Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News 03/08/06 - OSCAR NIGHT!

[autorank]

OSCAR NIGHT

This years Oscars for excellence in promoting election integrity go to

Citizen Activists.

You know who you are, come on up and get your award.

Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News March, 8, 2006

All members welcome and encouraged to participate.

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

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.

Please

"Recommend"

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

And don’t forget our own election integrity candidate for Secretary of State in Massachusetts<.b>
John Bonifaz Election Integrity Candidate
Mass. Secretary of State (also started AfterDowningStreet.Org.)

Contribute

[autorank]

1. MO: Cleland decries Diebold, Questions “accuracy of systems” in GA & OH!!

Well, how about that! This is a formidable spokesman and the FIRST prominent national Democrat to take on the “machine” people, just slamming them. THANK YOU Sen. Cleland.



http://www.stltoday.com/blogs/news-politicalfix/2006/03/demo-days-cleland-calls-bush-a-disaster

POLITICAL FIX
Demo Days: Cleland calls Bush a “disaster” By Jo Mannies 03/05/2006 12:45 am
Former U.S. Sen. Max Cleland, D-Ga., energized and frightened Missouri Democrats Saturday as he laid out the stakes for the party and the country.
<snip>
“There’s only one man in the Bush administration with combat experience — Dick Cheney after he went duck hunting,'’ Cleland said.

Cleland added that he also was concerned about the integrity of the new voting systems, and questioned the accuracy of the Diebold systems in use in Georgia and Ohio. In Ohio in 2004, he asserted “there was a lot of funny business'’ with the voting systems, such putting too few machines in Democratic precincts.

“It’s insane for us to install democracy in Iraq when we don’t even have it in our own country.'’

In a brief interview afterwards,

[autorank]

2. DemocraticUnderground Post on Cleland Statement & GA 2002

autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Sun Mar-05-06 03:55 AM
Original message
It’s happened! Cleland Speaks about Election Fruad in GA 2002!!!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x578479
Edited on Sun Mar-05-06 04:10 AM by autorank
(I've prayed for just ONE prominent national Democrat to speak out on election fraud. Thank you God. )
Just in:
POLITICAL FIX
St.Louis Post Dispatch StLouis.Com
http://www.stltoday.com/blogs/news-politicalfix/2006/03... /
Demo Days: Cleland calls Bush a “disaster”


By Jo Mannies
03/05/2006 12:45 am

Cleland added that he also was concerned about the integrity of the new voting systems, and questioned the accuracy of the Diebold systems in use in Georgia and Ohio. In Ohio in 2004, he asserted “there was a lot of funny business'’ with the voting systems, such putting too few machines in Democratic precincts.

“It’s insane for us to install democracy in Iraq when we don’t even have it in our own country.'’


There were reasons to question the election

The 2002 Georgia races for governor and U.S. Senate are highly instructive. Both Barnes and Max Cleland enjoyed significant leads in pre-election polls right up to Election Day. Cleland lead 5 to 6% and ended up losing the recorded vote by -- a stunning 9 to 12% reversal from the poll just days before the election. Barnes had a similar experience with a swing from leading to losing of 16%.* Prior to this election, Georgia made a heavy commitment to electronic voting and was also organized for Republican victories by Ralph Reed, former protégé of Pat Robertson and a fierce competitor. Questions were raised due to the disparity in polling and election results. These were never formally investigated, even though a Diebold consultant came forward and admitted that he installed a “software patch” on all of the Diebold machines used in the election at the company’s request but without telling the state of the change. He denied any awareness of what the “patch” did for the self-contained voting machines (DRE’s). Diebold refused to allow post-election review of these and the matter was never taken up by board or state officials, U.S. Department of Justice, or FBI.

(*Data from: All the Presidents Votes? The Independent. A. Gumbel. 10/14/2003 Reprinted in it’s entirety at http://www.whoseflorida.com/misc_pages/all_the_presiden... )

And guess who was involved…

Comment: A Diebold contractor reported that prior to the 2002 election in Georgia, Diebold sent him to apply a patch to the Diebold machines used all over the state. The contractor did not know what the patch was. Diebold wouldn’t say. The contractor lost his job but spoke out because he thought something was wrong.

Did E-Vote Firm Patch Election? From VoteScam.Com
By Kim Zetter
Oct. 13, 2003

http://www.votescam.com/Patchelections.php

Now a former worker in Diebold's Georgia warehouse says the company
installed patches on its machines before the state's 2002 gubernatorial
election that were never certified by independent testing authorities or
cleared with Georgia election officials.

If the charges are true, Diebold could be in violation of federal and state
election-certification rules. The charges also raise questions about the
integrity of the Georgia election results and any other election that uses
patched Diebold systems that have not been re-certified.

<snip>

Behler said 25 to 30 percent of the machines in one shipment to the
warehouse either crashed upon booting or had problems with their real-time
clocks, causing the systems to register the date inaccurately then boot
improperly or freeze up altogether.

"They did not meet what I would deem standard operation," he said.
Behler said Diebold provided warehouse workers with at least three patches
to apply to the systems before state officials began logic and accuracy
testing on them. Behler said one patch was applied to machines when he came
to the warehouse in June, a second patch was applied in July and a third in
August after he left the warehouse.

[fearnobush]

9. Now if Dem leaders other than Conyers, Cleland can speak up

may be, just may be we can expose some of this joke of a so called free nation. Boxer did good challenging the election, but they need to present hard and continuous pressure and evidence if the truth is to be known and dealt with. There is plenty of evidence, but no one in the party other than the above mentioned seems to care.

[autorank]

3. NY: “I’m still not sure why we need new voting machines.” No kidding.

Here’s a columnist from New York State. Why get new machines, he asks. Well, so Diebold, SAIC (ESS), or Sequoia (all Republican friendly;) can count your votes, that’s why.


http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060305/NEWS0201/603050328/1002/NEWS

I'm still not sure why we need new voting machines

Mark Hare

(March 5, 2006) — With more than a century of voting experience among them, Tim Minerd, Al DeSoto and Jake Patla have every right to be concerned about the so-called improvements required by the so-called Help America Vote Act.

The three retirees, all from Pittsford, are concerned that federal law, and now a federal lawsuit, may push the state into buying equipment that will be less reliable and less secure than the automated voting machines we've been using for decades.

"I don't want the state to make a mistake," says Minerd. "I'm glad that the state and county boards of election are taking their time and trying to do this right." Patla, who looked at sample machines recently, says, "They look pretty amateurish, not really ready yet."

(Ed. The 2002 law requires the state to upgrade their voting machines shortly.)

<snip>

Sorry, but this law looks like a solution in search of a problem. Washington is determined to protect us from fraud, whether we need it or not. I'm glad New York is taking its time. With time, we may wind up with machines that are almost as good as the ones we have.

[autorank]

4. PA: LTTE better than most articles from State College PA, Go Nittany Lion

PA: LTTE better than most articles from State College PA, Go Nittany Lions
Excellent LTTE

http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/news/opinion/14015013.htm

Your Letters
http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/news/opinion/14015013.htm
Leave no room for doubt

Electronic voting without a real paper trail opens the door to fraud and falsification. Unfortunately, there is little optimism that this will not occur as the last presidential election was fraught with such accusations.

It is critical that our next election be free of any doubt. Only devices that can produce verifiable evidence should be considered.
If Centre County chooses to ignore this issue, it could be complicit in what could erupt in a major scandal at the slightest sign of voter fraud.

I urge the commissioners to take a measured look at the voting systems and choose only those that can deliver proof of voters' intentions.

Robert Fisher
Bellefonte

[autorank]

5. AZ: More on the Voter ID Laws. March 14 in AZ. We’ll see.

Lets see how this comes out.


Election Day to put new voter-ID laws to test
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0305electionchanges0305.html

Matthew Benson
The Arizona Republic
Mar. 5, 2006 12:00 AM

Election officials are tentatively optimistic, minority voting advocates are nervous, and it's a good bet some residents are just plain oblivious.

Regardless, the way you vote is about to change.

The March 14 local elections are the first test for new voter-identification requirements that voters imposed on themselves in 2004 with their passage of Proposition 200. That means when residents trek to the polls, they'll have to do more than recite their name.

Valid identification is the norm now, meaning at least one form with name, address and picture or, lacking picture ID, at least two forms.

Voters with insufficient identification can cast a provisional ballot but may be asked to return to an election office with valid ID within 72 hours to have their ballot counted.

[autorank]

6. NM: Paper Ballot Law Signed by Gov. Richardson & People who got it done!

We’re all glad that Gov. Richardson signed the paper ballot bill in NM. That’s the end of the story, not the beginning. The suit that started it all was brought by citizen’s part of www.VoterAction.Org and attorneys for them who are listed below. This is another example of a law suit (Citizens versus the Secretary of State, etc.) driving policy. The legal team of Finley and Boyd is in discovery finding all sorts of nasty things out concerning 2004 New Mexico. Richardson got out front and grabs the glory which is fine. The why is important. Here’s what (the signing) and why (the law suit story).

THE FREE NEW MEXICAN
News: Santa Fe / NM, 2006 Legislature, Keep Talking
On the dotted line: Governor signs paper-ballot bill into law
http://www.freenewmexican.com/news/40228.html

By DEBORAH BAKER | Associated Press
March 3, 2006
New Mexico's 33 counties will switch from a patchwork of voting methods to a single paper-ballot system under a bill signed into law Thursday by Gov. Bill Richardson.

The governor, who pushed the proposal through the recent legislative session, said the system would make voting more secure and restore the public's confidence in elections.

"We believe that all voices deserve to be heard, and when it comes to elections, that all votes deserve to be counted," the governor said at a signing ceremony that more resembled a campaign event.

Richardson, a Democrat, is running for re-election this year and is also considering a possible presidential bid in 2008.

[autorank]

7. www.VoterAction.org THE PEOPLE WHO GOT IT DONE!!!

THE PEOPLE WHO STARTED IT ALL

Election Errors Threaten Future Voting Rights in New Mexico

Major Law Suit Under Way to Open Up “Secret” Workings of Voting Machines
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0511/S00067.htm
Special Report for “Scoop” Independent Media
First in a Series
By Michael Collins (permission to quote liberally granted)
Nov. 2, 2005

Patricia Rosas Lopategui et al… “wishes to have her vote properly counted and weighted in any forthcoming elections.”

New Mexico rarely generates much national news. When it does, as in the Wen Ho Lee nuclear espionage investigation, it can be explosive.

Now a little-known lawsuit before New Mexico District Court Judge Eugenio S. Mathis has the potential to alter the face of American elections.

Lopategui et al versus the State of New Mexico is preceding at a surprising pace, with the litigants currently in the “discovery” phase of the trial, the point at which lawyers are allowed to question key witnesses and dig for facts and opinions with wide latitude. The targets of discovery right now include Sequoia Elections, two of the big three voting machine companies; Rebecca Vigil-Giron, New Mexico Secretary of State; state and local election officials; and officials of the state’s voting systems support vendor.

Highly disturbing facts and allegations have already emerged in this well-run but under publicized case. For example, in one majority Hispanic precinct, the voting machines produced exactly zero votes for John Kerry. More issues will arise as the Plaintiffs’ legal team digs deeper into the highly irregular events of Election Day 2004. Remarkably, these events occurred at a much higher rate in predominantly Hispanic and Native American precincts.

<snip>

A nonprofit organization, Voter Action, www.voteraction.org, was formed. The organization is dedicated to providing financial, legal, research, and logistical support for grassroots efforts, with the goal of ensuring the integrity of elections in the United States. Its main project now is the Lopategui suit to insure that future elections result in the intention of voters, namely that their votes are counted regardless of the method of voting. Holly Morris Jacobson is co director of Voter Action. She is a former project manager and marketing communications professional who now devotes her time to election reform and voting rights causes. Ms. Jacobson resides in Seattle but grew up in New Mexico.

The Voter Action legal team includes San Francisco Bay area attorney Lowell Finley, an experienced litigator in civil and election rights cases. Mr. Finley is co director of Voter Action. He is also one of the very few lawyers to win a victory over a voting machine vendor when his client, Alameda County, CA, received a refund from Diebold Inc. for problems with their voting machines. Finley also successfully blocked California Governor Schwarzenegger from using campaign contributions to repay a $4 million personal loan to his campaign. Two distinguished New Mexico attorneys, John Boyd and David Garcia, complete the Voter Action litigation team. Boyd has extensive experience in civil rights, first amendment, constitutional, and election law. He is currently litigating a religious freedom case before the U.S. Supreme Court. Garcia has extensive experience in election law and served as co-counsel in the 2002 redistricting trials in New Mexico. Garcia is active in New Mexico politics and bar activities.

[autorank]

10. Voter Action Web Site

VOTER ACTION

Home[br />
About Voter Action

Voter Action is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to providing financial, legal, research and logistical support for grassroots efforts with the goal of ensuring the integrity of elections in the United States.

Update from New York

Voters, Groups Oppose DOJ Lawsuit that Would Cause Electoral Chaos

A coalition of New York voters and civic groups, including New Yorkers for Verified Voting and the League of Women Voters of New York, announced today that they are intervening to oppose a lawsuit filed by the United States Department of Justice against New York State. Led by Larry Rockefeller, a longtime voting activist, the coalition has filed a Motion to Intervene asserting that the relief sought by the Department of Justice-rushing out new electronic voting machines for the September 2006 primaries-will inevitably cause mass chaos on election day and will deny the right of citizens to have their votes counted.

Update

Voter Action Expresses Dissatisfaction with California's
Conditional Certification of Diebold Voting Systems

San Francisco, Feb 23 – Voter Action, a not-for-profit organization dedicated to providing financial, legal, research and logistical support for grassroots efforts with the goal of ensuring the integrity of elections in the United States has serious concerns regarding California Secretary of State McPherson’s “conditional certification” of Diebold voting machines.

The Secretary of State is shirking his responsibility. By sidestepping his duty to deny certification to voting systems that violate federal and state standards, McPherson's "conditional" certification violates California state law and puts County Clerks and Registrars of Voters at considerable legal risk. McPherson's own Voting Systems Technical Assessment Advisory Board (VSTAAB) found that critical Diebold software code had not been properly inspected by federal independent test authorities, that it contained banned 'interpreted code', and that it was vulnerable to multiple types of undetectable tampering.

Judge: Voting Suit Can Proceed
By Meredith Britt

January 19, 2006

A significant win for voters in New Mexico took place Wednesday, in the words of voting rights activist Pat Leahan.

District Court Judge Eugenio Mathis ruled on three counts that a lawsuit involving touch-screen voting machines could go forward.

"It's a basic fundamental right to have your vote counted," Mathis said.

Mathis stressed to those present in the packed San Miguel County courtroom the seriousness and complexity of the case.

[autorank]

11. Early article on historic NM Law suit.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0510/S00003.htm#3

Monday, 3 October 2005, 12:32 am
Article: autorank

A Huge Opportunity in New Mexico and Three Weeks to Raise the Money

"Voter Action Co Director Holy Jacobson brought the summit up to date on a critical legal action in New Mexico. The scene of clear wide spread election problems, Jacobson discussed the suit brought in behalf of eight citizens of New Mexico, each of whom "wishes to have their vote properly counted and weighted in any forth coming elections" (from plaintiffs filing). "

[autorank]

8. CA: MA Scty of State Cand. Bonifaz provides legal support on restricting

CA: MA Scty of State Cand. Bonifaz provides legal support on restricting corporate contributions

Article Launched: 2/23/2006 04:35 AM
Organizers: Corporate donation ban legal
http://www.times-standard.com/local/ci_3538431

James Faulk The Times-Standard
Eureka Times Standard

EUREKA -- Organizers trying to pass a ban on non-local donations to local races this week produced a list of legal scholars who support their effort.

This comes after a legal expert recently criticized the local ballot measure, saying that it was unconstitutional and would lose any court challenge.

But backers say Measure T, as the corporate donation ban is called, would stand a legal test.


Another supporter is John Bonifaz, founder of the National Voting Rights Institute.
”The real issue at stake is whether Humboldt voters support community rights or the idea that Wal-Mart and other large corporations should be able to distort the political process,” he said. “This initiative is critical to ensuring local democratic control of elections.”

[paineinthearse]

12. FL: thousands of mysterious entries in the tally of historic votes

I had to write an honest subject line, could not use this headline!

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060304/NEWS/603040424/1017/POLITICS

State: Absentee vote count 'will not be a problem' in elections

By MAURICE TAMMAN



[email protected]

With just days before elections, state officials were scrambling this week to determine whether they had a problem that could call into question tens of thousands of absentee votes.

The problem surfaced in the state's newly minted central voter database, a multimillion-dollar project that is supposed to cleanse the voter rolls of errors and prevent voter fraud.

The Herald-Tribune on Wednesday found thousands of mysterious entries in the tally of historic votes that suggested people had already voted in elections that haven't yet occurred.

The revelation launched a furious review by state election officials who worried that the entries could make it appear as though legitimate voters were trying to vote twice.

They now say that won't happen. "This is not a problem," division spokeswoman Jenny Nash said late Friday afternoon. "There will not be a problem."

more......