for more

10/19/05

by Miriam Raftery

On Election Day, will your vote be counted accurately?

According to a CBS/New York Times poll, only 35 percent of people surveyed had �a lot� of confidence that their votes would be properly counted.

Nationwide, a movement to reform election procedures and protect against electronic-vote tampering and other forms of voting fraud is gaining force.

CityBeat interviewed San Diego City Attorney Mike Aguirre regarding complaints raised by local and national election-reform activists over alleged violations of election law in San Diego�s recent mayoral race.

snip/more

http://www.sdcitybeat.com/article.php?id=3674

[Wilms]

23. Discussion

Thanks to helderheid for posting

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5111415

[kster]

16. Kick-n-Recommended.nt

[Wilms]

17. Why Can't The Left Face The Stolen Elections Of 2004 & 2008?

Election 2004

October 18, 2005

Why Can't The Left Face The Stolen Elections Of 2004 & 2008?

by Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman

If some of its key publications are any indicator, much of the American left seems unable to face the reality that the election of 2004 was stolen. So in all likelihood, unless something radical is done, 2008 will be too.

Misguided and misinformed articles in both TomPaine.com and Mother Jones Magazine indicate a dangerous inability to face the reality that these stolen elections mean nothing less than the death of what's left of American democracy, and the permanent enthronement of the Rovian GOP.

As investigative reporters based in Columbus, Ohio, we witnessed first-hand, up close and personal, exactly how the 2004 election was stolen, and how it will most likely be done in 2008. In the precinct in which Harvey Wasserman grew up, and in the one where Bob Fitrakis now lives, we saw the well-funded, profoundly cynical and deadly effective mechanisms by which the Bush-Cheney-Rove-Blackwell GOP machine switched a victory for John Kerry to an easily-repeatable defeat for democracy.

That Kerry and the spineless Ohio and national Democratic Parties have been complicit is a crucial part of the problem much of the left also seems unwilling to face. But if you live in Franklin County, Ohio, and watch the Republican and Democratic Parties run joint pickets against progressive candidate, and cut backroom deals allowing incumbents of either party run unopposed, you may miss the full scope of the disaster.

snip/more

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1502

[Wilms]

25. Discussion

Thanks to Talismom

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2169406

[Wilms]

18. House Leadership Plan to Restrict Low-Income Voter Participation

News Conference on House Leadership Plan to Restrict Low-Income Voter Participation as Condition of New Affordable Housing Grant Program

10/18/2005 4:07:00 PM

To: Assignment Desk, Daybook Editor

Contact: Amrit Dhillon of National Low Income Housing Coalition, 202-662-1530, ext. 222 or [e-mail] ; Web: http://www.nlihc.org

News Advisory:

Affordable Housing Fund provision in GSE Bill includes language restricting voter registration

News Conference Wednesday, Oct. 19

News Conference on House Leadership Plan to Restrict Low-Income Voter Participation as Condition of New Affordable Housing Grant Program

WHAT:

A coalition of national organizations concerned with housing, community development, people who are elderly or disabled, child welfare, civil rights, voter participation, and rights of non-profits will hold a news conference to voice opposition to provisions in a compromise on H.R. 1461, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005, reached by the House Leadership.

These provisions will disqualify a non-profit organization from receiving grants from the Affordable Housing Fund (AHF), created by the legislation to develop new affordable housing for low income people, if the organization has engaged in any voter registration and other non-partisan voter participation work in the 12 months prior to application. Any non-profit organization that does receive a grant to develop affordable housing is also prohibited from engaging in these activities, even using private funds. These restrictions are not imposed on for-profit companies. The legislation is slated to go to the House floor next week.

WHEN: Wednesday, Oct. 19, at 10 a.m. EDT

WHERE:

National Press Club - Zenger Room

529 14th Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20045

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=55222

Thanks to eridani for posting
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x397701

[Wilms]

19. New Mexico Secretary of State Attempts to Subvert Paper Record

New Mexico Secretary of State Attempts to Subvert Paper Record

By VerifiedVotingNM and UnitedVotersNM
October 17, 2005
New Mexico Secretary of State Rebecca Vigil-Giron appears ready to spend millions in taxpayer money on voting machines for the disabled but has ruled out the one machine the disabled are said to like best. Moreover, she is doing this out of the public view.

Her action, she says, is to comply with the requirement of the federal Help America Vote Act (HAVA) that at least one voting system accessible and usable independently and privately by the disabled must be purchased for each polling place by December 31. The Secretary seems poised to use an estimated $9 million in HAVA funds for buying some 1,400 electronic voting machines.

During Sept. 19-23, Secretary Vigil-Giron held an unpublicized meeting in Rio Rancho, to which she invited representatives of the disabled as well as county clerks from throughout the state. She has not revealed who these disabled representatives were and how comprehensively they reflected the range of disability. At this meeting she barred the county clerks from providing input and asked the disabled representatives to rate three touch screen machines – the Sequoia AVC Edge and the ES&S iVotronic and the ES&S AutoMark. According to testimony on 10/13 before the legislative task force on election reform, nine out of ten of the participating disabled voters at the Rio Rancho meeting preferred the AutoMark. But inexplicably the Secretary of State told them that the AutoMark is not eligible for selection on grounds that it is not HAVA compliant -- this despite the fact that the other two machines being rated are also not HAVA compliant at this time.

Election reform activists with VerifiedVotingNM and UnitedVotersNM say the Secretary of State is arbitrary and wrong to willfully bypass the AutoMark. The AutoMark utilizes a ballot marker that enables the disabled to vote without assistance and in private. It has a sip/puff tube for voters unable to use a touch screen and an audio function for blind voters. It is equally efficient for non-disabled voters. Also, the AutoMark does not count votes as other voting machines do. Instead, to insure counting accuracy, it utilizes a conventional paper ballot that can be readily audited or recounted by hand or by the electronic scanning machines already available in many New Mexico counties. By contrast, the Edge and iVotronic use rolls of paper tape for verifiable paper ballots that are much more difficult to audit and recount.

snip/more

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=197&Itemid=50

[Wilms]

20. VVPR Bill Introduced in Pennsylvania

VVPR Bill Introduced in Pennsylvania

By Warren Stewart, Director of Legislative Issues and Policy, VoteTrustUSA

September 27, 2005

Rep. Dan Frankel Introduces HB 2000

A bill that would require a voter verified paper record of every vote and a routine random manual auidt of 5% of the state's precincts has been introduced into the Pennsylvania Assembly today by Rep. Dan Frankel (D-Allegheny) and 38 initial bi-partisan co-sponsors.

In the 2004 General Election, Pennsylvania witnessed an alarming number of incidents of voting machine malfunctions and irregular vote totals. Machines malfunctioned and votes were lost in many Pennsylvania counties. And Pennsylvania was not alone, with hundreds of incidents in precincts and counties across the nation.

Many state legislatures have addressed concern over the accuracy and security of the machinery on which voters’ votes are cast and counted, with more than half the states in the country having required that voting machines produce a voter verified paper record of the vote, with legislation introduced in 13 others. Ten states have mandated random audits in which the totals of the voter verified records will be compared to the machine counts. Typically this legislation has passed by unanimous or near unanimous votes as state legislatures have recognized the compelling necessity of ensuring confidence in the election process and providing a safety net for inevitable voting machine malfunctions.

The recent final report of the Commission on Federal Election Reform , co-chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker, recommended that all voting systems be required to produce a voter verifiable paper record “as the only means to meet the Commission’s recommended standards for transparency.” The report noted four reasons that a VVPR was important: “(a) to increase citizens’ confidence that their vote will be counted accurately, (b) to allow for a recount, (c) to provide a backup in cases of loss of votes due to computer malfunction, and (d) to test – through a random selection of machines – whether the paper result is the same as the electronic result.”

snip/more

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=168&Itemid=26

[Wilms]

21. Who is R. Doug Lewis? (Election Center)

Who is R. Doug Lewis?

By New Yorkers for Verified Voting (www.nyvv.org)
October 08, 2005

R. Doug Lewis is the Executive Director of the Election Center in Houston, a private, “non-profit organization that serves the elections and voter registration profession”<1> by sponsoring training and certification programs for election administrators and vendors. The Election Center has about 1,000 dues-paying members, including state and county election officials and "suppliers of election products and services." <2>

Prior to taking over the Election Center in 1994, Lewis was president and director of Micro Trade Mart, a company that traded in used computer parts. He claims political experience as a presidential assistant, aide to Texas governor John Connolly, and chairman of state Democratic parties. Lewis has developed a continuing education program for election officials and the first Code of Ethics for voter registrars and elections administrators.

He has organized committees, associations, and task forces that bring election workers together around shared concerns, notably the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED). He serve as the director of the Voting Systems Program for NASED, where he was responsible for managing the qualification, testing, and approval of voting equipment in America through independent authorities and sat as a member of the national Voting Systems Board to develop and update the Federal Voting Systems Standards.”<3> During that period, Independent Testing Authorities (ITAs) did not answer questions about testing procedures but referred all questions about the certification of voting machines to R. Doug Lewis at the Election Center. <4>

Why worry about Lewis’ influence?

snip/more

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=184&Itemid=51

[Wilms]

22. DUI case may set black box voting precedent.

by Paul -V-

Thursday, October 20, 2005

People who are fighting for open and honest elections in this country may soon have those accused of Driving Under the Influence (DUI) to thank for an important precedent working its way through the courts.

According to vnunet.com:

A Florida court will hear arguments on Friday in a case where the accuracy of a breathalyzer is being scrutinized because the manufacturer has refused to release the source code.

Lawyers representing more than 150 defendants who have been charged for driving under the influence of alcohol in two Florida counties will file the request.

They argue that they have a right to see the source code of the alcohol breath analyzer that was used to determine their clients' guilt.

"None of the programs that was used here is approved," said Robert Harrison, a lawyer representing some of the defendants.

"The question is whether the difference is material or not. Without seeing the source code, we do not know."


Most people who are concerned about the accuracy of computerized Black-box voting (BBV) machines would heartily agree with the last sentence.

A lot has been written about the dangers of the BBV machines that now tally most of the votes in this country. Since the computers are run off proprietary code: If the election results are in dispute, not only is there no paper trail, no independent investigation is allowed to analyze the software that the machine used to come to its conclusion.

The defendants in the Florida DUI case are arguing that proprietary code that is above scrutiny is like having a witness against you that does not need to testify in court. I'm not a lawyer, but the Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution seems to favor the defendants:

snip/more

Thanks to brainshrub for posting

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x397758

[Wilms]

24. Was 2004 presidential election stolen?

Bucks County Courier Times

J. D. Mullane

October 20, 2005

Sen. John Kerry won Bucks County by two points and took Pennsylvania by three, but lost the national race to George W. Bush.

Like me, you probably thought this was old news and that Election '04 was settled.

Not Stephen Freeman, a visiting professor at the University of Pennsylvania, whose soon-to-be-published book will make a case that the Bush/Kerry election was riddled with "corrupted counts" that deserve high scrutiny, perhaps a recount.

Freeman stops short of saying Bush stole the race, but he comes close. His case is this. On the afternoon of Election Day, exit polling - which Freeman said is quite accurate - showed Kerry was winning with 51 percent of the vote, to Bush's 49 percent.

When the polls closed, however, the numbers reversed. Bush won.

snip/more

http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/219-10202005-557661.html

Thanks to helderheid for posting

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5111402

[Wilms]

28. Fitrakis and Wasserman to be Honored by "Project Censored"

Ohio Election Fraud (Formerly "Fairness")

October 20, 2005

Fitrakis and Wasserman to be Honored by "Project Censored" for Coverage of 2004 Election

Free Press Publisher/Editor Bob Fitrakis and Senior Editor/Columnist
Harvey Wasserman have been cited by "Project Censored" for their
coverage of the theft of the 2004 election as writers of one of the
Most Censored stories of the year.

The Fitrakis/Wasserman by-line has become the leading indicator of
coverage of the theft, fraud and intimidation surrounding the Ohio
vote. Rev. Jesse Jackson has called them "the Woodward and
Bernstein of the 2004 Election."

snip/more

http://fairnessbybeckerman.blogspot.com/2005/10/fitrakis-and-wasserman-to-be-honored.html