Dean talked about election reform in Mpls. tonight.

[Carolab]

I went to hear him speak as a guest of the ACLU of Minnesota.

In the Q&A, he was asked about the rigged machines and partisan secretaries of state. He was also asked about John Conyers' report.

He said that he had not read Conyers' report yet but he knew that there were definitely problems with voter suppression in Ohio, Florida and elsewhere. He also said that "these machines" had no place in a democracy. He said that he would speak out more about this but that it was difficult without hard evidence to point to--actual hard evidence of fraud and evidence that it would have made a difference in the election. He referred back to when he was the guest host of Topic A with Tina Brown before the election and had Bev Harris on demonstrating how hackable the machines are and that it is a huge concern to him. He said that we need IRV and he also said that we need to defeat these partisan secretaries of state nationally. He talked about Oregon as a model election system and said that in order to make their model happen nationally other states must do so through the referendum process.

[MadSal]

1. I am thrilled to hear of this news. I have known Howard

Dean was savvy to the election fraud and one of the earlier people to bring it to people's attention. I also applaud his up-front comments on this.

By comparison, John Kerry says nothing and completely leaves us in the dark as to what he knows or thinks. That is the reason I would not vote for Kerry again, though I feel he is an honorable man. If he won and the evidence again pointed to election fraud, would he fold again? We can't chance it. Gore did a much better job of fighting for his win in 2000.

Thanks much for your post, Carolab!

[MadSal]

2. I am thrilled to hear of this news. I have known Howard

Dean was savvy to the election fraud and one of the earlier people to bring it to people's attention. I also applaud his up-front comments on this.
By comparison, John Kerry says nothing and completely leaves us in the dark as to what he knows or thinks. That is the reason I would not vote for Kerry again, though I feel he is an honorable man. If he won and the evidence again pointed to election fraud, would he fold again? We can't chance it. Gore did a much better job of fighting for his win in 2000.
Thanks much for your post, Carolab!

[oneold1-4u]

3. Take a look at vote by mail

It really does work and will continue to get better in OR and all other states that adopt it! It is so simple and has the least likely flaws for a legitimate election. Don't let the Rs. get a foot in for rejection, just check it out!

[Amaryllis]

4. I live in OR and am very active in election reform. We have been looking

very closely at Vote by mail, and it has much to recommend it. I think we may have the best system in the country. However, part of why it works so well is that OR has a very strong county clerks association, and many of our election officials are union members, which meaans they can't be fired without good reason. Consequently, they are far less likely to be pressured into going along with someone like BLackwell. Some states' election officials are appointed by each new governor and are members of that gov's political party.

Also, we still have Sequoia and ES & S tabulators. This needs to be addressed. Because we have good election officials who are very committed to integrity, and who have built in many safeguards (for example, no tabulators or scanners have internet connections), our elections work. However, just importing vote by mail to a state where the SOS is bent on fraud is not going to solve the problem. A system based on a paper ballot makes fraud far more difficult than when DREs are used,plus it eliminates much of the problems such as long lines, etc. that we saw in OH, but there still would be plenty of opportunity for fraud as long as the votes are counted on software designed by corporate partisans, and elections in a state are run by highly partisan officials.

[Carolab]

5. That's pretty close to what he said, too.

He said we for sure shouldn't have voting systems that don't let you count the votes manually; i.e., paper ballots.

And then he said we need to work on the SOS races.

[eomer]

9. I'm skeptical about vote by mail.

I don't understand how you achieve a chain of custody of the ballots. If someone wants to intercept and destroy ballots, how could you preclude it?

With voting at a polling place you can have observers witness the ballot box from beginning to end with no break in the chain.

With vote by mail, when does the observation of the ballot box (the chain of custody) begin? And how do you make sure someone can't jump in just before that beginning and do whatever they want?

It seems like a good system if we could assume the absence of bad actors but I don't see how it can be trusted in the real world.

Here in S. Florida we have had serious problems in the mailing of absentee ballots. These involved the outgoing mail rather than incoming as far as I know but I don't see why the problems couldn't occur in both directions.

[Amaryllis]

11. People often compare it to absentee ballots. Comparing a statewide system

with a lot of checks and balances built in to absentee ballots is apples and oranges. It has so many safeguards built in that my reform group has concluded that it actually is safer than precinct level voting, for a number of reasons. The chain of custody is very good. We have signature verification, and as soon as the ballot comes in to BOE the sig is verified. THe number of ballots counted per precinct has to match the number of sigs verified. This makes "losing" ballots very difficult.

We are hoping to get something written up; there is a vote by mail handbook if you want to take a look
http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/Publications/vbm_manual.pdf
but we need something that's a quicker read.

But one of our county election supervisors said she didn't think it would work as well in some other states; it's not JUST the vote by mail part, it's the way our whole county election clerk system is set up that makes it work so well; it's the thing about partisan election officials again. We don't have that here (at least as far as we know, and the system isn't set up to foster that).

[shance]

10. Great points Amaryllis. When the communities are involved

in their voting and there is a strong county clerks association, there are going to be more accurate elections.

The tabulation and the hostage taking of our votes by the three Republican based companies (2 largest ES&S and Diebold being owned by Republican/conservative brothers) needs to be a thing of the past. If we can put our passion into confronting and attacking this problem like we have dealt with Tom Delay, then we'll be dealing with the issue that is at the base of all of our rights as Americans.

I think it deserves as much, don't you?

We've had what looks, walks and talks like potentially three very fraudulent election cycles, and its time to hit these private companies out of the ball park and out of the voting business and say adios. It's time to put them out of business for what they have done and are doing to our elections. Three strikes and they're done. It's like having Dick Cheney or George Bush sitting down and counting the votes themselves when you think about it.

Conversely, I wouldn't be comfortable with any Democrat owning any company that even resembled a ballot counting company. It goes both ways, and it's wrong for either party to have a financial/emotional stake in the outcome of our voting.

Neither party should be having a part in the private/electronic tabulation, much less the ownership of our vote. Our votes belong to us, the citizens. I think there is some legislation we could use right there.

Also, if we are going to support vote by mail systems, which at this point has some important issues to be addressed(I believe the votes should be tallied at the poll where the votes were given), we need to be sure we know who is tabulating the ballots. As you know the problem is not with the voter, its with those who counts the votes.

Thanks again for posting Amaryllis and a big thanks to Governor Dean for once again addressing this important issue.

[Amaryllis]

12. The votes not being tallied at the polling place was a concern of mine

untiil I found out some things. REad my post number 11 and see if that addresses your concern; if not, let me know why and I will see if I can answer it. We have spent six hours total with election supervisors in two different counties in the past few weeks. Still have big concerns about the scanner and tabulator software issues (not that we think they are being manipulated by our officials, but that the potential for code to be built in without them even knowing and manipulation happening that way is there.)

All recounts in OR have to be done by hand, and the change is just the actual cost to do the recount.
Anyone can ask for one as long as they can pay the recount cost; if it changes the election outcome there is no charge.

[tommcintyre]

6. kick

[kansasblue]

7. That is nice to near

I spoke to him briefly in Lawrence, KS about fraud. I've always expected more from him on the topic. But maybe he's on the best course waiting for more proof. So let's get at it.

He did say in Lawrence that we need to work very hard to elect good Sec of State at the State level and to get more people involved in the local processes.

[rigel99]

15. STUPID STUPID STUPID

someone needs to explain to Dean, a man I admire greatly and worked my TUSH OFF for his campaign, raised TONS of money, had house parties in the beginning where he called my house directly!! etc...

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ELECTIONS anymore. Running SOS candidates means Dean doesn't get it... his fog of denial is thick indeed.
In Georgia, guess what, I can tell you who will be SOS, it will Bill Stephens, he's a republican and he will be put into office by guess who? Diebold, because we are a 100% Rigged Diebold electronic voting state.

I heard from a very topnotch attorney at the Nashville conference that Dean and the DNC will only spend money on election reform and will not spend a penny on Fraud...

how can you reform something without investigating what broke it? how you can address reform without asserting fraud?

DEAN, listen up. I'm your biggest fan. I have a Dean Bat, I have raised money for you and wrote a little deanmix diddy for you when you were a shadow of a candidate and 50K in the bank and driving around in a car with kate and still able to spend time with Sally when you came to Georgia.

Dean listen to me clearly.

WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT FRAUD . we have to stop allowing DRE machine purchases nationwide.. it's the # 1 problem to fix now.. time is ticking, the clock of democracy goes slowly backward toward dictatorship everyday we do not address fraud.

I love your comments, but highlight the key problem and start telling Donna Brazile and folks who have till now done nothing positive and remain clueless to the true problems of election Fraud in this country, tell them to start listening to the citizens.. we have made calls and get the same response as from Baker Carter commission... that is no response...

[LatePeriduct]

16. Dean needs to be reigned in

He should attend the conference and find out himself how much illegal voting is being done.

[Fly by night]

8. Why don't we ask Dean to invite some 'Nash-ional" speakers to DC ...

... to brief him, Donna Brazille and her investigation team, Rep. Conyers and his committee members and any other person in a position of authority left in our political process who is (still) unaware of the 2004 election theft "hard evidence". After hearing from Cliff Arnebeck, Bob Fitrakis, Teresa Hommel, R.H. Phillips, Joanne Rousch, Bernie Windham, Mary Beth Kuznik, Jonathan Simon, Andy Stephenson, David Griscom, Judy Alter, Clint Curtis, etc, etc -- there should not be a doubting Thomas (or Howard or John or Donna or anyone else) left in the room.

Please write Dean and tell him that the only thing standing between him and enlightenment on the "hard evidence" of the 2004 election theft is one phone call. If he invites us, we will come.

[tommcintyre]

13. There is a lot I like about Dean, however..

WHY hasn't he "read Conyers' report yet?" <Knowing what he SHOULD know, shouldn't this be his number one issue/priority?>

"...he would speak out more about this but that it was difficult without hard evidence to point to--actual hard evidence of fraud and evidence that it would have made a difference in the election." <With the mountain of evidence collected, shouldn't he be pushing for a formal investigation to find the "hard evidence" as he puts it?>

You know, in hindsight, I think he was the best Dem candidate. But, somebody besides Conyers needs to be publicly acknowledging the possibility of MAJOR election fraud now. And if HE won't do it, who will? Time is running out.

[Carolab]

14. I wrote to him via the DNC website e-mail.

And insisted he read Conyers' report as well as the report from USCountVotes.

Others should do the same.

[tommcintyre]

18. Good idea! n/t

[Amaryllis]

17. How bout asking Conyers to talk to Dean?

[tommcintyre]

19. Yes! And cc: Dean with the message. n/t