Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News Tuesday 8/22/06

[Melissa G]

Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News Tuesday 8/22/06


translation: No to a fascist government!

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







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

[Melissa G]

1. Close Election Tests Mexico's Democracy

Close Election Tests Mexico's Democracy


Last Updated:
08-21-06 at 2:56PM

TUXTLA GUTIERREZ, Mexico -- The dispute over Mexico's presidential vote took a new twist Monday as a governor candidate backed by the ruling party vowed to protest a state race where the main leftist party held a slight edge.

As supporters of leftist presidential candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador clogged the country's capital with protests to demand a recount of the July 2 presidential election, President Vicente Fox's party cried fraud and demanded a recount in Sunday's governor's race in Chiapas, Mexico's poorest state.

Preliminary results in the southern state showed little more than 2,000 votes separating the two candidates. Both claimed victory late Sunday and held celebrations within blocks of each other _ as if there were a clear winner.

http://www.kfmb.com/stories/story.60679.html

[Melissa G]

2. Mexico teachers grab Oaxaca radio stations, shot at

Mexico teachers grab Oaxaca radio stations, shot at
Reuters
Monday, August 21, 2006; 9:14 PM


OAXACA, Mexico (Reuters) - Gunmen shot at a radio station occupied by striking teachers on Monday, prompting protesters to blockade streets, set buses on fire and take over radio stations in the southern Mexican city of Oaxaca.

The early morning attack, which injured one person, was the latest in a series that has killed four protesters in recent weeks.

Protesters demanding the resignation of Oaxaca state Gov. Ulises Ruiz responded by blocking streets in the historic city center with buses, setting some on fire. They also took over 12 private radio stations they consider hostile to their cause. Others blockaded bus terminals and gas stations and about 2,000 marched through the city streets.

The teachers also ignored pleas to end their strike on Monday, the first day of the new school year.
Mexico has been engulfed in a political crisis since leftist Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador narrowly lost a July 2 presidential vote and accused his conservative rival of fraud.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/21/AR2006082101527.html

[Melissa G]

3. New Zogby Poll: It's Nearly Unanimous

Thanks to Landshark and autorank for the poll and the post. DU thread here..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1951906

Land Shark and I ask that you spread
this wide and far, on as many lists as
you're willing. Thanks, autorank & Land Shark
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0608/S00220.htm

New Zogby Poll: It's Nearly Unanimous

Voters Insist on Right to Observe Vote Counting
Plus other findings from this unique poll
Michael Collins
"Scoop" Independent Media
Part I of a II part series.
Washington, DC


A recent Zogby poll documents ground breaking information on the attitudes of American voters toward electronic voting. They are quite clear in the belief that the outcome of an entire election can be changed due to flaws in computerized voting machines. At a stunning rate of 92%, Americans insist on the right to watch their votes being counted. And, at an overwhelming 80%, they strongly object to the use of secret computer software to tabulate votes without citizen access to that software.

The American public is clear in its desire for free, fair, and transparent elections. An 80%-90% consensus on the right to view vote counting and opposition to secrecy by voting machine vendor is both rare and remarkable in American politics. If only the public knew that these options are virtually non existent in today's election system.

Viewing vote counting will soon become a process of watching computers, somewhat akin to watching the radio, but without sound. Secret vote counting with computer software that citizens cannot review is now a fait accompli. Most contracts between boards of elections and voting equipment manufacturers bar both elections officials and members of the public from any access to the most important computer software; the source code that directs all the functions of the voting machines, including vote counting.

As a result of the 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA), a majority of these voters will be using touch screen voting machines with a lesser amount using special paper ballots counted by optical scanning devices. There are very few localities using paper ballots for the November 2006 election. If the federal government gets its way, they will be a thing of the past.

The supreme irony is that HAVA was sold to Congress as the solution to the problems of the Florida 2000 election. Of course, we now know thatas many as 50,000 black Floridians were wrongly removed from the voting rolls through a highly suspect "felon purge" that missed felons but captured legitimate registered voters. And we know further that over 100,000 ballots in mostly black precincts were disqualified due to the old voter suppression standby, "spoiled ballots." Neither of those voting rights and civil rights problems is addressed by HAVA. It's all about "the machines."

A Zogby Poll was commissioned and sponsored by election rights and business law attorney Paul Lehto of Everett. Washington. This author, Michael Collins, Editor, www.electionfraudnews.com was a contributing sponsor. It consisted of 1018 interviews over a five day period beginning August 11, 2006. For further details, please see the "Appendix" at the end of this article.

This article focuses on three key questions from the survey. The responses reveal public attitudes as they were measured very recently. The outcome should give policy makers and bureaucrats serious pause for reflection upon just exactly what they have done to America's system of elections and just how far from public beliefs they have strayed.

Voters Aware of Risks of Electronic Voting - Changing an Entire Election


How aware are you that there have been reports of flaws in electronic voting or computerized voting machines that make it possible to tamper with one machine in such a way as to change the results of an entire election?

Very aware - 28.5%
Somewhat aware - 31.8
Somewhat unaware - 14.9
Very unaware - 22.8
Not sure - 1.9
Aware - 60.3%
Unaware - 37.7

The response shows a wide spread awareness of the potential for flawed voting machines to overturn an entire election. This is highly significant since the change in election outcome represents a violation of the expressed will of the people. Elections using touch screens computers or optical scan tabulators would seem to present entry level doubt concerning any election, particularly the type of nail biters that are common in America over the past few years.

All subgroups were near or exceeded 50% or greater in awareness (very, somewhat) of the risks of electronic voting.

The breakdown politically is instructive. Combining the "very" and somewhat aware responses shows a near parity by political identification: Democrats 59.9%; Republicans 58.3%; and Independents, the highest at 63.8% awareness. Dividing the sample by political ideology shows Libertarians with the highest level of awareness concerning the risks of computerized voting, 81%, and Moderates with the lowest at 55.9%. Of interest, Liberals and those describing themselves as Very Conservative were nearly identical in their awareness at 62.7% and 61% respectively.

Near Universal Demand to See the Votes Counted


In some states, members of the public have the right to view the counting of votes and verify how that process is working. In other states, citizens are in effect barred from viewing vote counting even if they would like to view the process. Which of the following two statements are you more likely to agree with - A or B?

Statement A: Citizens have the right to view and obtain
information about how election officials count votes. - 91.8%
Statement B: Citizens do not have the right to view and
obtain information about how elections officials count votes. - 5.9
Neither/Not sure - 2.3


Most all likely voters (92%) agree that citizens have the right to view and obtain information about how election officials' count votes (Statement A). Just 6% feel citizens do not have this right (Statement B).

Four fifths of respondents within every demographic group selected the right for citizen review and access, Statement A. This includes overwhelming majorities of both Kerry (92.8%) and Bush supporters (90.8%); independents (96.9%); Catholics (92.8%), Protestants (90.8%), Jews (87.2%), and those with no religious affiliation (93.3%); and two points above the average, NASCAR fans, 93.9%.

If and when citizens begin demanding this widely assumed option, they will be gravely disappointed. Viewing vote counting in the era of electronic voting means something different than it did in the days of paper ballots. In the case of touch screen devices, the vote count consists of poll workers or technicians taking data tapes out of a computerized touch screen device. With optical scan ballots and voting machines, tabulation (vote counting) involves pressing a button for a total count after the special paper ballots have been scanned through the computerized scanning device.

The process of removing public review of voting and vote counting began in earnest with the 2002 Help America Vote Act. In a previous article with Paul Lehto, the clear intent to herd local and state governments into the seemingly happy pasture of touch screen voting devices is described in depth. In essence, the three step process of forcing locals to accept touch screen devices, stripping voters and government agencies of their rights to review and understand voting, and locking that system in place for the indefinite future is nearly complete.

The 2006 election represents the brave new world of electronic voting. The American people want something entirely different: free, fair, and transparent elections with full citizen participation and review. The following questions and responses provide convincing evidence to support that claim.

Voters Opposed to Secret Software to Count Votes


With computerized electronic voting machines, votes are counted using proprietary or confidential software from corporate vendors that is not disclosed to citizens. Do you agree or disagree that it is acceptable for votes to be counted in secret without any outside observers from the public?

Agree - 13.7%
Disagree - 79.8
Not sure - 6.5

There is overwhelming objection to vendor specific secret software used to count votes outside the purview of public observation. This is a sentiment shared by no less than 70% of the people in any sub-group in the survey. This includes every political party; political ideology; race, religion; age group; educational level; and income group. This included 85.5% of rural residents and 79.8% of NASCAR fans.

Once again, the public is in for a profound disappointment. Nearly every state and county board of elections has a contract with the voting machine vendors that prohibit access to and review of voting machine "source code," the software that controls all of the key functions of vote counting. These contracts are freely entered into by government officials and in place for a period of months or years. Even with full access to source code, the level of expertise and manpower necessary to police malicious acts, which we know can occur, makes such disclosure a Pyrrhic victory; a distraction from the return to real ballots, counted by real people, open to full supervision and inquiry.

The Publics Right to Know and Their Right to Know What They Don't Know

The Zogby Poll makes it clear that the public insists on the right to view vote counting. At 92% agreement with Statement A above, the public clearly thinks that it should have this option. There is also strong agreement that computerized voting should be transparent; that secret software, meaning secret vote counting is totally unacceptable.

What will people think and do when they find out that these rights are (a) not granted universally either in law or by custom and (b) that even if they are granted, they are virtually unobtainable due to the nature of computerized voting. Invisible ballots cannot be observed by voters. Computer software calculations cannot be observed by voters. Inquiring about and receiving information on these invisible processes requires an act of faith of epic proportions. Voters are expected to believe summary data and tables from election officials who routinely deny and/or discourage access to vote counting and who sign contracts with private vendors like Diebold, Sequoia, and ES&S, that surrender the right of officials or the public to inspect the most important software in the voting machines, the source code.

There has been a virtual media blackout on in depth coverage of these issues by the national corporate media. The work of Lou Dobbs and Catherine Crier are notable and powerful exceptions. Lou Dobbs' coverage includes online polls that consistently show 80% and greater preference for a complete dismissal of voting machines and a return to paper ballots.

The public has the right to observe the entire election process. It's called transparency. The public has a right to get information on how that process works in order to satisfy the requirement for free and fair elections. These rights are unavailable and the public does not even know it. If and when these issues are covered by the broader media with insight and attention, there may very well be the type of outrage at the loss of our liberties that we have seen from Lou Dobbs and Catherine Crier. That would be a most unpleasant event for those who have bargained away voting rights for the sake of a free Federal grant to buy voting machines people inherently distrust.


***END***


Copyright. Permission to reproduce in whole or part with attribution to the author, Michael Collins, a link to "Scoop," and attribution of polling results to Zogby International.

Michael Collins is a writer who focuses on clean elections and voting rights. He is the editor of the election fraud web site, www.ElectionFraudNews.com . He has written articles on a number of topics for "Scoop" Independent News including: The Disenfranchisement of Katrina's Survivors;www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0507/S00238.htm |The Unanswered Question: Who Really Won In 2004?; Secret Vote Counting, a scathing critique of HAVA; and Kennedy's Challenge, a detailed response to Salon's attack on the Robert F. Kennedy Jr. article on stolen election 2004. Special thanks to Stella Black for editorial assistance; Paul Lehto for very helpful suggestions; and acknowledgement and thanks to the Zogby professional (R) who did such an outstanding job summarizing complex data.
[e-mail]


***APPENDIX***


The Zogby poll was conducted from August 11 through 15, 2006. 1018 adult voters were interviewed by phone. The sample of people interviewed reflects the demographic and regional diversity of the United States. Due to the size, it has a 3.1 % (+/-) margin of error. 95% of Zogby's political polls have come within a 1% margin of accuracy in predicting election outcome. The survey was commissioned and sponsored by election rights and business law attorney Paul Lehto of Everett Washington. This author, Michael Collins, Editor, www.electionfraudnews.com was a contributing sponsor.

Voters were asked what type of voting machines they used to cast their votes. All but 4% knew the answer to this question. A plurality said that they use touch screens, 32%. Optical scanning devices for special paper ballots were used by 18% of voters and the same percent used "plain" paper ballots. Lever machines were used by 14% of voters with punch cards representing 12% of the sample.

[Melissa G]

4. Hearing held in voter ID lawsuits

Hearing held in voter ID lawsuits
KELLY WIESE
Associated Press
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. - Several election officials told a judge Monday that they expect to incur costs to implement a new voter identification law, from printing more ballots to hiring and training extra staff.

Their testimony was part of a daylong hearing before Cole County Circuit Judge Richard Callahan on efforts to block and declare unconstitutional the law requiring people to show a Missouri or federal government-issued photo ID to vote. Most of the law takes effect in a week and will be in place for the November general election.

Callahan did not rule, but instead set another hearing for Sept. 7.

Those lacking photo IDs this fall can cast provisional ballots, which would count if they sign an affidavit, their signatures match those on file with election authorities and they're in the right polling place. In future elections, only the elderly, disabled and those with religious objections to carrying photo identification could vote without one, and only by provisional ballot.

One lawsuit by St. Louis and Kansas City Democratic officials argues the law is unconstitutional because it imposes costs on local governments without providing state funding, violating what's known as the Hancock amendment. A second suit by potential voters argues the requirement infringes on the fundamental right to vote. The two were consolidated, and the judge is considering them together.

http://www.belleville.com/mld/belleville/news/state/15327854.htm

[Melissa G]

5. "The Fix Is In" New Video-DO NOT CONCEDE-Until Votes Counted & Verified

Thanks to kpete for the poast and the DU discussion here..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x446644

"The Fix Is In" New Video-DO NOT CONCEDE-Until Votes Counted & Verified


August 21, 2006 at 13:44:17
"Caught on Tape, The Fix is In!"
by Joan Brunwasser

http://www.opednews.com

Caught On Tape, The Fix Is In

Aug 21: Philadelphia, PA -- Caught On Tape, The Fix Is In is a new online video about America's flawed voting process by freelance journalist Lynn Landes, producer of EcoTalk.org. In this 13-minute video Landes strongly urges all political candidates to not concede their races until they or their supporters have verified election results through the collection of voter affidavits or signed statements in some or all precincts. She calls these efforts, "Parallel Elections".

The video begins with a now-infamous clip of Congressman Peter King (NY-R) on the White House lawn just before the 2004 presidential election. "The election is over. We won." (Reporter's voice, "How do you know that?") "It's all over, but the counting. And we'll take care of the counting," King boasts.

Also featured are some fascinating clips of an examination of the Danaher voting system by Pennsylvania state officials in November of 2004. In one clip a company representative admits that, in their computer program, every candidate's name must have a party identifier next to it. Landes notes that this feature enables the company to skew election results across-the-board in favor of one party over the other before the machines ever leave the factory floor.

Landes cautions viewers not to jump to conclusions, "Most voting machine companies have close ties to the Republican Party and most voting machine irregularities appear to favor Republicans, but I must emphasize, that is not always the case. Even in Republican and Democratic primaries, where the race is between members of the same party, voting machines are exhibiting suspicious irregularities. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party and the Green Party's measured response to the gravity of this situation makes one wonder."

The film warns viewers that election officials and voting machine companies can easily manipulate votes and not get caught. They accomplish this through the use of the secret ballot, voting machines, and absentee or early voting.

"It wasn't always this way," she notes.

more at:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_joan_bru_060821__22caught_on_tape_2c_the.htm
video:
http://www.ecotalk.org/VotingSecurity.htm

[Melissa G]

6. U.N. Removes Trapped Diplomats in Congo

U.N. Removes Trapped Diplomats in Congo
U.N. peacekeepers remove trapped diplomats amid fighting in Congo

KINSHASA, Congo, Aug. 21, 2006
By ANJAN SUNDARAM Associated Press Writer

(AP) Battles between forces loyal to President Joseph Kabila and those of his main campaign rival raged for second day Monday, and U.N. peacekeepers safely evacuated foreign diplomats who had been trapped inside the challenger's besieged home when gunfire broke out.

The fighting in the Central African nation came after election officials announced Sunday that President Joseph Kabila had failed to win an outright majority in Congo's first balloting in more than four decades and would face former rebel leader Jean-Pierre Bemba in a second round in October.

U.N. spokesman Jean-Tobias Okala said the diplomats, including U.N. chief of mission William Swing, were being returned to the world body's offices in the capital, Kinshasa, after being evacuated from Bemba's compound by U.N. troops in armored personnel carriers.
"They're out and they're coming to U.N. headquarters. Everyone's safe," he said.

The foreign envoys were meeting with Bemba when fighting erupted outside his compound. Swing, the head of the world body's 17,500-troop peacekeeping mission, was inside, along with envoys from the United States, France, China and other countries.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/21/ap/world/mainD8JL1FJO1.shtml

[Melissa G]

7. Nigeria: 2007 - We'll Protect Our Votes, Says Buhari

Nigeria: 2007 - We'll Protect Our Votes, Says Buhari

August 20, 2006
Posted to the web August 21, 2006

George Orji
Kaduna

Former head of state, Major General Muhammadu Buhari (rtd) yesterday in Kaduna warned the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) that he would not allow a repeat of the massive rigging that characterised he last general elections in the 2007 polls.

Buhari who spoke at the Arewa House Auditorium, Kaduna as special guest of honour at a one day conference on "Credible Leadership, Free and Fair Elections in Nigeria" organised by the "Save Nigeria Movement" said he and his party, the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) were ready to protect their votes in the 2007 elections.


He implored Nigerians to be Vigilant with their votes as this would go a long way in guaranteeing free and fair elections.

He also identified lack of vigilance on the part of voters as responsible for the manipulation of election results in 2003. He continued his criticism of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) over the 2003 general elections, alleging that elections did not take place in 13 to 15 states of the Federation in 2003.

http://allafrica.com/stories/200608210306.html

[Melissa G]

8. CNN's Lou Dobbs: Johns-Hopkins University's Avi Rubin On E-Voting

CNN's Lou Dobbs: Johns-Hopkins University's Avi Rubin On E-Voting
Guest Blogged by John Gideon

Tonight, Dobbs reporter and stand-in Kitty Pilgrim interviews Professor Avi Rubin about his new book and about the dangers of Direct Recording Electronic voting machines.

The text-transcript of tonight's segment on Lou Dobbs Tonight follows in full…


PILGRIM: More than half of all American voters will cast their ballots on electronic voting machines this November. But the accuracy and the integrity of these machines increasingly are in question tonight. Well, my next guest has written a provocative new book on the threat that e-voting machines pose to our very democracy. Avi Rubin is a professor of computer science at Johns Hopkins University and he's also the author of "Brave New Ballot: The Battle to Safeguard Democracy in the Age of Electronic Voting." Thanks very much for joining us tonight.

AVIEL RUBIN, AUTHOR: Good evening. PILGRIM: Aviel, you know, you point out some very, very compelling e-voting issues. And let's just bring our viewers up to speed on some of your worries. The first one is there's no way for voters to verify that their votes are recorded correctly. There's no way to count the votes in a publicly viewable fashion. And meaningful recounts are impossible.

For the American voter, this does not bode well for confidence in the system. What makes you think this with such conviction?

RUBIN: Well I'm speaking here about the electronic voting machines that are being used in many places. And these are the direct recording electronic or DREs. And the problem is that these are simply computers. And they've been programmed by people, computer software often has bugs in it. And it's almost the ideal platform for somebody who wants to rig the election or tamper with the election in some undetectable fashion.

Now the problem is that when a voter goes up to one of these machines and votes and makes their choices, when they leave the polls, they have no idea how that machine recorded the votes that they cast inside of it. There's no way for them, for example, to have confidence that the data that's now inside of that voting machine corresponds to how they voted.

more...
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3274

[Melissa G]

9. 'Daily Voting News' For August 21, 2006

Thanks to Bradblog and voter's unite for the post and links..
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3275


BLOGGED BY John Gideon ON 8/21/2006 4:41PM
'Daily Voting News' For August 21, 2006
Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org and VoteTrustUSA.Org

Early voting started in Florida today. Tomorrow is primary election day in Alaska and Wyoming / It looks like officials in Auglaize Co. Ohio may have some problems responding to a new law suit that was filed today. They are accused, in part, of artificially swelling the voter rolls just to get a bigger piece of the HAVA funds pie./ Zogby will release a new poll tomorrow that shows that 92% of Americans Oppose Secret Vote Counting…


NAtional: Election Reform: The Fierce Urgency of Now LINK
NAtional: Has Bush v. Gore Become the Case That Must Not Be Named? LINK
NAtional: New Zogby Poll On Electronic Voting Attitudes LINK
NAtional: 92% of Americans Oppose Secret Vote Counting LINK
NAtional: "Caught on Tape, The Fix is In!" LINK
CA: Major Election Integrity Bills Moving Forward in California LINK
CA: San Mateo County - Fisher: No foolproof system to make votes count (Hart Intercivic) LINK
FL: Early voting running smoothly around state LINK
FL: Is photo ID law useless action? LINK
FL: Volusia County - English-only ballots — for now LINK
NH: Ballot ruling boosts faith in fair elections LINK
NY: City Council to Board of Elections:Show Us New Voting Machines Work & What They Cost Before Buying LINK
OH: Auglaize County - Board named in federal suit LINK
WY: Paper or plastic? LINK
WY: Voters to see new machines for primary LINK
**"Daily Voting News" is meant as a comprehensive listing of reports each day concerning issues related to election and voting news around the country regardless of quality or political slant. Therefore, items listed in "Daily Voting News" may not reflect the opinions of VotersUnite.Org or BradBlog.Com**

active links available here...
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3275

[Melissa G]

10. Paper Trail Flawed in Ohio Election, Study Finds

Paper Trail Flawed in Ohio Election, Study Finds
E-voting has benefits, but still a calculated risk, report says
Marc Songini

August 21, 2006 (Computerworld) -- A report questioning the accuracy of Diebold Election Systems' e-voting equipment in a recent Ohio election gives more ammunition to critics who doubt the viability of electronic voting technology.

The report, issued publicly last week, was based on a study funded by the Board of Commissioners of Cuyahoga County, Ohio. It claimed that even backup paper records meant to assure voters that their votes were tabulated correctly can prove inaccurate.

Nearly 10% of the paper copies of votes cast in the election were "either destroyed, blank, illegible, missing, taped together or otherwise compromised," the report said. Ohio law requires that each machine include a so-called voter-verified paper audit trail listing each vote -- and considers that the official ballot.


snip
For example, the report said that 72% of the polling places demonstrated a discrepancy between the electronic record on memory cards and the paper ballots; 42% of the discrepancies involved problems with 25 votes or more.
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9002610&intsrc=cust_topread

[Melissa G]

11. Contender for DeLay Seat Quits

Contender for DeLay Seat Quits
Associated Press
Tuesday, August 22, 2006; Page A04


SUGAR LAND, Tex., Aug. 21 -- Sugar Land Mayor David G. Wallace withdrew Monday as a Republican write-in candidate for the seat vacated by the resignation of former House majority leader Tom DeLay.

His action left the Texas GOP united behind one write-in candidate, Houston City Council member Shelley Sekula-Gibbs. She won the party's endorsement last week.

snip
"What I am choosing to do at this time is unite with the Republican Party behind one candidate," Wallace said at a news conference. "There is no way that two write-in candidates could win. It would be very difficult and divisive to the Republican Party." He said the party did not pressure him to withdraw.

DeLay won the GOP primary in March. He resigned from Congress in June as he faced increasing scrutiny over ethical troubles, including state money laundering charges and fallout from his association with convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/21/AR2006082101465.html

[Melissa G]

12. A timeline of the rise and fall of Tom DeLay

A timeline of the rise and fall of Tom DeLay
McClatchy Newspapers

A timeline of the rise and fall of Tom DeLay:


November 1984 - Tom DeLay, a Sugar Land exterminator and member of the Texas Legislature, is elected to Congress from the 22nd District.


November 1994 - After Republicans sweep the congressional elections and take control of the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years, DeLay is chosen to be majority whip, the chamber's third-ranking Republican.


September 2001 - DeLay spearheads the creation of the Texans for a Republican Majority Political Action Committee, aimed at ending more than a century of Democratic rule in the state House, an impediment to a pro-Republican redistricting plan.


November 2002 - DeLay is elected U.S. House majority leader; Texas Republicans take control of the state House for the first time in more than 130 years.


more
http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthsuperior/news/nation/15327737.htm

[Melissa G]

13. Battle for DeLay's seat could help tilt balance of power

Battle for DeLay's seat could help tilt balance of power
By Jay Root
McClatchy Newspapers

CHUCK KENNEDY, MCT
Former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay.
A timeline of the rise and fall of Tom DeLay

SUGAR LAND, Texas - Charity is rare in partisan politics, and nobody ever accused Republican powerhouse Tom DeLay of cutting Democrats any slack. But the former House majority leader's resignation could hand Democrats the gift he seemed to cherish most: his own seat in Congress.


In any other year, it might be a minor embarrassment. But Democrats are close enough to retaking the U.S. House of Representatives that Texas' 22nd Congressional District, where DeLay has withdrawn from the election and left Republicans with no candidate on the ballot, could be the race that puts liberal Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., in the speaker's chair.


"Absolutely atrocious" is how Eric Thode, who got his start in politics putting up yard signs for DeLay in 1978, describes that scenario.


"No question it's possible," said Thode, who was the Republican Party chairman in DeLay's home county until a few months ago. "I would hope that any logical-thinking Republican will realize where the blame lies. The blame lies with Tom DeLay."


http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthsuperior/news/nation/15327736.htm

[Melissa G]

14. So Who Wants Your Vote to Count in Bucks County?

This is an example of what we need to be doing all over the country!!!




So Who Wants Your Vote to Count in Bucks County?
The final list of candidates who came through the CVI booth to support the work we do and the voter-verified paper ballot legislation that will save you from the whims of the Danaher touchscreen and make sure your vote is counted and recorded accurately is:

US CONGRESS 8th District - Patrick Murphy (D), Mike Fitzpatrick®,

State Senate 6th District - Paul Lang (D) Robert Tomlinson ®

State Senate 10th District - Chris Serpico (D) Chuck McIlhinney ®

State Representative - 18th District: Harris W. Martin (D)

State Representative - 142 District: Chris King (D) Mathew Wright ®

State Representative - 143rd District: Larry Glick (D) Marguerite Quinn ®

State Representative - 144th Dfistrict Jay Trimble (D)

John Norvaisas, Democratic candidate for the State Rep seat in the 145th District sent an email to CVI saying that he is also on board, although he hasn’t signed the whiteboard yet. The photo album of the candidates signing the board at the CVI booth at the fair is up-to-date. I’m still waiting for a few photos.

If you don’t see your elected official or the person running against him/her in the fall on this list, get on the phone and ask why not. If you see them there, get on the phone and say thanks.


snip

There are only 77 days until Election Day. Act Now.

http://blogs.phillyburbs.com/blog.php?p=7364&cat=8

[Melissa G]

15. Voting machine vendor to offer credit

$388,000 would pay for a lot of pencils and papers and transparent counting process!



Voting machine vendor to offer credit


LITTLE ROCK (AP) — The company that provided electronic voting machines to Arkansas' counties will credit them roughly $388,000 for programming costs after a problem-plagued May 23 primary, the firm's spokeswoman said Monday.

Secretary of State Charlie Daniels told election administrators in a letter Monday that Election Systems & Software agreed to credit each county the cost of ballot programming, layout, and printing for the May 23 primary election.



"This is a step in the right direction," Daniels said.

A bipartisan committee of state and local election officials accepted a report last month on how ES&S performed under a $15.9 million contract with the state. Daniels ordered the review following a problem-plagued primary riddled with delays that stretched out vote-counting in some counties for days.

http://www.baxterbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060822/NEWS01/608220316/1002

[Kurovski]

26. Hooray for paper!

:-):bounce:

[Melissa G]

16. Options at polls go beyond choosing among politicians

http://www.adn.com/front/story/8109888p-8002429c.html

Options at polls go beyond choosing among politicians

By LISA DEMER
Anchorage Daily News

Published: August 22, 2006
Last Modified: August 22, 2006 at 03:16 AM


Voters will be able to pick from an array of ballots in today's primary election.
Those registered as Republican or who are nonpartisan or don't list their party affiliation can choose from three ballots:

• The Republican ballot, which includes the hot race for the governor's office nomination.

• A ballot that combines primary races for Democratic, Libertarian, Alaskan Independence, and Green political parties.

• A ballot that only contains ballot measures including election reform and the cruise ship tax. Ballot measures also are on the other two ballots.

All other voters, including Democrats, Alaskan Independence Party members, and Republican Moderates, can pick only between the combined ballot or the one limited to ballot measures. They won't be able to vote in the Republican primary.

In addition, this election premiers touch-screen voting machines in Alaska. The state bought more than 500, one for each of the 439 polling places, plus spares, according to the Division of Elections. Most voters will still use either optically scanned or hand-counted paper ballots.

snip
The Alaska Democratic Party has raised concerns about the security of the touch-screen machines purchased from Diebold and is urging voters to take paper ballots instead. Irregularities have occurred in other places, and the machines are vulnerable to hackers, the party says.

http://www.adn.com/front/story/8109888p-8002429c.html

[Melissa G]

17. Venable seeks recount in GOP congressional primary

Tricities Tennessee...

Venable seeks recount in GOP congressional primary
Published 08/22/2006 By HANK HAYES


BLOUNTVILLE - First Congressional District Republican primary runner-up Richard Venable confirmed Monday that he has asked the Tennessee Republican Party (TRP) Primary Board to consider a recount in the GOP primary race won by state Rep. David Davis of Johnson City.

Venable, who ends his tenure as Sullivan County mayor on Sept. 1, said in a prepared statement that he made the request after a "very difficult couple of weeks for my family, friends and supporters" and in consideration of the "apparent difficulties in accessing voting machines and tabulating the results."

snip
Venable received nearly 6,900 votes in Sullivan County - the county with the largest bloc of GOP votes in the district - but a large ballot and long lines at a number of polling locations did not help voter turnout. A district recount would involve 12 Northeast Tennessee counties.

snip
Tennessee law authorizes a recount in the case of a tie vote, an indication of voter fraud, voting machine malfunctions or tabulation problems, and "any other instance the court or body with jurisdiction of a contested election finds that a recount is warranted."

http://www.timesnews.net/article.php?id=3668334

[Melissa G]

18. No-Name Dem Fires Shot Heard Around the Nation

No-Name Dem Fires Shot Heard Around the Nation

Commentary by Kevin Buck

Tuesday August 22, 2006

On Aug. 8, a Connecticut businessman named Ned Lamont became that state's Democratic candidate for the United States Senate by defeating three-term incumbent Sen. Joe Lieberman. This is a remarkable feat because Lieberman had the backing of the Democratic establishment; he was the party's vice-presidential candidate in 2000; and he had a huge cash advantage. Lieberman was facing a political amateur, a businessman and small-town politician with no statewide organization or name recognition - and he still lost.

Ned Lamont beat Joe Lieberman the old-fashioned way: on the issues. And no issue loomed larger in the Connecticut race than the ongoing debacle in Iraq.

Joe Lieberman faithfully parroted the White House "stay the course" mantra. He refused to acknowledge that his vote for and ongoing support of the quagmire in Iraq was out of step with Connecticut Democrats and 60 percent of the American public.

Ned Lamont waged a smart, grass-roots-powered campaign that captured the imagination not only of Connecticut voters, but also of political junkies across the nation. It was a rare, "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" win for the little guy over a polished, professional, well-funded political machine --and it has struck fear in establishment political circles inside the Washington beltway and beyond.


snip
This is what the Connecticut voters heard from Ned Lamont, and it propelled him to victory. This is what the rest of the nation needs to hear from Democrats, and in November we can take back America.



http://www.the-signal.com/?module=displaystory&story_id=32269&format=html

[Melissa G]

19. Electronic voting security poor

DAVID SARASOHN

Electronic voting security poor
David Sarasohn
August 22, 2006


The House Science Committee sounds like the geeky part of the House of Representatives, the kind of committee where representatives look through microscopes while all the cool congressmen are off naming bridges after themselves or going on golf vacations with lobbyists. But a hearing last month produced a number that could make even the most sociable members put down their fundraiser cocktails and pay attention.

With the mood of people doing what has to be done but nobody wants to do, the Science Committee, together with the House Administration Committee, listened to people testifying on the reliability of voting machines – the first and only hearing on the subject by this Congress. True to the spreadsheet wonkiness of the topic, the hearing seems to have produced only a single newspaper story.



But what they heard got the listeners' attention.

"It would take somebody relatively unsophisticated to hack into a machine," reports Rep. Darlene Hooley, D-Ore., who a month later still marvels about what she heard. "But the biggest problem isn't hacking, but programming errors.

"In some cases, the margin of error is 9 percent."

At that point, a roomful of politicians – most of whom at some point won or lost an election by less than 9 percent – apparently noticed.

http://www.spokesmanreview.com/opinion/story.asp?ID=145817

[Melissa G]

20. Paper trail a must when it comes to electronic voting

Paper trail a must when it comes to electronic voting
08/22/06
Voter advocates filed a lawsuit last week asking a federal court to forbid the usage of electronic voting machines that leave no paper trail.


Chester County is among many in Pennsylvania to have such machines.



The county also uses optical scanning voting, where the voter fills in spaces and a machine reads the ballot choice. This tried and true technology is not part of the lawsuit.

snip
But is it enough reason not to trust people pitching "modern" technology? We are talking about our votes here, the thing that makes us a democracy.
For that reason alone it is reasonable to have a paper trail whether required or not.
To us, that just makes good sense.

http://www.dailylocal.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17093172&BRD=1671&PAG=461&dept_id=17785&rfi=6

[Melissa G]

21. E-Voting Fraud Potential Exposed Part II. New Clarkcast out!

Thanks to Tom Rinaldo for the post and the DU discussion here..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2791222

E-Voting Fraud Potential Exposed Part II. New Clarkcast out!
This is the second installment in the series of Podcasts that General Wesley Clark's Political Action Committee is releasing concerning the threat to our Democracy posed by serious security flaws in electronic voting machines and vote tabulators. Like Part One, it features extensive interviews on the potential for Election Fraud with David Dill, Mark Crispin Miller and California Democratic Candidate for Secretary of State, Deborah Bowen.

All three guests interviewed are extremely well versed in the complexities involved in this threat to our democracy, and are each well known to activists involved in the election integrity movement. They all have the credentials, gravitas and experience needed to reach and change the minds of skeptics who until now may have not have given much thought to the threat to elections current e-voting technology presents. This is your chance to pass on solid information to friends, family, neighbors, and co-workers who until now have ignored our concerns regarding e-voting security. These podcasts are an excellent outreach tool to share.

Here is the link to Part II which was released yesterday:

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/8075

[Melissa G]

22. WP: Connecticut Groups Push to Remove Lieberman From Ballot

Thanks to kskiska for the post and the DU discussion here..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2468351
Mon Aug-21-06 10:43 PM
Original message
WP: Connecticut Groups Push to Remove Lieberman From Ballot
HARTFORD, Conn., Aug. 21 -- Critics of Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman's independent run to keep his job attacked on two fronts Monday, with one group asking an elections official to throw him out of the Democratic Party and a former rival calling on state officials to keep his name off the November ballot.

Staffers for the senator from Connecticut, who lost the Aug. 8 Democratic primary to Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont, called both efforts dirty politics. The senator filed as an independent candidate a day after the loss, running under the new Connecticut for Lieberman Party.

A group whose members describe themselves as peace activists asked Sharon Ferrucci, Democratic registrar of voters in New Haven, to remove Lieberman from the party, arguing that he cannot be a Democrat while running under another party's banner.

The request could lead to a hearing in which Lieberman, the Democrats' vice presidential nominee in 2000, would have to argue that he still adheres to the party's principles.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/21/AR2006082101427.html

[Melissa G]

23. 92% of Americans Oppose Secret Vote Counting; Favor Public's Right

August 21, 2006, Park City, UT

92% of Americans Oppose Secret Vote Counting; Favor Public's Right to
Know In Elections
By Kathy Dopp

A new Zogby poll will be released on Tuesday reveals that fully 92%
of every single demographic group in American favors the public's
right to observe vote counting and to obtain any information regarding
vote counting, according an August 12-15 Zogby telephone poll of
approximately 1200 likely voters nationwide.
One actual survey question and answers is:

"In some states, members of the public have the right to view the
counting of votes and verify how that process is working. In other
states, citizens are in effect barred from viewing vote counting even
if they would like to view the process. Which of the following two
statements are you more likely to agree with A or B?"

Statement A: Citizens have the right to view and obtain information
about how election officials count votes.
92%

Statement B: Citizens do not have the right to view and obtain
information about how elections officials count votes.
6%

Neither/Not sure
2%

The survey was commissioned by election protection attorney Paul Lehto
of Washington State. According to Lehto, "The public overwhelmingly
opposes secret vote counting and favors election transparency and the
public right to know."

Here in Utah, our Utah election officials are out of touch with the
public, as shown by this new Zogby poll. Utah Lt. Governor's office
implemented state-wide voting systems with secret ("proprietary")
programming code and decertified Utah's former paper voting systems to
force counties to adopt new electronic ballots that are not humanly
viewable.

Bruce Funk of Emery County, Utah invited computer security experts to
examine Utah's new voting machines in March, 2006. The findings were
reported in the New York Times on May 12, 2006. The security flaws
that Funk found caused PA and CA to issue urgent security directives
and Avi Rubin, professor of computer science at Johns Hopkins
University said "I almost had a heart attack. The implications of
this are pretty astounding" and Michael Shamos of Carnegie Mellon
University said "It's the most severe security flaw ever discovered in
a voting system". Yet Utah's Lt. Governor's office reacted by holding
a closed executive session meeting with Diebold officials and Emery
County officials, after which the doors on Bruce Funk's office were
locked to prevent this 23 year elected official from doing the job he
was elected for. The minutes of their secret meeting have yet to be
publicly released.

In Cuyahoga County, Ohio, where Salt Lake County's former election
official Michael Vu now officiates, it was found that 15% of the paper
ballot records did not match Diebold touch-screen electronic counts in
the recent primary. According to Kitty Pilgrim, CNN correspondent,
"The May primary election in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, using Diebold
electronic voting machines was a debacle."

The only way to be sure that electronic counts are correct is to count
the voter verifiable paper records. Yet, the Salt Lake Tribune on
July 7, 2006 quoted Utah Election Director Michael Cragun saying that
a recount would consist of reconciling the electronic polling place
records by "re-accumulating the memory cards" and "The permanent paper
record comes into play only in an extreme situation."

Counting the paper roll ballot records by hand to verify the accuracy
of electronic counts requires equipment called "paper roll advancers".
Yet Utah election officials have not purchased any paper roll
advancers; have not purchased the equipment required to install a
known clean software system on Diebolds; and have kept Utah's security
procedures a secret. "Security by obscurity" is a formula for insider
tampering.

Utah election officials have actively worked against the transparency
in elections that the public overwhelmingly wants. The US
Constitution created a government with checks and balances, not a
system of blind trust in the infallibility and good intentions of
others. Yet Utah election officials implemented a new "faith-based"
voting system which lets private companies secretly count unseen
electronic ballots and determine outcomes of elections without any
checks.

These nearly unanimous Zogby poll results bolster efforts to convince
the Utah Lt. Governor's Office that the public recognizes this as a
crisis on which they must act to change our election conditions. The
staff of the Lt. Governor's office should be willing to admit the
problems inherent with the secret vote counting machines and consult
with expert computer scientists and mathematicians to develop methods
to ensure our election outcome integrity.

In concert with Tuesday's full announcement of the Zogby poll, the
National Election Data Archive has developed a new method for ensuring
election outcome integrity. In this new paper to be released soon by
the National Election Data Archive "The Election Integrity Audit"
NEDA's releases a new method for calculating audit amounts -- hand
counting of ballots done to check the accuracy of vote tallying
machines—that would reveal any corrupted vote counts that could
wrongfully alter any election outcome.

According to NEDA, a fixed rate audit of 1 or 2% or even 5% is not
capable of detecting outcome-altering vote miscount in close races.
This is extremely relevant given the enormous financial and legal
barriers to bringing a challenge to a close election. Attached to
NEDA's paper is a computer algorithm and spreadsheet that offers
readers the ability to calculate, for particular races and elections
the audit size to detect vote total corruption. NEDA recommends that
their new calculation be adopted as the standard for calculating
election audit percentages.

It is from the "Consent of the Governed", according to the Declaration
of Independence, that government derives "Just Power." It is time for
state and county election officials to listen to the public and make
Utah's election process publicly transparent and verifiable.

Kathy Dopp, [e-mail]
National Election Data Archive, President
P.O. Box 682556, Park City, UT 84068
435-658-4657 http://ElectionArchive.org

http://electionarchive.org/ucvInfo/release/ZogbyTransparencyPoll.pdf

[livvy]

24. Kick n/t

[Kurovski]

25. Kick to the TOP!

Thank you, Melissa G!:hug: