Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News Tuesday, 12/12/06

[Melissa G]

Christine Jennings REALLY Gets it!

http://www.christinejenningsforcongress.com/vertical/Sites/{661B9D35-1B36-415F-84DA-90168433FC06}/uploads/{900EF34B-FEDB-4C0C-BC9A-BCB99E965187}_Web.jpg
It's not if we win or lose But whether we had a Real Election!

Here is an excerpt from her interview with the St Pete Times...

Jennings sat down with the St. Petersburg Times on Monday to answer some questions.

Why are you so sure that the 18,000 undervotes represent people who wanted to vote for you?


From the very beginning of early voting we had people call our office and tell us they were having problems with the machines, problems getting their votes taken and they were concerned about whether they would be counted.

Why is it so important to review the source code in the voting machines?


The source code is the DNA of the whole voting experience. … It would be as if you have a car, someone gave you the keys and you started driving and you had a problem and yet you were told, “No, you can’t go under that hood to find out what that problem is.” The source code is the key, is the DNA of the election — and we’ve got to get to it.

More in the first post of the news thread....

Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News Tuesday, 12/12/06

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 new Spring 2006 Edition of "Election Fraud and Reform News Directory" listed here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x407240

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).

[Melissa G]

1. The woman who refuses to admit she didn't win

The woman who refuses to admit she didn't win


snip
Isn’t there a possibility you may not win a revote?


If my opponent would win, I would absolutely wish him well and I would walk away from this and be pleased that the people have spoken. All people … I believe then that all people would have had an opportunity to vote for their representative.

How much of a problem was the ballot design?


The ballot design may have been a contributing factor, but it is not the major factor.

Are you worried about being called a sore loser?

Not at all because I can tell you I am getting e-mails, letters, all kinds of support from people across this nation, from New York to California, telling me don’t ever give up.


snip
I am not giving up until we have an answer about what happened in this race. … I’m going to keep fighting until we know we have fair elections in this country and that every vote counts in this district.

snip

( Editor's Favorite quote!!!)
I don’t understand any representative or senator that isn’t saying, “I’m concerned about the integrity of the voting system of this country.” … It defies logic.

http://www.sptimes.com/2006/12/11/State/The_woman_who_refuses.shtml

[tblue]

23. K&R, and she's doing just what we wanted Gore & Kerry to do. So we gotta support her.

[Melissa G]

25. Well tblue... according to the article, many are supporting her..

more from the interview...

SPT: Who’s paying your legal costs?


CJ: We are raising money from all over the United States. People are being incredibly generous.


SPT: Do you think the federal government should pass new legislation regarding voting machines and standards?


CJ: I certainly do, and I want to be a part of working on election and campaign reform. I think both are needed in this country.


Here is a link to learn more about her and /or contribute if folks feel inclined...
http://www.christinejenningsforcongress.com/

[Melissa G]

2. A Message from Christine Jennings, 12/11/06

A Message from Christine Jennings, 12/11/06

Dear friends,



Today, the Bradenton Herald ran a very powerful column that I hope you’ll all read. Shirley Foor, a Republican from Bradenton and former editor of the Bradenton Herald, the Daily Dispatch and the Anne Marie Islander, makes a strong case for why papers like the Bradenton Herald should take seriously their role as public guardians, and urge real analysis and answers for the current voting crisis in our nation.



In Shirley’s words,



Given the sacrifices that African Americans and American women have made to have the right to vote, a right summarily granted to white males, the vote should be protected from fraud, from question, from loss….To have 18,000-plus votes unaccounted for, with only someone now branded as a "sore loser" crying out for some explanation, some fact-based explanation, to have those votes so cavalierly dismissed, diminishes those courageous battles.



Please click here to view the full column.http://www.christinejenningsforcongress.com/index.asp?Type=B_PR&SEC={16668ED8-A172-4E54-8DE4-D9179298DFE7}&DE={7473AFE7-E430-4E4D-9F7A-AB56EC0BE546}



I spoke with Shirley today and thanked her for her concern about the integrity of the voting system for the people of this country. I have been hearing from people from New York to California urging me to protect the voting system and not to give up! But the strongest calls have been from here in our District, from the voters who lost their voice in this election.



We need to do this together. Our newspapers have a critical role to play in investigating this issue and demanding answers. You can help by writing to your local paper and urging the editors to keep this issue top-of-mind. ( Links at site)


Sincerely,



Christine Jennings


http://www.christinejenningsforcongress.com/

[Melissa G]

3. 100 Phantom Votes Found in One Precinct; DelCo Board of Elections Hinders Investigation

Press Release from Election Integrity

Election Integrity
100 Phantom Votes Found in One Precinct; DelCo Board of Elections Hinders Investigation

Stephanie Frank Singer

Media, Pennsylvania, Dec 11, 2006. Something was rotten in Newtown Square, Pennsylvania, on Election Day, November 7, 2006. According to the Numbered List of Voters in the precinct known as "Newtown 1" in the Philadelphia suburbs, 984 citizens arrived at the precinct to cast their votes. But the voting machines tallied 1089 ballots -- an overvote of 10%.

We don't know exactly what happened. It's clear that the next thing to check is the pollbook -- but the Delaware County Board of Elections has not responded to Election Integrity's week-old request to see the pollbook. And whatever the pollbook says, it won't explain how the Delaware County Board of Elections missed such a whopping discrepancy in their certification process.

We also don't know how many other precincts in Delaware County have similar problems. We found this discrepancy while examining a mere 10 precincts (out of hundreds), in a routine check on Election Integrity's Election Verification Exit Poll. A request to see materials from other precincts has been referred to the County's Right to Know officer, who has stated that Right to Know office requires 30 calendar days to respond.

Documents such as pollbooks should be easily available for inspection during business hours, as required by the Election Code. Most Pennsylvania counties make such materials easily available. Delco's efforts to postpone our access to these basic documents is curious, even suspicious.

Contact Information for Delaware County Officials
Delaware County Right to Know Officer: Joyce Lamont, County Clerk, 610-891-4260.
Delaware County Board of Elections Chief Clerk: Loreen Hagan, 610-891-4673.

About Election Integrity

Election Integrity is a non-profit initiative whose mission is to verify the real-time accuracy of vote counting practices in political elections.

Website: http://www.electionintegrity.org

Election Integrity
Stephanie Singer
Co-Director
email: [e-mail]
phone: [phone] Marian Schneider, Esq.
phone: [phone]

[Melissa G]

4. The EAC Has Failed To Meet Its Own Mission Statement

The EAC Has Failed To Meet Its Own Mission Statement
by John Gideon, December 11, 2006
The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) was created by the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA).
According to the EAC's Mission Statement:

The U.S. Election Assistance Commission – an independent bipartisan agency – is charged with disbursing payments to states for replacement of voting systems and election administration improvements, adopting voluntary voting system guidelines, and serving as a national clearinghouse and resource of information regarding election administration.


Let's review this 'Mission Statement' and see how the EAC is doing.

Independent, Bipartisan Agency

There are many examples of the EAC’s failure to maintain bipartisanship in its work. I present only two.

First, the debate about the need for voter ID to stop voting fraud in the polling place has been clearly split across party lines, with Republicans advocating and Democrats opposing such laws. In September of 2005 the EAC commissioned bipartisan researchers to examine, among other issues, the extent of voting fraud, such as “dead voters,” double-voting, non-citizens voting, and ineligible felons voting. On May 17, 2006, the researchers presented their “Status Report On The Voter Fraud-Voter Intimidation Research Project” to the EAC.

Their interviews with experts and examination of media reports and legal case files for the past five years showed little evidence of voting fraud and substantially more evidence of voter intimidation. The EAC might have furthered its mission as an information clearinghouse by allowing this preliminary report to inform the debate in the U.S. House of Representatives on H.R. 4844, a bill requiring Voter ID for voters who vote in person at the polling place and not for absentee voters. Specifically, the report stated

http://www.votersunite.org/info/EACFailedMission.asp

[Melissa G]

5. Tennessee appears to be worst state for vote-flipping in 2006

Thanks to Fly by night for the post and the DU discussion here...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x462278

Original message
Tennessee appears to be worst state for vote-flipping in 2006

Tomorrow evening (Tuesday, December 12), we will be holding a public meeting in east Nashville to discuss the many problems that occurred in the Orange State in November, 2006, now that our State Election Coordinator and our self-castrated State Election Commission forced paperless DREs on most counties. There were a myriad of problems reported throughout the state -- two counties had a complete meltdown of their new equipment, much illegal software was found on the central vote tabulator in Memphis (Harold Ford, Jr's hometown), touch-screen flipping was widespread, "lost" voter registrations were common in Democratic strongholds, etc. With all of these problems, however, I was unprepared for the following analysis received this afteroon from Jonathan Simon with the Election Defense Alliance. Read and weep -- we will be forwarding this analysis on to Harold Ford, Jr. to help explain why Tennessee was the ONLY state to elect a freshman Republican Senator in 2006.
-----

In response to Bernie's query relative to the Nashville meeting, I'm sending some "background" data that should have relevance to the fairness of E2006 in Tennessee.

As you probably know, there was a statewide exit poll conducted by Edison-Mitofsky for the major media consortium. This exit poll was "adjusted" to conform to the statewide vote totals once they became available, the ostensible theory behind this being that the demographic picture of the electorate and its voting patterns will be most accurate if the poll results match the votecount, which is taken for gospel and therefore the best standard of calibration. If this is indeed the case, we would expect the resulting sampled electorate as portrayed by this adjusted poll to accurately reflect the electorate that went to the polls and voted on Election Day (and early and absentee voting, which are incorporated into the exit poll via telephone survey).

There are yardsticks that enable us to check whether this is indeed the case. One is Presidential Approval Rating, which can be compared to a known baseline as established by tracking polls in the state.

In Tennessee the results are dramatic. In the most recent pre-election baseline poll of Bush approval, taken by Survey USA on October 17, 2006, Bush approval stood at 39% Approve, 59% Disapprove, for a net of minus 20%. In the Edison-Mitofsky poll adjusted to match the 2006 vote totals, Bush approval was 48% Approve, 50% Disapprove, for a net of minus 2%. The difference between the two nets, a whopping 18%, was the greatest of any of the 32 states for which data was available. Bear in mind what this means: in order to get the vote to come out the way it did, an electorate has to be created or postulated that is grossly overpopulated with pro-Bush or Republican voters, voters with a very great propensity to vote for other Republican candidates in 2006.

There are only two ways in which such a disparity could come about. One is if the Republicans trounced the Democrats in the turnout battle in the 2006 election, so that the poll's "roomful of Republicans" sample did accurately represent an electorate that was also a "roomful of Republicans." No one, not even Republicans, suggests that this was the case. The only other explanation is that the votecounts, to which the exit poll was adjusted, are themselves grossly distorted and mistabulated. In Tennessee it appears that the degree of vote shifting--i.e., election theft--was in the double digits: certainly more than enough to alter the outcome of the Senatorial race, among others.

Much moe good discussion available here..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x462278

[Melissa G]

6. NYT editorial: The Road to Reliable Elections

Thanks to DeepModem Mom for the post and the DU discussion here...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x462231

Original message
NYT editorial: The Road to Reliable Elections
The Road to Reliable Elections
Published: December 11, 2006

Two influential federal advisory groups have added their voices to an emerging national consensus that voting machines must produce a voter-verified paper record if they are to be trusted. One of those groups, the one dominated not by scientists but by election officials, was more grudging than it should have been. But their analyses should give further support to members of Congress who plan to push next month for a strong federal law requiring voter-verified paper records.

More than half of the states now have laws requiring electronic voting machines to produce paper records that voters can review to ensure that their votes were correctly recorded. Voters understand that without this paper, there is no way of knowing if the software registered their choices incorrectly, either by accident or by design.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology, an agency that promotes good standards in everything from medical devices to smoke detectors, recently concluded that paperless electronic voting is unacceptable. The agency’s scientists said that for electronic voting to be trustworthy, it must be “software independent,” meaning there has to be a means apart from the machines’ own software to prove that the vote tallies are correct.

The obvious way to do this is a voter-verified paper record....NIST’s report went to the technical guidelines committee of the Election Assistance Commission, the federal agency created after the 2000 meltdown to help improve elections. The guidelines committee voted down a resolution recommending that electronic voting be used only if the results are independently verifiable. Instead, it affirmed the need for paper trails or other independent verification going forward, but recommended giving a pass to localities already using flawed machines.

It is unfortunate that the stronger resolution did not pass....

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/11/opinion/11mon1.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

[Melissa G]

7. Kucinich will run in 2008.

There are threads all over DU but here is a link to the highest rated one..enjoy!
Thanks to Infinite Hope for the post and the DU discussion here..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...



Original message from Infinite Hope
MSNBC BREAKING: Kucinich will run in 2008.
Edited on Mon Dec-11-06 03:31 PM by Infinite Hope
Just announced on Scarborough country that Kucinich has announced he will run.

Also in General Politics section here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph... discussion in both places. Check it out and contribute to both!

[Melissa G]

8. Recount confirms Republican U.S. Rep. Pryce won re-election in Ohio

Recount confirms Republican U.S. Rep. Pryce won re-election in Ohio


By The Associated Press
Tuesday, December 12, 2006


COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) - A congressional race that was so close it triggered an automatic recount finally wrapped up Monday with officials confirming Republican Rep. Deborah Pryce had won.
Pryce ended Election Night 1,055 votes ahead of Democrat Mary Jo Kilroy, a difference that was within a half-percentage point, which requires a recount under Ohio law.

Numbers released Monday showed Pryce had gained seven votes to win with 110,739 votes to Kilroy's 109,677.

The close margin of victory was not lost on Pryce. She said that, while she was gratified to retain the seat, she got a clear message from her constituents.


"There was a lot of disenchantment with government as it was," she said. "We all went through this election process. We'll take that message back."

Both candidates said the end of the fight should be seen as a win for transparent elections.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/election/s_483820.html

[Melissa G]

9. Democrats vow votes will have paper trail

Democrats vow votes will have paper trail

Mark K. Matthews
Washington Bureau
Posted December 12 2006


WASHINGTON -- It may be too late for frustrated voters in Sarasota County, but Democratic leaders said they intend to change election rules next year to require that all voting machines produce a verifiable paper record.

If the federal proposal becomes law, Florida would have to abandon all its touch-screen-voting machines unless state election officials decide to certify a touch-screen model with a verifiable paper trail. So far, that has not happened.


Recently, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Boca Raton, said they aim to make paper records a top priority in the next Congress, despite concerns about the regulation's expense and questions about its accuracy.

The aim is to prevent the confusion and mistrust that grew out of the controversial House District 13 race in Sarasota County. That's where about 18,000 people who cast ballots on touch-screen machines did not record a vote in the razor-thin race.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/florida/orl-votereform1206dec12,0,7797896.story?coll=sfla-news-florida

[philb]

30. Actually not, the recount documented that Kilroy got the most votes from legal voters

There was just enough unreasonable manipulation to reject enough votes of legal voters to declare Pryce the winner.

There was a huge amount of malfeasance, misfeasance, dirty tricks documented to result in enough legal voters voting in the
"wrong precinct" to have their votes not counted. But the fault in virtually all cases was with the election officials, not the voters, and these were legal voters voting in the correct Congressional race. In prior circumstances, such votes would count, and they should. It should make no difference where you vote as long as you vote in the correct races. And the fact that enough voters were manipulated into voting in the "wrong precicnt" was clearly manipulation, not voter error in most cases.

www.flcv.com/franklin.html
www.flcv.com/ohiosum6.html

[philb]

31. Lots of switching, disappearing votes, malfunctioning machines, glitches, long lines, suppression

of minority voters, systematic illegal dirty tricks in many races in many states.

Lots of close races appear to have been decided by irregularities and millions of voters who were not allowed to vote.

www.flcv.com/eirstss6.html
www.flcv.com/eirsppp6.html
www.flcv.com/eirsoth6.html
www.flcv.com/eirsdt6.html

[Melissa G]

33. Thanks for the updates, philb!

[Melissa G]

10. NY Otsego board endorses scanners

Otsego board endorses scanners


By Tom Grace


Cooperstown News Bureau


The Otsego County Board of Representatives has voted to support buying optical scanners for the county’s voting machines, and other counties in the state may follow its lead.


Though the issue had seemed partisan months ago, support for scanners, rather than direct recording electronic machines, came from Republicans and Democrats at the Dec. 6 board meeting. The motion was made by James Powers, R-Butternuts, seconded by Nancy Iversen, D-Otsego, and won with nine members supporting it, three opposed and two, Hugh Henderson, R-town of Oneonta, and Margery Merzig, R-Oneonta, absent.


snip
Democratic Commissioner Hank Nicols favors scanners. Republican Commissioner Charlotte Koniuto has proposed buying DREs, but said Monday that she’s willing to hear the pros and cons of each system again.


snip
On Monday, Rep. Kevin Hodne, D-Oneonta, chairman of the county’s Intergovernmental Affairs Committee, said,``I think more and more people are seeing that scanners are a better system.’’


Scanners have been around for a generation. When using scanners, voters mark their own paper ballots, then feed them into a scanner, essentially a high-speed calculator, Hodne said. If a recount is needed, officials can hand-count the original ballots to make sure the machine was right.

http://www.thedailystar.com/news/stories/2006/12/12/tgscanners3.html

[Melissa G]

11. 2 Democrats sue for new elections

2 Democrats sue for new elections
Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 12/12/06
BY SHRUTI L. MATHUR
MANAHAWKIN BUREAU

Two high-profile Democrats in southern Ocean County are requesting new elections for five Ocean County municipalities in a lawsuit filed Monday against the county Board of Elections, claiming the agency mismanaged the votes in November in which results were miscalculated.

Michele F. Rosen, 60, of Waretown and Rose Jackson, 63, of Barnegat want a Superior Court judge to throw out the Nov. 7 election results in Barnegat, Lavallette, Seaside Park, South Toms River and Tuckerton and to require a special vote with paper ballots.

"Essentially whoever wins an election, so long as it is run properly, and they win fairly and there is some way of ascertaining they have won fairly, then more power to them," Rosen said of the lawsuit's intent. "So long as we are in a position in Ocean County that we can't know that, I will do whatever I have to do to bring it to the attention of the court."

In their complaint, Rosen and Jackson allege officials for the Board of Elections mismanaged the election and infringed on citizens' rights to vote and have their votes counted correctly. The lawsuit targets the five municipalities where vote counts were close.

http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061212/NEWS/612120322/1070/NEWS02

[Melissa G]

12. Recount begins in local contest Indiana

Recount begins in local contest
Machine, provisional and absentee ballots will be counted separately, in case provisional ballots are thrown out.
By RICK YENCER
[e-mail]



MUNCIE -- Objections over provisional ballots won't stop a recount sought in the Delaware County recorder's race.

"We want to give everybody a fair shake," Delaware County Circuit Court 5 Judge Wayne Lennington said.



The recount began Monday after an hour-long hearing before Lennington to discuss objections and procedures. It will resume at 1 p.m. today in the basement of the Delaware County Building, where the election vault is located. The recount could take several days.

Lennington named a recount commission, including attorney Bruce Munson, court employee Mary Jane Johnson and former county election board member Mike White to handle the recount sought by Democratic candidate Claudette King, who lost by 15 votes to Republican Jane Lasater.
http://www.thestarpress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061212/NEWS01/612120334/1002

[Melissa G]

13. End state travesty of a rigged system - California

Article accuses Dems of vote rigging... Maybe we can get some Repubs on board for transparent elections?

End state travesty of a rigged system
BY SCOTT HARRIS, Guest Columnist
Article Last Updated:12/11/2006 07:08:54 PM PST


WHAT do the following politicians have in common:

State Assembly members Noreen Evans, Juan Arambula, Richard Alarcón, Fabian Nuñez and Mervyn Dymally; and state Sens. Dean Florez and Gloria Negrete McLeod?

All are Democrats and all won election, or re-election, to the California Legislature last month with 100 percent of the votes cast in their district. That's not a misprint - 100 percent.

Everyone from the old political machines must be turning over in his grave with the California returns. Even the late Mayor Richard J. Daley, who personified the infamous Chicago-ism "Vote early and often," never grabbed 100 percent of the vote. Responding to accusations that his father bought the 1960 presidential election, John F. Kennedy often joked that he received a telegram from Joseph Kennedy saying, "Don't buy another vote, I won't pay for a landslide." Not even Fidel Castro gets 100 percent of the vote.

http://www.dailynews.com/theiropinion/ci_4820790

[Melissa G]

14. Broward to explore paper trail options

Broward to explore paper trail options

By Bill Hirschman
South Florida Sun-Sentinel
Posted December 12 2006


Broward County's $23 million touch-screen voting system may be scrapped unless commissioners find a way to create a paper trail.

At least two commissioners and Supervisor of Elections Brenda Snipes question the reliability and credibility of touch-screen machines without a physical record of each vote. They want county staff to explore the cost of several alternatives, among them buying printers for the controversial system or switching to paper ballots that can be read by scanners.


"When you use an ATM, you get a slip back. When you use a credit card, you get a receipt. The only place you don't get an auditable paper trail is voting," said Commissioner Ilene Lieberman, who put "Item 86" on the agenda with colleague Suzanne Gunzburger.

Commissioners will vote today on the item, which would direct the staff to investigate the cost of the proposed alternatives.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/palmbeach/sfl-pcelect12dec12,0,4740757.story?coll=sfla-news-palm

[Melissa G]

15. County Board Of Elections Still Working On Voting Machine Decision

County Board Of Elections Still Working On Voting Machine Decision

By DENNIS PHILLIPS



12/11/2006 - MAYVILLE — With the state delay in certifying new voting machines, the county Board of Elections has yet to make its own decision.

Following a week where the Board of Elections held public demonstrations allowing voters to see new voting machines and a public forum where voters’ opinions were expressed, Norm Green, county Democratic Election Commissioner, said the county will make a decision on which voting machine to choose once state certification is complete.

The state still hasn’t certified any of the new voting machines, which are supposed to go into the rotation by Jan. 1.

The Board of Elections will be replacing all mechanical lever voting machines as mandated by the federal Help America Vote Act.
http://post-journal.com/articles.asp?articleID=10264

(ArRGGG!!! This is not what HAVA mandates!!!)

[Melissa G]

16. ROFL!!! DeLay bids to resume his career -- as a blogger!!!

DU discussion here...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x462348

DeLay bids to resume his career -- as a blogger
Houston Chronicle

Tuesday, December 12, 2006



(12-12) 04:00 PST Washington -- Tom DeLay is moving to reclaim his role as a conservative powerbroker by creating a new online network of grassroots activists who could nudge the Republican Party to the right and serve as a counterweight to liberal alliances such as MoveOn.org.

snip

Now, he's back with a revamped Web site, a new blog and a "Grassroots Action and Information Network" that he pledges will shape politics in federal, state and local races and help Republicans reclaim their lost majority in Congress.

"If the past two election cycles have taught us anything, it's that a strong, focused and activated grassroots network is key to achieving victory," DeLay said in a statement Monday. "This entire operation is designed around finding conservative individuals in each congressional district and motivating them to act on behalf of our principles."

For $52 a year, members of the network will have access to the latest intelligence in the conservative movement and a chance to build an alliance that will flex its muscle in all 435 congressional districts, DeLay says.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/12/12/MNGE5MTPN01.DTL

[Melissa G]

17. Victory for Tom DeLay Trolls!

From Wonkette...




Victory for Tom DeLay Trolls!
Their eventually-deleted efforts spreading filth and insults on his new blog have been preserved forever on another blog

OK, fuck all you critics, I was the best leader the House of Representatives has ever had. Don’t try to smear me, I am the definition of honesty and integrity, so fuck all you liberal commies.

December 10, 2006 | Unregistered Commenter Tom Delay
That’s the spirit, Hammer!

tomdelay.com
Earlier: Another Unemployed Loser (Tom DeLay) Starts a Blog

http://www.wonkette.com/politics/tom-delay/victory-for-tom-delay-trolls-220983.php

[Melissa G]

18. Can U.S. Elections Be Decidedly Accurate, Cost Far Less, and Run Like Clockwork? YES!

Thanks to kster for the post and the DU discussion here...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x462353

Original message
Can U.S. Elections Be Decidedly Accurate, Cost Far Less, and Run Like Clockwork? YES!
Can U.S. Elections Be Decidedly Accurate,
Cost Far Less, and Run Like Clockwork?
Swiss Voting System Report Says "Yes!"


Basel, Switzerland – Weeks before U.S. presidential voting, cries of potential fraud and deep concern about honest tabulation of votes ran rampant in both Republican and Democrat camps. Must an election – be it for President of the United States or President of a labor union – be clouded by charges and counter charges, lost votes, inaccuracy, equipment malfunctions, and a widespread lack of confidence in the process?

According to Beat Fehr, CEO of Swiss Voting System, it doesn’t have to be this way. His company’s Swiss Voting System Report offers a complete solution to these issues, and, according to Fehr, can save American governments millions of dollars. "The cost in the U.S., per voter, ranges from $25 to $40," Fehr notes. "Using the practices our report describes, it is very possible to match the Swiss cost of $2 per voter. That could be one-twentieth of the cost. Multiply that by thousands or millions of voters, and it’s easy to see how the savings can be monumental. And if you have results that all parties view with complete confidence, you are achieving the best of all possible outcomes."

Swiss Voting System expended over 1,500 hours of time studying the electoral system of Switzerland, creating a document that provides an overview of best-practice processes and gives detailed instructions on how to implement Swiss concepts, guidelines and standards to the benefit of any election. Cost effectiveness, descriptions of procedures, price calculations and logistics for complete elections are included. In essence, the report takes the wisdom of the Swiss voting system and creates a compact, yet comprehensive and highly utilitarian guide.

Swiss Voting System, a privately held company, is headquartered in Basel, Switzerland and draws on Fehr’s extensive background in voting systems and computer expertise.

http://www.swissvs.org /

Click on "PRESS RELEASE"

[Melissa G]

19. Panel Shifts Direction On E-voting Audit Trail

Panel Shifts Direction On E-voting Audit Trail
Federal board OKs plan requiring that new machines create vote records

December 11, 2006 (Computerworld) -- A government board charged with improving the security of electronic voting last week took a first step toward requiring that new e-voting machines include independent audit mechanisms.

The move came just a day after the same board had voted to reject a similar but stronger measure.

The latest proposal, unanimously approved by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission’s Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC), would require that new direct recording electronic (DRE) voting machines provide independently verifiable voting records, such as voter-verified paper-trail printouts.

The plan, offered by TGDC member Ronald Rivest, a computer science professor at MIT, calls on the group’s Security and Transparency Subcommittee to write requirements for the next generation of e-voting machines.

According to the approved proposal, the rules must ensure that new machines use an audit mechanism that is independent of the software running the machines. “I think is very important for the safety of voting machines in this country,” Rivest said.

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyId=12&articleId=276359&intsrc=hm_topic

[Melissa G]

20. PFAW:Florida's 13th District Debacle Requires a Re-Vote in Sarasota Today and National Reform

PFAW Press Release
Florida's 13th District Debacle Requires a Re-Vote in Sarasota Today and National Reform Tomorrow


To: Journalists
fr: Ralph G. Neas

With a new Congress set to convene in less than a month, it’s critical to solve the festering problem in Florida’s 13th congressional district by allowing the citizens of Sarasota County to make their voices heard in a re-vote. It’s the only fair solution to what was arguably the biggest foul-up among many in this year’s midterm elections—a congressional race where some 18,000 votes were not recorded.

The Sarasota snafu also sends up a bright signal flare that Congress and individual state legislatures cannot ignore. They must investigate all the election problems voters experienced this year and enact genuine election reform in time for the 2008 elections. With the high turnout and close contests of a presidential year looming, we’ve got a little over a year to get it right.

The evidence in Sarasota County strongly suggests that several factors led to the massive undervote in the congressional race, where no vote was recorded for about one of every six Sarasota voters. Numerous voters’ accounts provide compelling evidence that voting machine error—faulty machine programming and/or malfunctioning touch screens—was a major problem. Machine error is also suggested by voting patterns, as other potential problems alone do not explain the fact that undervotes were twice as common among strongly Democratic voters as they were among strongly Republican ones. Flawed ballot design (and the distribution of sample ballots indicating a different design) was also apparently a problem. Crucially, in what amounts to official misconduct, election supervisor Kathy Dent did not adequately address ballot design problems when she became aware of them during early voting.

In fact, dozens of voters testified at a hearing cosponsored by People For the American Way Foundation that when they tried to vote in the race between Christine Jennings and Vern Buchanan their votes were not recorded, or somehow disappeared when the summary screen appeared. Other Sarasota voters have provided similar eyewitness testimony to the courts and the news media.

Despite this clear evidence that thousands of voters were disenfranchised, the state certified the election for Buchanan by a razor-thin margin of less than 400 votes. A meaningless “audit” of just ten machines, has thus far shed no light on how the undervote occurred. That’s not surprising considering that the lead auditor prejudged the audit, claiming “they’re not going to find anything,” before an examination of the voting machine software even began, and another auditor has clear partisan leanings and wore a “Bush won” button during the 2000 Florida recount. Editorial opinion in Florida and across the country has been scathing.

Jennings is contesting the results in court. Separately, People For the American Way Foundation, Voter Action, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU Foundation of Florida filed an independent, nonpartisan suit on behalf of voters asking for a revote. Additionally, Congress is preparing for a potential contest by Jennings to Buchanan’s certification as the official Representative of CD-13, which could result in numerous outcomes, one of them being a delay in seating a representative from Florida’s 13th District. This may be the last option available to protect the voting rights of the 18,000 Floridians that have thus far been denied.

It’s only by chance that the mess in Sarasota was not repeated in other races around the country. Problems with iVotronic voting machines, the type used in Sarasota, were widespread:
Large undervotes also appeared in Florida in the races for Attorney General and Secretary of State in Broward, Miami-Dade, Sumter, Charlotte, and Lee counties. All of these counties use iVotronic machines.
Election officials in Williamson County, Texas, say that iVotronic machines malfunctioned, counting each vote cast electronically three times.
After voting concluded in a mayoral race in a small town in Arkansas, the iVotronic count had one mayoral candidate with zero votes, even though he voted for himself and his wife did too.
Reports of iVotronic “vote flipping” were widespread throughout Pennsylvania, with eyewitness accounts of machines changing votes in the city of Hazleton and in Cambria, Westmoreland and Allegheny counties, among others.
Many more iVotronic problems have been reported—a list can be found here.
Those are only a few of the problems encountered with just one brand of voting machine. As a co-founder of the Election Protection coalition, People For the American Way Foundation is reviewing thousands of complaints from voters nationwide about voting problems—everything from machine failures to deceptive flyers, poorly trained poll workers, and the inequitable distribution of voting machines and election resources.

The mess in Sarasota County is a timely reminder that the nation needs comprehensive election reform. It’s no small irony that the race in Florida’s 13th district is to replace Katherine Harris, the former Florida Secretary of State who stood at the epicenter of the voting debacle in the Bush-Gore race in 2000. That sorry episode laid bare the flaws in our voting system that now, six years later, have been inadequately addressed.

The new Congress should start with hearings into what happened in Sarasota County, and in other places around the nation where the voting process failed, where voters were misled or intimidated, or where serious questions have been raised about the integrity of the voting process. Several excellent pieces of legislation, including Senator Hillary Clinton’s Count Every Vote Act and Senator Barack Obama’s Deceptive Practices and Intimidation Act, have already been introduced, and People For the American Way is working closely with congressional leaders on additional election reform legislation. People For the American Way is also working with lawmakers in more than a dozen state legislatures to push for election reform, including the removal of barriers to the ballot box.

In 2008, the nation will face a Presidential election with no incumbent, close House and Senate races, and election battles for key offices in state and local governments. The stakes, always high, will be intensified in a nation still sharply divided along political lines. We’ve got a little over a year to forge an election system that will make sure voters in Florida and all 50 states have full faith and confidence that their votes will count.

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=23234

[read the law first]

29. only one problem.....it's illegal.

The U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals (which covers Florida) has already ruled that you can not have a "revote" in an area smaller than the area represented by the office voted on. A new election for the entire district is the only remedy available. A revote in just one county will NEVER be approved for a multi-county office.

[Stevepol]

21. Glad to add an R!

[Melissa G]

24. Thanks for the help, Stevepol!

:hi:

[Melissa G]

22. TX...Can Republican Bonilla Hang On in TX 23 Runoff?

Thinking Good thoughts for Ciro!!!
May he Kick Henry Vanilla's behind back to Texas!!!


Thanks to sonias for the post and the DU discussion here...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=180x40634

Original message
1. Can Republican Bonilla Hang On in TX 23 Runoff? Latest SUSA poll yesterday
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=02122173-a776-42b7-b885-c26296f452e3
On the eve of the 12/12/06 runoff election in Texas's 23rd Congressional District, incumbent Republican Henry Bonilla appears to edge Democrat Ciro Rodriguez, 51% to 47%, according to a SurveyUSA poll conducted exclusively for WOAI-TV San Antonio. Since an identical SurveyUSA WOAI-TV poll 1 week ago, on 12/4/06, Bonilla has lost 2 points and Rodriguez has gained 1 point.


Margin of Sampling Error for this question = ± 4.3%

More on the poll above. Si se puede!

[Melissa G]

28. Woo Hoo!! Ciro is looking Good!!!

Thanks to sonias for the continuing updates!!!
link here...http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=180x40634
Response to Original message
24. Full district with 114 of 267 Ciro at 57%
ALL COUNTIES
Bonilla 19,321
Ciro 25,907
total 45,228
114 of 267

Ciro is kicking ass!!!


edit to say
Burnt Orange Report Just called the race for Ciro!!!:woohoo:!!!:woohoo:!!!:woohoo:

[freedomfries]

26. K & R

great Jeannings quotes! Thanks MG!
:hi:

[Melissa G]

27. Thanks, FF! She is an inspiration. Hope more politicians get with the program!

:hi:

[AtLiberty]

32. k & r