Reply #3: Living History: The Election Fraud Clearing House

[autorank]

Resource number two. The Election Fraud Clearinghouse (not funded by the Federal government ;) is a great historical site for the classic documents and studies in election fraud. It’s a must bookmark.

Election Fraud
Clearinghouse

http://www.electionfraudclearinghouse.org/

A resource for citizens, journalists, activists and wonks as our nation tries to make sense of the least credible election in modern history.
Despite widespread problems and possible foul play affecting races using electronic voting systems in 2002, their use expanded dramatically prior to the 2004 Presidential Election. Nearly five out of six of all votes cast on November 2, 2004, were counted by computerized devices controlled by FIVE corporations. Two of the largest of these companies are controlled by ardent Republican partisans. 35 Million of the votes entrusted to these companies were cast on "touch-screen" machines without leaving a paper record. On Election day, voter assistance hotlines received tens of thousands of calls from touch-screen users complaining that their vote was changed from Kerry to Bush at the review stage, forcing them to go back (often more than once) to change their vote.

Read the startling Johns Hopkins E-Voting Study that shattered public confidence in electronic voting systems.

If you want a second opinion, try the (heavily redacted) SAIC Report commissioned by the State of Maryland.

Read a U. Penn Professor's very accessable statistical analysis of the chances that the exit polls for Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania could all come out as far off as the election results would have us believe.

Have we already seen the trailer for this movie?
This analysis of the 2002 mid-terms explains why you may feel a sense of deja vu.

Optiscan Dixiecrats
Cross-party voting in Florida seems to depend on the local voting technology
Even after correcting for the Dixiecrat Effect, counties that used electronic touch-screen voting showed a shift toward Kerry; while among counties that used opti-scan paper ballots, there was a shift toward Bush.

Comupter Security Expert Chuck Herrin shows you how easy it is to Hack the Vote.

Want to know more about the Companies that Count Your Vote?
The main players in this booming industry have consistently resisted allowing government officials, independent experts or non-partisan watchdog groups to review their software, citing "trade secrecy."

Voters Unite, a non-partisan movement to reform election procedures, has compiled a partial yet still shocking list of incidents involving these machines dating back to 1998, and broken down by manfacturer. Voters Unite has also produced an excellent and comprehensive white paper on the subject of electronic voting systems. Entitled Myth Breakers, it leaves the "conspiracy theories" behind and addresses practical reasons why elections officials who have just spent millions on such systems are reluctant to acknowledge their mounting problems.

Visit BlackBoxVoting.Org for the latest on the biggest Freedom of Information Act suit in U.S. history, and excellent background on the e-voting scandal. Bev Harris has been on the case since 2001, and has been sending geek squads out across the country to access and analyze the hard drives from tabulators and paperless touch-screen machines in 34 states.

Donate to the Recount Efforts in Ohio, Florida and New Hampshire

If you're tired of wading through the many red herrings on the amatuer blogs on this topic, Dr. Edward Fenton of Princeton has started a weblog with experts in electronic voting systems.

Read the two letters sent by Congressmen Henry Wexler (D-FL), Jerold Nadler (D-NY), and John Conyers (D-MI) to the Government Accounting Office demanding a full investigation into the 2004 vote count.

Ohio's own Dennis Kucinich got the goods on Diebold.
Diebold Employee Manual Reveals Knowledge of Software Flaws
"Not only have the above memos demonstrated company knowledge of software flaws, but Diebold specifically instructs employees to misrepresent such flaws when questioned, according to Diebold’s Election Support Guide, published on Oct. 21, 2002. This manual is provided to the individuals who work directly with voting machines and systems on Election Day. Diebold’s employee guidelines demonstrate why we need more transparency in the development and implementation of voting machines so that such failings are not tolerated."

The National Ballot Integrity Project is a coalition of voting rights watchdog groups that has coalesced around the mounting questions around the 2004 vote, and the issue of privatized elections.
Take Action now to resolve the 2004 vote count, and insure that faulty voting machines and procedures never again cast such doubt on the integrity of our democratic system.



CLICK HERE to get quick access to Election Results and Discussion Forum on your “Latest” page.