Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News Saturday 12/17/05

[FogerRox]

All members welcome and encouraged to participate.

Please post Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News on this thread.

PLEASE, please

will you please:

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=203x397093

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

for MAC users-- IIRC its hold down control- and click on the image to view its source.

[FogerRox]

1. The GOP's Missed Lesson- Virginia gubernatorial race

The GOP's Missed Lesson


Saturday, December 17, 2005; Page A22

JERRY W. KILGORE'S stinging defeat in last month's Virginia gubernatorial race has provoked a venomous debate within his Republican Party: How did things go so badly wrong that a Republican candidate in a solidly red state could lose by 113,000 votes? Unfortunately, the party's leadership seems to have drawn precisely the wrong lesson from the outcome, concluding that Mr. Kilgore, a staunch conservative, was not sufficiently right-wing. If that analysis sticks, look for the Republicans to lose the next gubernatorial election by even more.

Guided by political handlers whose instinct was to throw red meat at the state's most partisan voters, Mr. Kilgore bashed gay marriage and illegal immigrants, celebrated the death penalty and courted pro-life activists and gun owners. His distaste for new taxes was so pronounced that he once cynically suggested that he would oppose a "yes" vote on regional referendums to raise new road revenue -- even as he made a point of favoring the referendums themselves. His favorite president was Ronald Reagan. And this is the man GOP leaders say didn't measure up as a conservative? Please.


Mr. Kilgore lost because he was too much of an ideologue, not too little. He thought Virginians cared more about expanding capital punishment than expanding their road networks. He attacked a Democratic tax increase, broadly accepted by Virginia voters, that helped public schools. He hewed to the GOP's anti-tax rhetoric and disdained the no-nonsense, nonpartisan, pragmatic governance that has made the incumbent Democrat, Gov. Mark R. Warner, so successful.

It's remarkable that the Republican leadership, led by state chairman Kate Obenshain Griffin, doesn't get that. After all, there are plenty of clues. After Mr. Warner pushed through his $1.5 billion tax package last year, anti-tax activists vowed revenge against the 17 Republicans in the House of Delegates who defected to the governor's side. But just one lost his bid for reelection, and his defeat was mostly unrelated to backing Mr. Warner. Rather than being punished for pursuing a pragmatic course on investing in the state's future, moderate Republicans were rewarded.

more-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/16/AR2005121601708.html

[FogerRox]

2. NJ recount:

GOP candidate falls short in recount
By: Tony Regina, Managing Editor

Shelly Lovett may have accomplished what she set out to do, but she fell a step shy of accomplishing a larger objective.
Lovett, who ran for an unexpired term on Gloucester Township this year, filed for a voting recount two weeks ago in light of a close loss to Orlando Mercado. Last week, after all the votes were tallied again, the outcome remained the same.
So, Mercado will continue to serve on council while Lovett, a Republican candidate, takes satisfaction in the fact that the recount cleared up a few things.
"Basically, the recount didn't overturn anything. It gave us a better understanding of who the winner was, though," she said.
Lovett decided to pursue a recount after tracing "voting irregularities" throughout the township. Her attorney, Thomas Booth Jr., indicated that ticket patterns marked one area that called for closer examination.
"Typically, one can expect that you'll lose about 60 percent of the voters in election because they vote from the top, but never make it to bottom of the ticket, which is their local election," he said.

more-

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15759642&BRD=1687&PAG=461&dept_id=41463&rfi=6

[FogerRox]

4. Another NJ recount: O’Scanlon concedes after recount gives Panter 73-vote

12th District election results same after recount
O’Scanlon concedes after recount gives Panter 73-vote margin
BY LAYLI WHYTE
Staff Writer



RED BANK — It was an exciting ride with a bittersweet ending for Republican Declan O’Scanlon, who conceded the 12th Legislative District Assembly race to Democrat Michael Panter after a recount.

O’Scanlon, according to counts from both Mercer and Monmouth counties, lost the election by a margin of 73 votes to Panter.

O’Scanlon said that although he is disappointed that he did not win the second seat, the first going to his running mate, Red Bank Republican Councilwoman Jennifer Beck, he is proud of how they ran their campaign.

“We did a lot better than anyone anticipated,” he said. “We’ve got a lot to be proud about. I’m thrilled with the system, because we proved that with a lot of hard work and a good, honest message, you can fight a huge, well-oiled political machine.”


more-

http://hub.gmnews.com/news/2005/1215/Front_Page/022.html


Michael Panter wins in NJ's 12th Legislative District

[FogerRox]

3. Detriot recount-Review of write-in ballots must wait

Review of write-in ballots must wait

December 16, 2005

BY KATHLEEN GRAY

The stack of challenged ballots, which contains write-in votes for the Detroit City Council, is growing.

But the Wayne County Board of Canvassers won't look at those ballots until the recount of four contested races, including the one for mayor of Detroit, is complete.

Mayoral candidate Freman Hendrix, who lost to Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick by more than 14,500 votes, has challenged nearly 500 ballots with write-in votes because similarity in the handwriting suggests that people in different precincts filled out more than one ballot. The Wayne County Clerk's Office, which is conducting the recount, has completed recounts in more than 130 of the 720 precincts in Detroit.

more-


http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051216/NEWS05/512160394/1001/NEWS

Mayoral Candidate Freman Hendrix



Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick addresses a group gathered to announce a campaign to eliminate lead poisoning in Detroit housing.

[FogerRox]

5. Kathy Dopp- "ES&S is a Good voting machine company - NOT like Diebold"

Just for SOME of the ways that ES&S is different than Diebold include:

1. Tight secure operating system as a base (unlike Diebold, Sequoia, and some others).

2. INDEPENDENTLY auditable DREs because they use an open source bar code on their paper rolls and make an open source system that any geek can build to audit the paper rolls (OK I still hate DREs because the majority of voters never take the extra step to verify a stupid paper roll)

3. They put their money into R&D rather than lobbyists and have responded to the criticisms of voting activists by improving their systems.

4. ES&S sells a really good optical scan system that is easier for election officials to use and their AutoMARK ballot printer is ideal for disabled (in fact much more disabled friendly than DREs) and it is ideal for foreign languages so no extra ballots need to be pre-printed in foreign languages.

Note: It is not logically correct to say that just because my brother works for one company and I work for another company, that means that the ethics and products of the two companies must be similar.

See for your self, here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x404972#405557

[kster]

16. Neil B Forzod--- disagrees

Your post is alarming in the sheer amount of disinformation it contains. Please check a few facts before posting... USCV's propensity for publishing incorrect data is bordering on embarrassing.



1. Tight secure operating system as a base (unlike Diebold, Sequoia, and some others).


That's a pretty gross misstatement of fact. ES&S does actually use Windows for almost all of its important software, including everything related to election definition and setup, result tabulation and reporting. ES&S touchscreens don't use Windows (Diebold's use Windows CE, while Sequoia's use Linux) but it's hardly an issue. ES&S optical-scan machines do use custom firmware, but so does Diebold's optical scan machine. Sequoia's optical-scan machine is actually the same as the ES&S machine -- they won the rights to the technology several years back when ES&S was sued by the government over violating anti-trust laws with their monopolistic, non-competitive business practices. (But they're much better now. )

As for the characterization of their operating system as "tight" and "secure"... that's entirely subjective. With all due respect, I'll lay ten to one odds that you don't actually know what operating system is used, or what's especially "tight" or "secure" about it relative to the operating systems used by other vendors.



2. INDEPENDENTLY auditable DREs because they use an open source bar code on their paper rolls and make an open source system that any geek can build to audit the paper rolls (OK I still hate DREs because the majority of voters never take the extra step to verify a stupid paper roll)


ES&S doesn't actually have an independently-auditable DRE at all, since they don't have a VVPAT unit that's been certified either federally or in any state. Nor have they sold a single DRE with a VVPAT unit anywhere. ES&S is actually the only major vendor without a voter-verified paper-based unit in production, and ES&S is the slowest vendor to respond to the demand for one. Sequoia was the first to sell and deploy such a unit, in New Mexico. Diebold has actually sold the most DREs with a voter-verified paper audit trail, with sales exceeding those of all other major vendors combined.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=404972&mesg_id=405586

[FogerRox]

6. In Plain English- TIA: A Polling Simulation

WHO SHOULD READ THIS?

It's for everyone who voted in 2004 or plans to vote in 2006.

It's for those who say: "Math was my worst subject in high school".
If you've ever placed a bet at the casino or race track,
or played the lottery, you already know the basics.
It's about probability.
It's about common sense.
It's not all that complicated.

It's for individuals who have taken algebra, probability and
statistics and want to see how they apply to election polling.

It's for graduates with degrees in mathematics, political science,
an MBA, etc. who may or may not be familiar with simulation concepts.

It's for Excel spreadsheet users who enjoy creating math models.
Simulation is a powerful tool for analyzing uncertainty.
Like coin flipping and election polling.

It's for writers, blogs and politicians who seek the truth:
Robert Koehler, Brad from BradBlog, John Conyers, Barbara Boxer,
Mark Miller, Fitrakis, Wasserman, USCV, Dopp, Freeman, Baiman, Simon,
Scoop's althecat, Krugman, Keith Olberman, Mike Malloy, Randi Rhodes,
Stephanie Miller, etc.

It's for Netizens who frequent Discussion Forums.

It's for those in the Media who are still waiting for editor approval
to discuss documented incidents of vote spoilage, vote switching and
vote suppression in recent elections and which are confirmed by
impossible pre-election and exit poll deviations from the recorded vote.

It's for naysayers who promote faith-based hypotheticals in their
unrelenting attempts to debunk the accuracy of the pre-election
and exit polls.

People forget Selection 2000. Gore won the popular vote by 540,000.
But Bush won the election by a single vote.
SCOTUS voted along party lines: Bush 5, Gore 4.
That stopped the Florida recount in its tracks.
Gore won Florida. Why did they do it?
And why did the "liberal" media say he lost?

But Gore voters did not forget 2000.
So in 2004, they came out to vote in droves.
Yet the naysayers claim Gore voters forgot that they voted for him
and told the exit pollsters that they voted for Bush in 2000.
It's the famous "false recall" hypothetical.
The naysayers were forced to use it when they could not come up
with a plausible explanation for the impossible weightings of
Bush and Gore voter turnout in the Final National Exit poll.

Put on the defoggers.
We had enough disinformation
We had enough obfuscation.
Now we will let the sunshine in.


more-

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x404988


http://www.truthisall.net/

thanks to Autorank for posting-------------

[FogerRox]

7. Doylestown PA. supervisors: yeah to SB977- VVPB law

Doylestown supervisors say they want county officials to purchase the most accurate, reliable, tamper-proof, cost-effective and accessible voting system for their voters.



Thus, at its first regularly scheduled public meeting of the month Dec. 6, the Doylestown Township Board of Supervisors passed a resolution in support of State Senate Bill 977 and House Bill 2000, which call for a voter-verified paper record of each vote and routine audits of electronic machine counts. Furthermore, supervisors urged the county to purchase "a voter-verified paper record voting system."
According to the resolution, "Paper ballots provide a permanent record of the voter intent and would be available in the event of Election Day discrepancies for the purpose of recounts." The resolution continues, "The voters of Doylestown Township will be better served if their votes are represented in elections by paper ballots which have the ability to be reviewed and confirmed by the voter before submission. The residents of Doylestown Township will then be assured that their votes will be accurately counted in elections."
Copies of the resolution will be forwarded to the appropriate state and county officials. Doylestown Township is the first Bucks County municipality to pass such a resolution.
The federal Helping Americans Vote Act, which was passed in 2002 following the hanging chads debacle in Florida during the 2000 Presidential election, has mandated for the replacement of lever voting machines because they do not "produce a permanent paper record with a manual audit capacity," and are not handicap accessible.
However, the three voting systems that the state has certified for purchase by the county (i.e. direct electronic recording machines) do not have a voter-verified paper audit trail. Other voting systems are in the process of being examined and certified by the state, including optical scan systems, in which the voter marks a paper ballot that is read by the optical scanner and dropped into a secured container where it can be saved for recounts and random machine audits.
Madeline Rawley, a member of the Coalition for Voting Integrity who encouraged the board to consider the resolution, said she is happy the board did so.
"I'm pleased that the board recognized the importance of having every vote count in passing this resolution," she said.
Barb Eisenhardt, township supervisor and member of the voting advocacy group, agreed.

more-
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15761630&BRD=1685&PAG=461&dept_id=45363&rfi=6

[FogerRox]

8. FLorida-- Volusia dumps Diebold voting system

Volusia dumps Diebold voting system

By JAMES MILLER
Staff Writer

Last update: December 17, 2005


DELAND -- The Volusia County Council ditched controversial voting equipment company Diebold Election Systems on Friday in hopes of securing paper ballots for voters with disabilities.

Supervisor of Elections Ann McFall and some voters with disabilities opposed the move, arguing that some of the replacement equipment from another company may be less accessible than a less-expensive alternative from Diebold.

But activists who have fought for a paper ballot-only system hailed the decision.

"This is the only way to conduct verifiable elections," said Sylvia Perkins, a founding member of the DeLand-based Florida Fair Elections Coalition.

Under the deal, county elections officials will stop using the county's existing Diebold paper-ballot system -- the same type of system that came under scrutiny this week when Leon County Supervisor of Elections Ion Sancho authorized what he said was a successful hack into it.


more-

http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/News/Headlines/03NewsHEAD01LOPOL121705.htm

[FogerRox]

9. Diebold sued by four law firms

Thanks to kansasblue for posting this-- seems like stockholders are getting pissed and jumping into the fight. I can see Diebold folding--What kind of protections would Diebold see under the new bankruptcy laws?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x405613

[Wilms]

10. HuffPo - Avi Rubin: The Dirty Little Secrets of Voting System Testing Labs

The Dirty Little Secrets of Voting System Testing Labs

Avi Rubin

12.16.2005

snip

Before election officials can purchase voting systems, those systems need to be certified by a federally accredited lab called an Independent Testing Authority (ITA). There are three such labs in the US: Ciber, Wyle Labs, and Systest. These labs are tasked with testing any proposed voting systems against federal standards, in this case, the 2002 federal standards, soon to be replaced by the 2005 voluntary voting system guidelines (VVSG). You would think that these labs would be very interested in attending a summit such as this, and in fact, they were all invited. Only Systest showed up.

There were several overriding themes that emerged at the voting systems testing summit. Perhaps the most prevalent one was that the ITAs consistently decline to appear at these meetings. Why? Well the main reason is that they are fraught with conflict of interest and incompetence. In fact, had they shown up, they would have been raked over the coals by some of the voting system examiners that attended the summit. For instance, an examiner from Pennsylvania wanted to know how come so many systems that passed the ITA testing still had serious security and even operational flaws. The Systest representative, who had the misfortune of representing his entire industry alone, replied that they were only required to test against the standard. When pressed about whether or not the ITAs would fail a system if a serious flaw was found, the reply was that a memo would be written, but that the system would still pass. I couldn't believe it. The company that was tasked with certifying machines for elections in the United States would still pass them, even if a serious flaw was found, as long as the machine did not violate any aspects of the standard. Unbelievable.

Now, let me talk a bit about the conflict of interest. As a friend of mine put it, the ITAs are not independent and they have no authority. So Independent Testing Authority is a misnomer. Thankfully, NIST is going to change the name next year. Here's where it gets bad. The ITAs are hired by and paid by -- the vendors. That is, when a vendor has a voting machine that they want certified, they find an ITA who is willing to certify the voting machine. Any memos about flaws that are discovered remain confidential. There is no requirement to disclose any problems that are found with the machines. In fact, the entire ITA report is considered proprietary information of the voting machine vendor. After all, they paid for it. This provides an incentive for ITAs to certify machines, to satisfy their clients.

Two years ago, my research team got our hands on the code that runs inside of Diebold's Accuvote machines. We performed a source code analysis and reported all kinds of serious security problems (see http://avirubin.com/vote/analysis /). It was incredible to me that such machines were actually deployed and used in elections. Equally confounding was that a national testing lab, in this case Wyle Labs, actually certified this machine. Either they did not know the first thing about cryptography and security, or they did not look at the source code. In fact, according to the 2002 standards, they were not required to examine the code.

snip

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/avi-rubin/the-dirty-little-secrets-_b_12354.html

Discussion:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x405541

[Wilms]

11. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr on Theft of Election 2004 - Ring of Fire/AAR, Today!

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr on Theft of Election 2004 - Ring of Fire/AAR, Today!

Saturdays 5-7pm ET • Rebroadcast: Sundays 3-5pm ET

December 17th, 2005

Truth or fiction? Both! Larry Beinhart, author of Wag the Dog, wrote The Librarian, an eerily prescient novel about the 2004 election before it happened. Now Harvey Wasserman has documented the scam in, How the GOP Stole the 2004 Election and is Rigging 2008.

If you want to talk with Bobby and Mike on the show, call our hotline anytime and leave us a message. 866-389-FIRE (3473)

http://shows.airamericaradio.com/ringoffire/

Discussion:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x405658

[Wilms]

12. Breaking News: FEC Nominees Announced

Election Law Blog

December 16, 2005

Breaking News: FEC Nominees Announced

by Rick Hasen

The White House has issued this press release (to be buried on Friday night?):

President George W. Bush today announced his intention to nominate four individuals to serve in his Administration:

snip

One can have various opinions about these nominations (I expect a lot of fireworks from Democrats, from reformers and from Senator McCain), but the misspelling of my alma mater in the Walther bio is inexcusable.

snip

http://electionlawblog.org/archives/004642.html

also...

Hans A. Von Spakovsky for FEC Commissioner???

That's the rumor. That would be sure to create some controversy; see this New Yorker report on Van Spakovsky's DOJ voting rights activities.

http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/040920fa_fact

snip

http://electionlawblog.org/archives/004640.html

[Wilms]

13. Bush Picks Controversial Nominees for FEC

Bush Picks Controversial Nominees for FEC

By Thomas B. Edsall and Dan Eggen

Washington Post Staff Writers

Saturday, December 17, 2005; Page A09

President Bush nominated two controversial lawyers to the Federal Election Commission yesterday: Hans von Spakovsky who helped Georgia win approval of a disputed voter-identification law, and Robert D. Lenhard, who was part of a legal team that challenged the constitutionality of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law.

snip

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/16/AR2005121601717.html

[Wilms]

14. Cozy: He's the husband of Viveca Novak

firedoglake

Cozy

December 17, 2005

snip

But there is perhaps another reason why Mr. Lenhard is being rewarded by BushCo. at just this moment. He's the husband of Viveca Novak, whose testimony now provides the foundation for Karl Rove's defense in the CIA leak case.

A small but rather key fact that both the Washington Post and the White House Press Release manages to leave out, wouldn't you say? They WaPo is having quite a stint in the GOP stenography department this week, it would seem.

snip

http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/2005_12_01_firedoglake_archive.html#113485007313391863

Discussion:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2318824

[Wilms]

15. GuvWurld Roundup: A Tumultuous Week For Election News

GuvWurld Roundup: A Tumultuous Week For Election News

http://guvwurld.blogspot.com/2005/12/guvwurld-roundup-tumultuous-week-for.html


Discussion:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x405732