Tokaji response to RFK piece

[sandnsea]

He worked on the ground in Ohio in 2004, his take. Thought I'd post real quick, I'm actually going out of town for a whole day!!! Going to have lunch with my step-son in the big city of Salem, woohoo, lol. See yas later.

http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/blogs/tokaji/2006/06/back-to-ohio-rolling-stone-piece.html

[ginnyinWI]

1. the most important sentence in the piece:

"The most important question we now face, however, is not whether Kerry really won. It is instead what ought to be done about the very real and serious problems that emerged in Ohio and other states in 2004, which Kennedy exhaustively documents, for the most part quite accurately."

I believe that this is the reason RFKjr. is publishing this now. We have to raise awareness of the weaknesses in our voting system. JK might have really won, or maybe not (I prefer to believe he would have in an honest election), but there isn't anything we can do about it. It's the future that we can do something about.

[ProSense]

2. Why not just investigate this election?

It appears even the most reasoned people are citing widespread discrepancies, tampering and vote suppression.

Real Problems

...Foremost among the decisions that might reasonably be questioned are his order not to count provisional ballots cast in the wrong precinct, and the order (later rescinded) to require that registration forms be on 80-lb. paper weight...

...Kennedy estimates (based partly on my work) that 66,000 votes were lost due to unreliable voting equipment. This seems to me a reasonable estimate if we include the votes lost due to non-notice punch-card and optical scan systems.

...While it's difficult to measure with any degree of precision how many votes were lost due to long lines, this undoubtedly was a serious problem that discouraged some people from voting.

A Grain of Salt
- Kennedy describes a group of Republican operatives known as the "Mighty Texas Strike Force" which allegedly "us pay phones to make intimidating calls to likely voters."...since the Conyers Report was relying on a statement made at a hearing by someone other than the hotel worker -- if true it's obviously very troubling.

Snip...

To summarize: There's no doubt that some votes were lost due to faulty voting technology (let's say 66,000). There were also likely some voters whose provisional ballots weren't counted due to registration errors (the most that this could possibly be is 35,000). Add to that voters who report leaving the polls without casting a ballot (174,000, generously estimated), and you've still only got a total of 275,000 lost votes-- and keep in mind that this is indulging very optimistic assumptions in Kerry's favor. If my algebra is right, Kerry would still have had to pick up about 196,500 of those lost votes, or over 71%, in order to tie Bush, given the 118,000 margin of victory. Perhaps not beyond the realm of possibility, but not very likely.

On the exit polling (hard to swallow but not without doubt):

Even if this is true, however, it doesn't tell us who those voters completing the exit survey in Bush strongholds were -- or more precisely, whom they supported. More specifically, it doesn't eliminate the possibility that Kerry voters in Bush strongholds were more likely to speak with interviewers than were Bush voters in those strongholds.

The most important question we now face, however, is not whether Kerry really won. It is instead what ought to be done about the very real and serious problems that emerged in Ohio and other states in 2004, which Kennedy exhaustively documents, for the most part quite accurately.

snip...

It's perfectly reasonable to look back at the 2004 election and try to learn from the mistakes that were made. I'm therefore not one who believes that those distressed by the 2004 result should simply "get over it." But arguing over who really won shouldn't distract us from issues like voter ID and felon disenfranchisement, where the present fight over vote suppression really lies.

This is just Ohio. Everything Tokaji mentions from the "Real Problems" to the "Hard to Swallow," can only be cleared up by a thorough investigation. I can see that a lot of people simply view this as too large an undertaking, therefore we should just deal with the implications, not the crime.

Geez!

[zann725]

6. I agree. "Why NOT investigate THIS ('04) Election?"

Why keep focusing, deflecting to some distant, unknown factors in future?

THAT's what Conservatives do. Keep ingoring, putting off REAL change to some indefinite point in the future. Let's NOT be Conservatives.

[karynnj]

3. Thanks for posting this

This is the most sensible analysis overall that I have seen. I like that he comes out exactly where Kerry did.

1) The election couldn't be challanged

and

2) There are major problems that need fixing

I am really surprised and impressed that only 3% abandoned the effort to vote.

[ProSense]

4. What amazes me is that some people

seem to believe that every single one of the charges have to be proved true. Which is why the GOP sticks to the meme "massive conspiracy." Look at the machine discrepancies in a few of the states where these occurred AK, NM, NC and OH, vote suppresion in OH and FL alone, or tampering by Blackwell and others. The impact of any one of these is serious enough to bring into question the election results.

[karynnj]

5. Also, the elections should be well run and the

transparently honest. The fact that even within states, there are different methods with different error rates is wrong. The problem with all these problems is that in most elections, it will lead to the winner's win being questioned and the loser's loss will be debated. Our democracy deserves better.

[GregD]

7. Tokaji is, and always has been, our enemy

When I webmastered VerifiedVoting, he was always on the wrong side of this issue. I just confirmed with VotersUnite.org that this remains the case.

Anything that Tokaji says should be considered in that light.

[globalvillage]

8. In what way, Greg?

Can you point to anything specific? I thought his article was thoughtful, and appeared balanced. That doesn't mean my perception was either right or wrong, but if there's something that can help me understand where he's coming from, I'd like to see it.
Thanks.

[GregD]

11. Tokai opposes VVPAT and election transparency

Here is a starting point to understand Tokaji's views. In July 2003 he debated Kim Alexander of www.calvoter.org on Michael Krasny's KQED (SF Bay Area's NPR station) Forum program. The difference in views is striking.

Search for "tokaji" on this page:
http://www.kqed.org/pgmArchive/RD19

This is the listing you should locate:

New Voting Technology
Listen (program)
Forum looks at the growing popularity of electronic "touch screen" voting machines and debates plans to expand their use in California elections.
Host: Michael Krasny
Guests:
Dan Tokaji, professor of law at Ohio State University and immediate past chair of California Common Cause
Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation


A bit about Tokaji and the state of the debate at that time:

Those were the days when www.commoncause.org was also on the wrong side of the eletronic voting issue. Months later, through the efforts of some hard-working activists (and one woman in particular from Texas), Common Cause National finally came around and stood on our side of the issue. But even in the face of that change, California Common Cause continued to issue public statements opposing us. ACLU and LWV also opposed paper trails in those days.

Note that Tokaji was listed as "immediate past chair of California Common Cause". It is fairly clear that his personal views influenced the organization he had chaired.

So with this as background, just do a search on the guy and see what he has said about e-voting. He's not a good guy - that's for sure.

[ProSense]

12. Thanks for posting!

I hope you will post it in the link I provided. That is similar to something I found in a search:

http://gnosis.python-hosting.com/voting-project/August.2004/0109.html
http://gnosis.python-hosting.com/voting-project/July.2004/0236.html

[ProSense]

9. Interesting! Thanks!

Would you mind posting this information in the following thread?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1349078&mesg_id=1349078

Thanks!

[sandnsea]

10. He may be your enemy

But he isn't everybody's enemy. The truth is that some of these claims are just flat bullshit. The stickers are bullshit and the humidity problem is bullshit. The machine glitches are a definite problem, but there were glitches on machines in other state that had nothing to do with the presidential election so at least some of that indicates machine problems in general. We keep pointing to the exit polls, but somehow forget that the exit polls were way off in New Hampshire too, and the recount there didn't turn up anything at all. I know defense attorneys often use the tactic of throwing every possible irregularity at a jury to create reasonable doubt, but that doesn't really work with something as serious as our national elections. As sick as I am of balls and spine, I'm equally sick of Diebolded elections as if there aren't problems with every other machine on the market. My understanding is that Tokaji and others are trying to get to the real methods that are consistently used to suppress the vote and get away from some of these accusations that have been blown way out of proportion when the complaints actually consisted of a handful of votes to start with.