No Optical Scan Machines in CT demos last week!

[truckin]

I recently posted this in the CT State forum and thought it would be good information in this forum also. Basically, the RFP put out by Demmocrat, Secretary of the State Bysiewicz in CT, only calls for DREs and she refuses to amend the RFP after more than a year of correspondence. Below is some recent correspondense and you can go the TrueVoteCT to view the history of TrueVoteCT's requests and the SOTS's stonewalling tactics.

Letter to the SOTS:
http://truevotect.org/resources/Morelli-letter-to-SOTS-2005.09.19.pdf

SOTS response:
http://truevotect.org/resources/SOTS-Morelli-response-2005.10.05.pdf

[Land Shark]

1. Rather than work out problems in existing technology, we shuffle the deck

with a whole new model rife with alpha and beta problems, not to mention structural inability to recount, structural secrecy of vote counts, and structural nontransparency that will not ever be solved through experiency. It may be that elections officials are attracted by the "miraculous" results that can't be second guessed and save them time in counting, at the expense of voters standing in electronically bottlenecked lines, together with the loss of the public's checks and balances like the ability to monitor their own elections.

[FogerRox]

2. Considering what happen in my home county in NJ recently

5 Dems voting to purchase the Sequoia Advantage---------

I have to consider that some DEMs are complicent with the rush under HAVA to buy DREs.
Working within the system did not work for me- we did not do enough arm twisting, and threatening.

I wholey recommend going after Election officals that do not see the light within 1 month. And I mean going after them most vigorously.

I realize now how I have failed, over the last 6 months, in my home county of Essex, NJ. It is now -- figuritively speaking--time to take out my baseball bat and start bustin some heads.

And if they happen to be DEM heads-- tuff.