Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News, Tuesday 01/22/08

[Melissa G]

Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News, Tuesday 01/22/08


Esteemed DUer's, please consider taking a moment (or more)
to graciously participate by posting 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 Spring 2006 Edition of "Election Fraud and Reform News Directory" listed here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x407240

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.




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

[Melissa G]

1. States n/t

[Melissa G]

5. NH- NH Recount Uncovers Discrepancies -- Result of Human Error Officials Say

Wired
NH Recount Uncovers Discrepancies -- Result of Human Error Officials Say
By Kim Zetter January 22, 2008

A recount of the New Hampshire Democratic primary is underway in two counties in that state, and already the internet is abuzz over initial figures that show some clear discrepancies on optical-scan ballots cast in two polling locations in Hillsborough County, though officials say the discrepancies are the result of human error rather than machine error.

As you recall, Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich and Republican presidential candidate Albert Howard asked the state to recount the primary ballots after a blogger posted a chart showing that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama received more votes than Hillary Clinton in regions where officials counted the paper ballots by hand than in regions where they were counted by optical-scan machines made by Diebold Election Systems and that Republican presidential candidate John McCain also received more votes than Mitt Romney in hand-counted districts over machine-counted ones. The implication was that Clinton and Romney somehow benefitted from the optical-scan machines.

Voting activists say that pre-primary polls favoring Obama over Clinton add to suspicions that there was something wrong with the optical-scan machines

So the state is currently conducting a hand recount of ballots cast in the Democratic primary in Hillsborough and Rockingham counties (Kucinich will decide based on the results of the recount in these two counties whether he'll pay to have Democratic primary ballots in the rest of the state recounted). So far the numbers out of two polling places in the cities of Manchester and Nashua in Hillsborough County show consistently screwy changes in the totals for all of the top Democratic candidates (Clinton, Obama, Edwards) and, therefore, have some voting activists crying foul.

While the vote totals for the candidates in other voting districts changed by a handful -- as they're expected to do in recounts for various reasons -- each of these Democratic candidates lost a significant number of votes in the recount at Manchester Ward 5 and Nashua Ward 5, ranging from 7% to 15% of their totals in those precincts.

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/01/nh-recount-unco.html

[Melissa G]

7. NH- Few errors found in N.H. recount that Kucinich sought

Few errors found in N.H. recount that Kucinich sought

Posted by Sabrina Eaton January 22, 2008 11:14AM

The recount of Democratic primary votes in New Hampshire that Cleveland's Dennis Kucinich requested hasn't changed any candidate's voting percentage "by more than a few hundredths of a percentage point so far," the Nashua Telegraph newspaper reports today.

Kucinich paid $27,000 to recount about 40 percent of New Hampshire's Democratic ballots after Hillary Clinton polled disproportionately well in machine-counted parts of the state. According to the Telegraph, the partial vote count Kucinich paid for may be finished this week, after which he'll decide whether to pay approximately $40,000 more to recount the rest of the state's Democratic votes.

When the Democratic recount wraps up, Republican primary ballots will be recounted at the request of a little-known GOP candidate from Michigan, Albert Howard, who got just 44 votes.

"The hand recount seem to support local officials' confidence in AccuVote scanners, which tally the election-night votes from the paper ballots at most area precincts," the newspaper reported. "But they may not placate the concern of those who worry about the 'chain of custody' -- the security of the cardboard boxes that hold ballots between the time that polls close and the time that recounts start."

http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2008/01/few_errors_found_in_nh_recount.html

[Melissa G]

8. Brad blog- NH Election Contest Update: 7.5% Vote Count Discrepancy Found in Nashua, Ward 5

BLOGGED BY Brad Friedman ON 1/22/2008 12:01AM
NH Election Contest Update: 7.5% Vote Count Discrepancy Found in Nashua, Ward 5 for Clinton, Edwards
While getting caught up with New Hampshire, after three days of travel and other related maladies, in preparing for a long catch-up article on the latest there (to be posted late late late tonight), I came across the following, from the latest numbers as posted last Friday night on the NH SoS website results page.

I've translated the numbers from the SoS's ridiculously impossible-to-read page, to something a bit more useful...

NASHUA, WARD 5
Diebold
Result Hand
Tally Discrepancy
Total
Votes %
Error
CLINTON 1,030 959 -71 7.40
EDWARDS 405 377 -28 7.42
OBAMA 673 678 +5 0.73

Beyond the folks above, in Nashua, Ward 5, Richardson lost 3 votes (out of 72, as tallied by Diebold originally) and Biden lost 1 (out of 9). Everyone else, including Kucinich, remained exactly the same after the hand count in that one precinct.

Note: The above numbers are from Nashua, Ward 5. As opposed to Manchester, Ward 5, which we pointed out last Thursday, with some consternation, after enormous disparities were revealed by the post-election hand count in that precinct as well.

Much more later. Or, as the democracy-hating editorialists at the Eagle-Tribune wrote today: "e have a partial recount of Democratic ballots underway in New Hampshire even though it is certain that the results will not change an iota....The whole idea that it will is a fallacy that is destructive to Americans' confidence in the democratic process."
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5591

[Melissa G]

9. CA- San Francisco settles voting machine vendor lawsuit

San Francisco settles voting machine vendor lawsuit
The Associated Press
Article Launched: 01/22/2008 02:30:21 PM PST


SAN FRANCISCO—The city of San Francisco has settled a fraud and breach-of-contract lawsuit against its former voting machine vendor, the city attorney announced Tuesday.
Under the settlement, Omaha, Neb.-based Election Systems and Software agreed to reimburse the city $3.5 million, nearly all of the $3.8 million San Francisco paid the company for its ballot-marking machines in 2006.

ES&S is not admitting product liability as part of the deal, which also calls for the city to pay the company $400,000 in outstanding bills.

"This resolution is a creative approach that benefits both parties," John Groh, a senior vice president for ES&S, said in a statement.

City Attorney Dennis Herrera sued ES&S in November after the secretary of state required hand-inspection of each ballot cast the in Nov. 6 municipal election because of concerns about the reliability of the ES&S machines.

Herrera alleged that the company deliberately gave the city an outdated model that the secretary of state had not approved for use and that the manual tally caused an expensive delay in obtaining election results.
http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_8045984?nclick_check=1

[Melissa G]

10. New York: Breakthrough at the Board?

New York: Breakthrough at the Board?

By Bo Lipari, New Yorkers for Verified Voting
January 22, 2008
New York Could Vote on Paper Ballots



Pressure from Judge Gary Sharpe's order for the State to put Ballot Marking Devices in place for the 2008 Election may at last force the New York State Board of Elections to authorize a single state wide paper ballot marker and scanner system. Unquestionably, there are many benefits to using only one voting system throughout the state, and it’s obvious that touch screen voting machines, or DREs, are the worst possible choice for New York in light of huge costs and the number of states rapidly abandoning failed DRE technology. But so far the State Board has refused to do what’s right for New York's voters and have kept DRE vendor hopes alive, even going so far as to recklessly allow vendors to submit DREs to use as Ballot Marking Devices - a purpose they are not designed for, can’t fulfill (see why here, here, and here) and which was protested by NYVV and a coalition of advocacy organizations.

But sources at the State Board of Elections tell me that the small number of submitted systems, and the Board’s inability to agree on what actually constitutes a Ballot Marking Device, could result in only one system being authorized at the Board’s crucial meeting on Wednesday, 1/23/08 – a combination ballot marker and scanner which would virtually guarantee that New Yorkers will vote on paper ballots when lever machines are retired in 2009.

This outcome could potentially please everyone - citizen groups who have long called for a single statewide voting system; county legislatures, editorial boards and citizens across New York State who’ve advocated for voting on paper ballots; even county election commissioners would be glad to have the machine decision be made where it belongs - with the State Board of Elections. One caveat however, the decision to authorize one system for the entire state is being made not because it has been judged the most accessible, user friendly, or accurate, but because a partisan split at the Board leaves only one option left on the table.

The State Board's Democrats and Republicans disagree about what a Ballot Marking Device must do - specifically, whether New York’s unique full face ballot layout is required only on the paper ballot, or if only the screen display must present the full face layout. This would seem to be a minor point but it in fact determines whether or not DREs will be allowed in New York (two of the six submitted systems are from Avante, but both of these machines should be rejected at Wednesdays meeting because they provide no way for voters with visual disabilities to verify their ballot).
http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2720&Itemid=113

[Melissa G]

11. AR- Sec. of State’s office says voting problems possible

Sec. of State’s office says voting problems possible

Published: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:11 PM CST


LITTLE ROCK (AP) _ Arkansas has had five statewide elections since it began to introduce electronic voting machines, and officials at Arkansas secretary of state’s office say they expect few problems in the state presidential primary on Feb. 5.

Early voting starts Jan. 29.

“We’ve had five statewide elections since the implementation of this new equipment, and every election is better and smoother than the one before,” said Natasha Naragon, spokeswoman for Secretary of State Charlie Daniels.


Many Arkansans still will not vote on the new machines. For the Feb. 5 election, 47 of the state’s 75 counties are to have the electronic machines in place as the primary voting method. The other counties are to have at least one of the electronic touch-screen machines at each polling place. Voters in those counties will be given the option of using paper ballots, which will be tabulated using optical scanning machines.

snip
In the May 2006 presidential primary in Arkansas, the electronic machines were blamed for widespread problems, either due to technical issues or worker inexperience.
http://www.stuttgartdailyleader.com/articles/2008/01/22/news/news03.txt

[sonias]

20. TX- Mistrust of voting machines on the rise

Houston Chronicle

Mistrust of voting machines on the rise
Texas sticking with electronic balloting despite reports of flaws

Jan. 21, 2008, 11:52PM

By ALAN BERNSTEIN
Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle

In December, Colorado rejected the kind of touch-screen voting machines in wide use across Texas.

Ohio called for a return to paper ballots after deciding that the kind of click-wheel voting machine used in the Houston area, as well as the touch-screen model, were unreliable and too vulnerable to computer-savvy manipulation of election results.

California found in mid-2007 what it called serious security flaws in the same kinds of equipment.

Amid growing concern about glitches in electronic election systems, the states also are requiring that voting machines produce receipts of a sort so voters can check whether their ballot choices are recorded correctly.

Texas, however, plans no such scientific re-evaluation of its computerized voting machines. And the state has yet to require the ATM-style record known as a Voter-Verified Paper Audit Trail, though the Democratic and Republican state parties say in their platforms that Texas should use the technology.

Same as it ever was, same as it ever was.... :grr:

Sonia

[Melissa G]

21. Indeed!

:grr:

[Melissa G]

2. National n/t

[Melissa G]

13. Common Cause Press Release-South Carolina Voting Machine Failure Underscores Need For Swift Federal

South Carolina Voting Machine Failure Underscores Need For Swift Federal Action for Voting Security

S. Carolina - January 22 - Problems with electronic voting machines in today’s Republican South Carolina presidential primary and reports that voters were being turned away from the polls as a result of those problems underscore the need for Congress to move swiftly to provide states with funding to have emergency paper ballots on hand in the event of a machine failure and to replace paperless voting systems so that meaningful recounts and audits can occur.


“Voters are understandably outraged that in this important primary election they could not exercise their right to vote because of the machine malfunctions,” said Bob Edgar, president of Common Cause. “This was a preventable and foreseeable crisis. Congress and state election officials must move fast to fix this problem by the general election in November.”

Due to a programming error, the electronic iVotronic voting machines were reportedly not working properly today in Horry County, home of Myrtle Beach. Poll workers were handing out paper ballots in the affected precincts, but some of the precincts reportedly ran out of paper ballots and were sending voters to other precincts to cast provisional ballots. Poll workers said the county has about 100 precincts, and all of them were affected. The iVotronic voting machines used in South Carolina are the same make and model as the machines used in the contested Florida congressional election of 2006 where 18,000 votes appear to have been lost.

Common Cause is pushing for emergency legislation that would provide funding for the 20 states, including South Carolina, to print up emergency paper ballots and to replace paperless voting systems like the iVotronics machines, which can’t be subject to a meaningful recount or audit. The Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act of 2008 (HR 5036), introduced Thursday, is a critical first step in addressing what could be nothing short of a national emergency around the presidential election.

“Paper never fails to boot up” said Duncan Buell of Common Cause South Carlolina and author of a white paper detailing problems with the iVotronics voting machine. “We need to replace the system we have here in South Carolina and we definitely need to have emergency paper ballots on hand in case of machine failures next week.”
###

http://www.commondreams.org/news2008/0122-13.htm

[Melissa G]

15. Early Voting Important Factor in 2008

Early Voting Important Factor in 2008
By NANCY BENAC – 3 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — For many people, the question this year isn't just which presidential candidate to vote for, it's when.

States have done backflips to make it easier for people to vote in advance of election day. Presidential candidates are turning cartwheels to lock in early votes.

But in a campaign as volatile as this one, people have to decide whether it makes sense to vote too far ahead. The race is so unsettled that today's champ can be tomorrow's chump.

California, for example, is one of more than 20 states voting on Feb. 5. But people have been able to vote by mail since early January. That monthlong voting season is tantamount to a lifetime in this campaign.

Other Feb. 5 states where voting is under way include Arizona, Georgia, Illinois, New Jersey, New Mexico, Tennessee and Utah. Early voting in Florida, which holds its primary next Tuesday, began Jan. 14. As many as one-quarter of all ballots in the state typically are cast early.

In all, at least 32 states allow some form of no-excuse early voting, according to electionline.org.

Any vote that a candidate can secure early is precious, particularly when so many states are voting at once and campaigns are stretched thin. Many people like the convenience of voting early. But what about when the contest in both parties is so scrambled?
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iXAkBilVhjbpsgAAHfgp6kGEShvwD8UB4MNO0

[Melissa G]

3. International n/t

[Melissa G]

4. Editorial n/t

[Melissa G]

6. Why the Internet is not today’s CNN

NetworkWorld.com
Why the Internet is not today’s CNN
Growing reliance on blogs for political news a concern
'Net Insider By Scott Bradner, Network World, 01/22/08

Ted Turner founded the Cable News Network in 1980. It took a few years, but CNN became a major source of news for most of the United States. According to the latest Pew Research survey, 38% of the U.S. public turns to CNN and its cable competitors for news about the current presidential campaign. That is essentially the same percent as turn to their local TV news, somewhat ahead of the percent that get their news from the nightly network news or from newspapers, and about 30% more than those who admit to getting campaign news from the Internet.

The Internet is growing in importance (up from 9% in 2000 to 24% a month ago), but is still not a dominant player. However, it still may be a dominant effecter.


The Pew survey makes for interesting reading, and contains lots of charts detailing its findings. Perhaps the most telling is the one showing the generational divide over news sources. The relative importance of the Internet and local news shows as information sources is almost reversed when you compare the over-50 population (50% local news and 15% Internet) with the18-29 population (25% local news and 42% Internet).

A lot of news is only "covered," if that is the right concept, by Internet-based blogs. For example, effectively no major print or TV news show is reporting in any detail on the vote recount going on in New Hampshire while there are a number of blogs publishing the up-to-the-minute results. But this example illustrates a basic bias and competence problem with Internet news that is likely much worse than that with most major news organizations or newspapers.

Allegations of bias are leveled against CNN and its major competitors all the time, and, from what I’ve seen, for quite good reasons. But the worst of these allegations are milk toast when compared to the vitriol and speculation in some blogs. The New Hampshire reports in the blogs are, at best, varying in their degree of believability. Too many border on supermarket tabloid quality.

http://www.networkworld.com/columnists/2008/012208-bradner.html

[Melissa G]

12. The Political Plot Thickens

The Political Plot Thickens
January 22, 2008 11:03 AM ET | Barone, Michael | Permanent Link


My U.S. News column this week is a reminiscence of past campaigns and election nights. But we had quite an election night (and afternoon) last Saturday, as Mitt Romney notched up a big victory and Hillary Clinton a narrow victory in the Nevada caucuses and John McCain squeaked out a 33-to-30-percent victory in the South Carolina primary. I was at Fox News headquarters in New York, with the Decision Desk, which called the Romney victory quickly (there was no doubt whatsoever) and the Clinton victory pretty quickly (she carried Clark County and lost in most of the rest of the state, but Clark County has 71 percent of the state's population). Fox called McCain the winner in South Carolina at 9:17 eastern time (by my watch), before the other networks. It could have been called much earlier except for the fact that the voting machines in Horry County (Myrtle Beach area) weren't working and its totals (it was one of McCain's two best counties in the 2000 primary against George W. Bush) weren't being registered either in the exit poll or in the tabulated vote.

Where are the two parties' races going from here? The Democrats seem headed toward more acrimonious division, while the Republicans seem headed toward something more like not entirely unacrimonious closure.

The Democrats. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are now in a rock 'em, sock 'em battle. The astute liberal columnist Michael Tomasky characterizes Clinton's victory as "downright ugly." A push poll in Nevada four times identified Clinton's opponent as "Barack Hussein Obama"—imagine the cries of bigotry that would ensue if a Republican had done that! Bill Clinton was in Las Vegas charging the Obama forces with unfair tactics, and pro-Clinton forces were prosecuting a lawsuit against the caucuses held at nine casino worksites where it was assumed that the 60,000-strong Culinary Workers Union would pitch votes to its endorsed candidate, Obama. Turned out the lawsuit wasn't necessary and the Culinary Workers couldn't deliver: Seven of the nine casino voting sites went for Clinton over Obama.

The reason: ethnic politics. Previous contests didn't have appreciable numbers of black, Latino, and Jewish voters. The Nevada Democratic caucuses did (the fact that many blacks and Latinos could vote was Nevadans' strongest argument to the national Democrats for having an early caucus there). The entrance poll showed that blacks favored Obama over Clinton 83 to 14 percent, while Hispanics favored Clinton over Obama by 64 to 26 percent and Jews favored Clinton over Obama by 67 to 25 percent. Blacks and Hispanics were 15 percent of the sample, Jews 5 percent (enough to be statistically significant given the large number of respondents). We saw the pattern familiar from the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary results, with Clinton favored by older and more downscale voters and Obama favored by younger and more upscale voters. But the ethnic split has important implications for Florida on January 29 (where the Democrats are not supposed to compete but are on the ballot) and some of the big February 5 primary states (New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and California). Obama seems likely to have a huge advantage in southern states with large black percentages in the Democratic primary; that's why he's leading by solid margins in polls for the January 26 South Carolina contest, where blacks will account for about 50 percent of Democratic primary voters. And the ethnic split may not make much difference in New York and New Jersey, where Clinton is heavily favored, and in Illinois, where Obama is. But consider California. There are many more Latino than black voters in the California Democratic primary. And there could well be more Jewish voters than black voters in the California Democratic primary. California is the big prize of the February 5 contests, and it has been assumed that its upscale/young electorate favors Obama. But Latino and Jewish voters could pitch it toward Clinton.

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/barone/2008/1/22/the-political-plot-thickens.html

[Melissa G]

14. Every Vote Counts

Every Vote Counts
Posted January 22, 2008 | 04:18 PM (EST)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Breaking Politics News



Stalin once said it's not the votes that count but who counts the votes.


So here we are in a presidential election year and there is genuine concern about "who counts the votes." Can there be a more compelling question in a democracy?

One person, one vote sounds so reasonable and -- dare I say it -- democratic. But the voting process in America is anything but fair and balanced. When members of a certain party concoct various devious schemes to suppress votes, purposely misinform potential voters, spread vile untrue filth about certain candidates, play the race, gender and religious cards, and literally tamper with vote tallies, then we are not a truly representative government! Are we?

In 2004 I was at a small reception for John Kerry in Robert Altman's office and future senator Al Franken expressed deep concern about the Diebold voting machines and the potential for widespread vote tampering. He asked Senator Kerry if he was concerned about it. The senator said he was aware and would do something about it. In fact, there was a 25 million dollar voter fraud fund that could be used to investigate such claims, but alas, Kerry did nothing about it after losing a profoundly suspect election. An election in which -- instead of the Supreme Court bailing out Bush -- Ohio and Florida became cesspools of shady vote-counting and un-counting.

So we must not only ask who counts the votes, but actually find out!

See you at the polls?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-belzer/every-vote-counts_b_82704.html

[Melissa G]

16. That's it for me. Post away folks! I'm at a city council meeting.

Please vote this up also!

[Kurovski]

17. Many thanks to good citizen MG!

K&R. :loveya:

[Melissa G]

22. Back atcha...

:loveya:

[EFerrari]

18. Thank you, Melissa G!

:loveya:

[Ellipsis]

19. #5 n/t

:hi: