BBV - MD - Linda Lamone suspended ! Go figure?

[harmonyguy]

ANNAPOLIS — The Republican-dominated State Board of Elections took the first step yesterday toward firing Linda Lamone as election laws administrator, suspending her with pay and bringing in an acting administrator to run the office just two months before the general election.
(snip)
"This is raw, partisan politics, and smacks of Florida being revisited in Maryland," Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller, Prince George's Democrat, said yesterday. "I can't imaging that the Republicans could trump up any charges that could be sustained in a court of law in terms of reasons for her dismissal."
House Speaker Michael E. Busch, Anne Arundel Democrat, also defended Miss Lamone, saying she "has been acknowledged as running a model election board for the nation."
(snip)
Mr. Burger announced Miss Lamone's suspension yesterday and said Robin Downs Colbert, head of the election board in Prince George's County, would take over as acting state administrator of election laws.

http://washingtontimes.com/metro/20040903-112500-1528r.htm

(Proof that this is truly a bi-partisan issue)

[ParanoidPat]

1. WTF?

:shrug: First Arnold freezes the funding for poll worker training and auditing the elections and now this. :crazy:

<snip>

A statement issued by the board said the members were responding to "several complaints from multiple sources, including several local boards of elections" about Miss Lamone's performance as head of the office that oversees Maryland elections.

Mr. Burger said the board voted Thursday night after meeting privately for more than seven hours to file administrative charges against Miss Lamone. He said he is prohibited by law from disclosing details of the charges, but the law allows her to be dismissed only for "incompetence, misconduct or other good cause."

The next step in the process will be a hearing before an administrative law judge, where Miss Lamone would have the right to contest the findings included in the charges filed against her. Mr. Burger said a decision on whether to fire Miss Lamone would not be made until the board received a report from the administrative law judge affirming or rejecting the complaints against the administrator.

He said he did not think bringing in a new administrator at the state level and in Prince George's County just two months before the election will interfere with the presidential election in November.
But Mr. Miller said the move "is going to cause the public to have even less confidence in the election system than it currently has."

[Boredtodeath]

2. Is Lamone a Democrat?

And was she at the NASED convention last week?

Does anyone know?

[loudsue]

3. Good question: Let's get an answer!!

Kickin' it up there until someone in the know appears!!

:kick::kick::kick::kick:

[ParanoidPat]

4. I wonder how it affects this lawsuit?

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT
FOR ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY

LINDA SCHADE, ANDREW HARRIS, JUDITH BURNS, MARK ELRICH, KWAME ABAYOMI, TERRENCE FITZGERALD, SHARON BEARD, and PAUL SUH

Plaintiffs,

vs.

MARYLAND STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS,

LINDA H. LAMONE (in her capacity as Supervisor of Maryland’s State Board of Elections),

Defendants.

This case is brought on behalf of registered Maryland voters and candidates for public office to ensure the integrity of the November 2004 elections, and to preserve public trust and confidence in the system by which Maryland voters will elect the next President of the United States. Specifically, Plaintiffs bring this action against the Maryland State Board of Elections and its Administrator, Linda H. Lamone, for improperly certifying the Diebold AccuVote-TS electronic voting machines used in Maryland, and then failing to either correct or decertify the machines -- as required by state and federal law -- once it became clear that the machines could neither preserve the security and reliability of the November 2004 election nor create a voter verified paper audit trail. This suit is filed now, well in advance of the November 2004 election, to make sure that Maryland, which lies at the epicenter of the nationwide electronic voting machine controversy, does not become the next Florida.

Lots more here. http://www.truevotemd.org/litigation_complaint.asp

[Boredtodeath]

6. That case is over - TrueVoteMD lost

Lamone won that case, plus round two (arbitration).

on edit:
Maryland court rejects paper requirement for e-voting
ITAA calls decision reality check for e-voting critics

News Story by Dan Verton
SEPTEMBER 03, 2004 (COMPUTERWORLD) - A Maryland county court yesterday rejected a challenge to the use of electronic voting machines that sought to allow voters to opt out of using the technology.

In his decision, Anne Arundel County Circuit Court Judge Joseph P. Manck cited the "exorbitant cost" that would be associated with providing paper ballots alongside electronic voting machines, which in Maryland are the Diebold AccuVote-TS systems. Based on testimony of academics and experts on both sides of the issue, Manck concluded that the DRE machines are "much more secure and less vulnerable than the paper ballot." The judge also said he is confident that Maryland officials have "taken all reasonable steps to protect the integrity of the voting process."

The original complaint was filed on May 13 by Linda Schade, co-founder of TrueVoteMD.org. In the complaint, Schade and seven other plaintiffs argued that the Maryland State Board of Elections and its administrator, Linda H. Lamone, improperly certified the Diebold AccuVote-TS electronic voting machines and then "failed to either correct or decertify the machines -- as required by state and federal law -- once it became clear that the machines could neither preserve the security and reliability of the November 2004 election nor create a voter-verified paper audit trail."
http://www.computerworld.com/securitytopics/security/story/0,10801,95688,00.html

[Boredtodeath]

5. Much more going on here

Lamone just "won" the case against TrueVoteMD.org and should be the "queen of the hill" right now.....but the result is suspension......

Something tells me she is being told to shut the hell up because she has threatened to talk.

And I don't think the NASED convention timing is a coincidence with this suspension.

She's been a good soldier in the fight to deny voters verifiable elections and her suspension makes no sense.

[Cleita]

7. Dominoes?

Keep knocking over the election officials that aren't part of the problem? Sure looks more and more like the fix is in.

[Boredtodeath]

8. She IS part of the problem

HUGE Diebold supporter.

She has led a bitter fight against the activists in Maryland on the side of Diebold.

[loudsue]

9. We need some more background here.

:kick::kick::kick:

[Andy_Stephenson]

10. Could have been the letter I wrote and

the documents I posted.

here is the letter

Ms. Linda Lamone
State Administrator
Maryland State Board of Elections
P.O. Box 6486
Annapolis, MD 2140l-0486

August 11th 2004

Dear Ms Lamone,

This is a request under the Maryland Public Information Act, State Government
Article §§10-611 to 628. I am making this request on behalf of Black Box Voting a 501 (c) 3 Corporation. We are a “Consumer Protection for Elections” organization. I would like to inspect all records in your custody and control pertaining to the following:

(A) Your letter dated May 20th to Bob Urosevich of Diebold inquiring about The VoteHere VHTi technology.

(B) A letter dated May 26th …sent to you by Jim Adler of VoteHere and copied to Bob Urosevich of Diebold Election Systems regarding a pilot test of the VoteHere VHTi technology.

(C) Notes from any subsequent meetings, or phone calls as a result of those letters.

(D) All Phone records, messages, long distance records e-mail’s and correspondence contact between you and any employee or officer of VoteHere, David Jefferson or Avi Rubin for the last 6 months.

If all or any part of this request is denied, I request that I be provided with a written statement of the grounds for the denial. If you determine that some portions of the requested records are exempt from disclosure, please provide me with the portions that can be disclosed.

I also anticipate that I will want copies of some or all of the records sought. Therefore, please advise me as to the cost, if any, for obtaining a copy of the records and the total cost, if any, for all the records described above. If you have adopted a fee schedule for obtaining copies of records and other rules or regulations implementing the Act, please send me a copy.

I look forward to receiving the records promptly and in any event, to a decision about all of the requested records within 30 days. Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions regarding this request, please telephone me at the number below.

Sincerely,

Andy Stephenson
Associate Director
Black Box Voting


Prolly not....but a nice thought

[JohnGideon]

11. Her Suspension Has NOTHING To Do With Voting Machines....

it has everything to do with partisan politics. Linda Lamone is an appointee of the last Democrat governor of the state, Glendenning. The present Repug and his administration want the state election director chair for one of their own. That position is one of those that is held until the person quits, retires, or is fired. The Repugs brought in an investigator from another state agency and they have been investigating Linda Lamone for months now. They seem to think they have enough to make something stick so they suspended her.

Sorry, Andy, your constant attempts to denigrate the work by Avi Rubin, David Jefferson and others who have been fighting this battle on your side didn't have anything to do with the suspension.

And just so the air is perfectly clear; Avi Rubin and David Jefferson have both stated in no uncertain terms that voter verification software may work in the future but it should NEVER be used to replace a paper ballot. It should be used in PARTNERSHIP WITH but not in replacement of.

[Boredtodeath]

12. Sadly, there's no changing the rhetoric

Once proven false, they just deny they ever said it. Even after proof is offered.

It's shameful to watch the personal destruction of good people because they dare to question the Almighty Bev and Andy.

But, hey, as long as it gets them on television and/or radio, the behavior will continue.

[claudiajean]

13. WHY do most BBV threads have to get hijacked and become personal???

Can anyone explain that to me?

Although I've only been actually posting for a short time this summer, I have been lurking and reading DU daily for over two years -- principally for the voting threads, whether they be regarding civil rights issues surrounding voting, machine and systems issues, all of the various issues that get lumped into the "BBV" threads, etc.

Evidently, some of you folks actually know each other outside of DU. And evidently, judging from the various posts some of you have warm, productive bonds, and some of y'all can't stand each other. Fine, whatever. I don't care about your personal issues.

But why do your personal problems with each other have to receive so much bloody airtime here on DU? WHY? Neither I, nor anyone else I am acquainted with who lurks or posts on DU want to have to waste our valuable time wading through a page and a half of personal sniping to get to the essence of the topic being discussed (and some days, it's that bad...).

If you folks (and it seems to be the same group of about 10 people) want to viciously fight with each other, can you PM each other and do it off line, or at least off DU, and out of the way of the rest of us?

One of the biggest problems, as I see it, with the BBV movement, is that the movement is a multi-headed monster, which renders it substantially less effective that it could be. Any time three or more people in the same town or county anywhere in America become concerned with the issue, they seem to start their own organization, rather than adding their skills and energy to an existing group.

Years ago, I was a very involved abortion-rights activist (I'm still committed to the cause, but for a while in my youth, I spent 14 hours a day on the issue.) I think about how much less effective we were until like-minded folks became more centralized under NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and NOW. I see BBV as having the same problem -- everyone has their own little fiefdom, and for all the good work that people are doing, their own effectiveness is seriously diminished by engaging in the constant in-fighting.

Why waste your valuable energy fighting with each other? Why not spend that energy on achieving a transparent, verifiable, confidence-inspiring voting system?

The womens' suffrage movement suffered the same problem over a hundred years ago. The movement nearly shuddered to a halt, as familiarity breeds contempt, and there was so much internal bickering and hatred going on that progress on the issue was affected, until everyone wised up and realized that sometimes you aren't going to like the people that agree with you, and unless everyone works together, the message will not be heard, and the status quo will not be changed.

What was the old joke about how do you form a Democratic firing squad? Place everyone in a circle and shout "FIRE"!

Just keep battling each other and the corrupt voting machine manufacturers have absolutely nothing to worry about...

And just a note about the disclosure letter that was posted by one of you and that apparently set off today's round of nonsense: I write and edit Freedom of Information Act letters and other types of demand for public document letters and civil rights inquiry letters to public agencies every day. It's what I do.

I saw nothing in that letter that denigrated ANYONE. A commonly used tactic in FoIA letters, when you expect that the agency will try to narrow your request down to such a literal description that they will attempt to "exclude" (Bureaucrat speak for hide and destroy) as many documents as possible, is to broaden the request by tossing in names of people that would have communicated with the office on the issue, either positively or negatively, as well as other touchstone items, to put the agency on edge, and make them think that you have copies of some of the information already and if the agency withholds anything, you will bring out the document they illegally withheld and play "gotcha!" in the media. It keeps the agencies honest.

I don't think that making assumptions about what was asked for, or why, in the letter is constructive or useful. Clearly, the author(s) have some good guidance by legal professionals who do this work on a regular basis. Why assume sinister intent?

And if you do assume sinister intent, why not PM the author of the posting and get an off-line response, rather than exposing the rest of us to this constant bickering???

Thank you, everyone, for letting me get this off my chest, and I apologize for the length of this post.

:)

[Bushfire]

14. Washington Post has article on Linda Lamone here...

Md. Board Targets Election Official
Source Outlines Plan for Ouster

By John Wagner
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, September 3, 2004; Page B01

Maryland's Republican-dominated Board of Elections took a key step toward ousting its Democratic administrator yesterday, emerging from a seven-hour, closed-door session with a list of complaints it intends to use as a legal justification to replace Linda H. Lamone as early as today, according to a source familiar with the discussions.

The move enraged Democrats, who called it a partisan bid to give Republicans control of the state's election apparatus.

"I think this is most unfortunate," said Sen. Ulysses Currie (D-Prince George's). "We're just a couple of months before a presidential election, and they're talking about replacing Linda Lamone, who has put together the voting system the citizens will use."

Lamone, a Democrat appointed in 1997 by then-Gov. Parris N. Glendening (D), did not return calls seeking comment late yesterday. Under state law, she is allowed "an ample opportunity" to respond to the board's charges.

more...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57323-2004Sep2.html

be sure to read page 2 where it tells that "under Lamone's leadership the election board forged ahead with a controversial plan to use electronic voting machines statewide in November. An Anne Arundel County Circuit Court judge this week turned back a challenge from a group of voters seeking to require a paper record for the touch-screen machines, which the group argued are unreliable."

This is still a non partisan issue, and should be presented to the media in that light. Only then will corporate media be willing to put a spotlight on this issue.

[Bushfire]

15. Has anybody heard any updates on this yet? n/t

[Bushfire]

16. Here's the latest on Lamone...

Md. Election Official Placed on Leave
Judge Is Asked to Block Firing; Board Appoints Acting Chief

By John Wagner and Brigid Schulte
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, September 4, 2004; Page B01

Maryland Elections Administrator Linda H. Lamone asked a judge yesterday to block the Board of Elections' attempt to oust her, as two leading Democrats accused the Republican-dominated board of blatantly abusing its political power.

In a move that triggered a full afternoon of legal and political jockeying, election board Chairman Gilles W. Burger (R) announced that Lamone had been placed on paid leave for unspecified complaints that rose to the level of "incompetence, misconduct or other good cause."

The board then immediately named Robin Downs Colbert, Prince George's County elections administrator, as acting chief of the state agency.

Democrats said the personnel action, decided at a seven-hour session Thursday, was little more than a partisan bid to take control of the state's election machinery before two key contests -- the presidential race in November and the governor's race in 2006. Burger stressed that Colbert, a Democrat, has 25 years of experience as an election official.

more...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60274-2004Sep3.html

The face who wants Diebold in MD despite the overwhelming evidence in its insecurity.

http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/images/I60730-2004Sep03