|
08 Sep 03 - 10:39 AM (#1014763) Subject: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Alice Hi, Folks, I just received this email and thought my politically minded friends at Mudcat would be interested in the information. There is a House bill that needs support in order to get a printed ballot verification when voters use voting machines. My apologies if this info is already in another thread. Here is the email: ------------- Subject: HR 2239: Assuring Voting Machines Produce Voter Verified Printed Ballots Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 23:32:00 EDT Rep. Rush Holt of NJ--Congress' on PhD--has a proposed bill before Congress to plug the hole in the Help America Vote Act by requiring that every electronic voting machine produce a voter verified printed ballot. Make sure your congresspersons get on board in supporting this legislation. To read the summary of the bill Holt has crafted in consultation with many of the nation's best computer security specialists, go to: http://holt.house.gov/issues2.cfm?id=5996 For further insight into the dangers of paperless electronic voting machines go to: http://www.notablesoftware.com/evote.html http://www.ecotalk.org http://www.verifiedvoting.org -------------------------------------------- |
|
08 Sep 03 - 11:32 AM (#1014789) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: GUEST,pdq It suggests that a touch-screen voting machine should be made that produces a printed document which will be saved as a permanent record. Sounds good to me. There some constitutional scholars who say that a ballot must be in writing, making paperless voting unconstitutional. Sad fact is there was never anything wrong with punch cards and other paper ballots until Gore got fewer votes in Florida. |
|
08 Sep 03 - 07:50 PM (#1015070) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: McGrath of Harlow Except he didn't... |
|
08 Sep 03 - 11:14 PM (#1015165) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: LadyJean I spent several years as minority clerk for Ward 14 District 8. (Minority means minority party, which in my district is Republican, which I am not, but as no Republicans were available, I got the job.) The machines were a worry. Most poll workers are women, and the machines are big and heavy. Hard for us to move, and set up. If there was a problem with a machine, it was difficult to impossible, depending on voter turnout that day, to reach the people who could fix it. Add to all that, that we work a 14 to 16 hour day at the polls, and you understand the problems. After spending 12 hours running the polling place, the staff gets to count the votes. It aint easy, when you're holding your eyes open with toothpicks. OH! PLEASE! By all means support a legitimate write-in candidate, but NO FUNNY WRITE IN VOTES! They make extra work the staff at the polls don't need. It takes ten minutes to record your "funny" vote for Britney Spears. We're tired, and we don't see the joke. Nobody else does either. |
|
08 Sep 03 - 11:27 PM (#1015173) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: GUEST I'm a "Jeffersonian"
Voters stupid enough to leave "hanging-chads" are probably "Democrats" and don't have a vested interest anyway. |
|
09 Sep 03 - 12:25 PM (#1015547) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: DougR Oh but he did, McGrath! DougR |
|
10 Sep 03 - 12:16 AM (#1016036) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Donuel The die is cast. 36 states are locked into Dieblod machines. None of the machines have printers in them. Retrofit at this late date, if not impossible, will be claimed to be impossible. An independant agency has formed itself and is claiming jurisdiction for the quality control and security of electroic voting machines. That the CIA, McDonell Douglass and other military industrial concerns have thier representatives sitting on the board of this ad hoc commitee reflects the security we have all come to expect. |
|
10 Sep 03 - 10:31 PM (#1016635) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Alice For an investigative report on the Florida voter fraud, go here: Click ..."It wasn't reported in mainstream press, but the NAACP sued Harris and the gang for the black purge, and won. The state threw up its hands immediately and said, 'You got us! We'll put these people back as soon as we can.' We're still waiting." |
|
10 Sep 03 - 10:35 PM (#1016637) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Bobert Hey, when ya' got Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris on the taxpayer's payrolls, why would you want shop anywhwre else fir fixin' votin' machines. These two folks wrote the book!!!.... Bobert |
|
11 Sep 03 - 02:39 AM (#1016728) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: The Pooka Credential: I worked as a state Elections Officer (CT) for almost 30 years, before retiring recently. 1. LadyJean: absolutely right on, in every respect; & hurrah for you & all those like you, in all the states, who do the vital frontline gruntwork of democracy for little or no pay, no recognition for fine service, and public scorn when things go wrong through no fault of yours. / Especially good point about sillyarse write-ins. Oh, they're all very hilarious for those who only read the funny news stories about them with no notion of how much time & money it costs to compile them. In CT years ago I wrote, & by Golly we enacted, a law requiring Registration of write-in candidates. Very late pre-election filing deadline; only one signature required: the candidate' own. No Register, No Count. Damn good law. Yes, it's utterly constitutional. And no, Mickey Mouse has not yet Registered, to this very day. :) 2. McGrath: though I say he's wrong to *celebrate* it, DougR is correct about Florida: Bush did win it. Several exhaustive news media & other reviews of the ballots have confirmed this, by all plausible counting standards. The only way to find otherwise is to simply attribute the Palm Beach County "butterfly ballot" votes unambiguously marked for Pat Buchanan, to Al Gore instead. This is Jame's Carville's basis for saying, "Al Gore won the Intended Vote in Florida." Yes, that doubtless was most of those voters' intent. But you just can't DO that: take a plain clear ballot unspoiled & say, "Well, this voter didn't mean that. He couldn't have. He's probably Jewish. Therefore, he meant THIS." And no, the Butterfly Ballot was not a Bush conspiracy. (a) The Republicans aren't that smart; and (b) in any case the BB was designed by a pro-Gore Democrat county election official (and a very good one, too). 3. Alice: voter-roll purges occur, as they must, in all states & they always & everywhere disproportionately impact minorities & poor --- largely because the Minorities & the Poor relocate more often than do the Majorities & the Rich, and re-register or report address changes less often & less timely. And there is a differential in the rate of disfranchising felony convictions, too. & Yes, any & all such purges do incorporate an error-rate, too. That does not make them prima facia racist conspiracies by the Bushes. Also there are corrective procedures, right at the polls on election day, for such errors. // But, yeah --- to get the correction & to vote, you do have to go through the procedure. It isn't right or fair when the airline loses your luggage, either, & you have to fill out forms etc. -- but, it happens. Because the air travel system, like any other human system including our sacred elections, is forever imperfect. Sorry, but there it is. (4) Re the Voter-Verifiable Paper Trail for the Touchscreen-type computer voting systems: Yes, given the vulnerability of the software & source codes etc., it's a very wise provision --- PROVIDED you are welling (a) to pay for it (Not Cheap, Kids), and (b) in very-close-vote situations, like Florida, to PATIENTLY WAIT A LONG LONG TIME, without bitching & moaning & making stupid jokes about the bureaucrats, for the labor-intensive by-hand Recount results. Which is, of course, the main POINT of a paper-ballot backup system. There. (Hey, ain'tcha glad I'm Baaaaack? :) |
|
11 Sep 03 - 07:30 AM (#1016825) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Greg F. 2. McGrath: though I say he's wrong to *celebrate* it, DougR is correct about Florida: Bush did win it. Not quite. Truth is, since the Repubs stopped the count, we'll never know. |
|
11 Sep 03 - 08:02 AM (#1016835) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: catspaw49 Well Pook, I'm with Jimmy Carville......and if a Dem did design it he should have been strung up by his nuts! Anyway, it did produce one of my favorite parodies of "Don't Think Twice, It's Alright:" PUNCH IT TWICE, ITS ALRIGHT ........By Ross Altman, 2000 It ain't no use to vote in Palm Beach County If you don't know by now And it ain't no use to vote in Palm Beach County It don't matter anyhow When you look to the right of your candidate's name And the holes and the arrows they don't line up the same Maybe you're just a little off with your aim Punch it twice, its alright. It ain't no use in turnin' on your light babe Like you never done before And it ain't no use in turnin' on your light Babe There ain't no way you can vote for Gore. This butterfly ballot was designed just for you 'Cause you're old and liberal....and a Jew Been votin' Democratic since 1932 Just punch it twice, its alright. It ain't no use to ask for another ballot babe If you think you made a mistake Ain't no use to ask for another ballot Babe That's how its done in the Sunshine State We threw out 15,000 in '96 Relax....It ain't nothin' but...politics Me and the Governor, we're tight as ticks So punch it twice, its alright. So you might as well vote for Buchanan babe The Reform party nominee He's on the right side of the ballot babe He's as right as he can be There's not a dimes worth of difference between the Dem-o-crats And the Re-Pub-licans, George Wallace told us that So we made it easy, to vote for Pat Just punch it twice, its alright. Spaw |
|
11 Sep 03 - 12:21 PM (#1017010) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Alice Pooka, the type of purge of voters in the Fla election was not just a matter of error. See the article I linked. The courts eventually DID RULE it was FRAUD. Alice |
|
11 Sep 03 - 01:01 PM (#1017032) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: DougR Alice: I know I am not going to convince you otherwise, but when one offers as "back-up" a publication that so strongly leans to the Left as an argument for Bush stealing the election, it certainly casts doubt, in my mind at least, as to the objectivity of the report. A look into all of the topics listed on the left side that I opened revealed the same "Bush hating" prose the author exhibits in his writing about the election. If there was any meat in the story, the U. S. press, led by the New York Times, Washington Post and other to the Left newspapers would have been on that story like flies on you-know-what. DougR |
|
11 Sep 03 - 01:25 PM (#1017060) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: The Pooka Har har har!! Excellent, Mr 'Spaw sir. Hee hee hee...A lotta crap but ohhh, so well done. Any good parody of muh man Bobby Zimmerman is OK by me. :) The ballot was reviewed & approved (maybe not actually designed, I forget) by Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections Theresa LePore, so it might be a little difficult to hang her in the way you propose, 'Spaw. A 32-year career election official, she is well respected in her profession. She's been twice elected Supervisor by the county's voters. I don't know whether she's running again next year; but if she does, I betcha she gets elected again. (YEAHyeah, she'll rig the ballot, etc. etc. Skip it. Go make fun of folk musicians. :) Alice - Thanks. You're right, I hadn't read the article; I will do so. Fraud, and negligence, can & do occur of course, and obviously are unacceptable. I just wanted to put on the record that "purges" don't *automatically* (or even usually) equate to that just because my candidate (who WAS Al Gore btw) narrowly lost. The same is true of the "undervote", cited (I think) in 'Spaw's spoof above as ballots 'thrown out'. The undervote is the difference between the total *voting*, and the always-lower total voting *for a given office*, e.g., the "top office" on the ballot, e.g. President. Most (not all) of the top-office undervote -- which ALWAYS occurs, everywhere, typically at a rate of around 1% -- is caused by the fact that some voters consciously (even *rationally*) choose not to vote for that office. To the extent that this occurs for this reason, these are not "ballots thrown out". They are abstentions for that office. // But, it's still a funny song. :) |
|
11 Sep 03 - 01:31 PM (#1017064) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: GUEST,Casual Observer I didn't win the lottery last week. I'm going to sue for fraud. I'm sure they MEANT to pick my numbers. |
|
11 Sep 03 - 02:00 PM (#1017077) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Bobert Actually, Dougie, the Washington Post did print part of Greg Palist's findings about the illegal purging of predominantly black voters in Florida. But they didn't run it until like 4 months after the election and buried it like on page A-17... The folks in the UK knew the deal becuase it was printed there. In Greg's book, which I have challenged you to read, all the facts are presented, along with documents. The election was very much stolen in Florida, my frined. There is no doubt on this subject for anyone willing to learn, ahhh, the truth.... Yer pal... Bobert |
|
11 Sep 03 - 02:39 PM (#1017096) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Greg F. There ya go again, Bobert, relentlessly persecuting poor Dougie with those plaguey FACTS! |
|
11 Sep 03 - 03:36 PM (#1017118) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Bobert Yer right, Greg... I'm sorry, Dougie. I know what facts do to ya there, pal... (sniff...) Bobert |
|
11 Sep 03 - 07:55 PM (#1017246) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Alice Doug, if the Florida voter rolls purge was not fraudulent, the courts, in the law suit by the NAACP would not have ruled that it was fraud. And Florida would not have ADMITTED that it was fraud. "Florida Faces 2000 Election Fraud, Will Settle With NAACP By Catherine Wilson Associated Press | Boston Globe Tuesday, 27 August, 2002 MIAMI (AP) The NAACP's lawsuit over Florida's disputed 2000 presidential election appears headed for a close as the state and two counties, the only remaining defendants, have agreed to a settlement, attorneys said Tuesday. Joe Klock, an attorney for the state, told U.S. District Judge Alan Gold that all parties promised to file final papers by Friday for approval. Attorneys would not discuss terms of the settlement. The class-action lawsuit filed by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and other civil rights groups argued voters were disenfranchised during the Nov. 7, 2000 election; it included allegations that blacks were kept from voting in some counties. The state and Orange and Hillsborough counties were the only holdouts in the lawsuit. Miami-Dade, Broward, Leon, Volusia and Duval counties settled earlier rather than face trial." or maybe you will believe the conclusion of the US Commission on Civil Rights: "The US Commission on Civil Rights issued a preliminary report that provided damning evidence of the systematic and intentional disenfranchisement of voters by Florida officials during the 2000 presidential election. The evidence points to an array of problems, including those in the following categories: ... Non-felons were removed from voter registration rolls based upon unreliable information collected in connection with sweeping, state sponsored felony purge policies..." |
|
11 Sep 03 - 08:03 PM (#1017252) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Bobert And isn't is somethin' that the US Supreme Court ruled that Bush would be harmed if the recount had been allowed to go forward??? Figure that one out!!! "Well, danged, Mildred. It they keep recountin' them votes then George is gonna loose this thing! That might hurt his feelin's..." Turns out that the entire world was harmed by the Supreme's partisan decision.... Bobert |
|
11 Sep 03 - 08:50 PM (#1017270) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Don Firth I don't have my copy of the Constitution handy right at the moment. Does anybody know if it's possible to impeach one or more Supreme Court justices? Don Firth |
|
12 Sep 03 - 04:47 AM (#1017385) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Don Firth Just ran across this: He who casts a vote decides nothing. He who counts the votes decides everything. —Joseph Stalin Don Firth |
|
12 Sep 03 - 03:12 PM (#1017704) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: GUEST,pdq Great point Don, 'ol bud. Look who counts the votes in Chicago, New Orleans, Kansas City, St. Louis, New York, San Francisco, New Jersey.......... |
|
12 Sep 03 - 04:37 PM (#1017774) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: McGrath of Harlow "Oh but he did, McGrath!" Maybe the best way to settle that would have been if they'd been allowed to take the time to finish the count, omnsteads of stopping it at the insistance of the man who was ahead at the time. Mind, I think it's safe to assume that, if it had been Gore ahead, his camp would have been pulling every trick in the book to stop the count. There are enemies of democracy in all parties in all countries. Running most parties much of the time. The first priority of any true democrat (small d) should be to concentrate on getting rid of the enemies of democracy in their own party or section of a party. I don't see much sign of that happening. |
|
12 Sep 03 - 05:12 PM (#1017804) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: The Pooka McGrath, I agree. But true small-d democrats are never partisan activists in political parties. To the partisans, winning is everything. // Of course there are some partisans who sincerely believe that the defeat of their cause is intrinsically, definitionally, anti-democratic: it is logically impossible for such an outcome to be legitimate. Ergo, it could only have been achieved via larceny, fraud & corruption; and so the use of any & all means to overturn it is, well -- democratic. On those occasions in British history when Parliament has elected a Prime Minister whose party's MP candidates had not received, in the aggregate, the most popular votes --- did the winner decline, and ask that the leader of the first-place-finishing party be chosen instead? (Of course, the UK system does not require that the chief executive be of the party which got the most popular votes. And -- neither does the US system. Fortunately, in both systems it *almost* always comes out that way.) |
|
12 Sep 03 - 05:59 PM (#1017842) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: McGrath of Harlow Not quite "almost always". Twice since the last war the government in Westminster was formed by the party which did not receive the largest number of votes. In February 1974 the Tories led Labour by 180,000 votes, and lost, and in 1951 Labour was ahead by about 1.5 million votes. But I wasn't making the point that Gore was ahead on the popular vote across the USA, and therefore should have been awarded the victory. That's not the rules under which they play the game. But the rules also state that all the votes should be counted, and that wasn't done in Florida, because the side which was marginally ahead set to abort the count, and succeeded in doing so. Any true democrat (small d) should be ashamed of that happening in their country, any country. And that should apply, even if the result came out the way they would have wanted it to come out. |
|
12 Sep 03 - 08:39 PM (#1017919) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: McGrath of Harlow I forgot to say that in 1951, in spite of that 1 1/2 million vote lead, Labour lost the election. |
|
13 Sep 03 - 05:20 AM (#1018057) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: The Pooka McG.: > "Not quite 'almost always'. Twice since the last war the government in Westminster was formed by the party which did not receive the largest number of votes." Well, it is 4 times in United States history, including 2000, that the "electoral college inversion" has occurred, wherein the November popular-vote party "winner" loses the presidential election conducted by the Electors in December. Prior to 2000, the last-previous occasion was 1888. Maybe that's not quite "almost never"; but over on this side of the Pond, I think it'll do until Amost Never comes along. > "But I wasn't making the point that Gore was ahead on the popular vote across the USA, and therefore should have been awarded the victory. That's not the rules under which they play the game." I know you weren't, Kevin; & I knew it when I posted my previous. / So, I was consciously setting up a Straw Man to knock down. So, sue me. (Hey: if you had a sharpie Amurrican trial lawyer, you *would*! :) > "..But the rules also state that all the votes should be counted, and that wasn't done in Florida, because the side which was marginally ahead set to abort the count, and succeeded in doing so..." Well, that's considerably oversimplified [Considerable Oversimplification being *MY* turf btw, so kindly Keepa U Hands Off :] -- but, OKOK, I'll buy it if you'll amend "abort the count" to "abort the *re-re-count*". The FLA results were (a) unofficially tallied by the news media, which is meaningless because (trust me on this) such totals are ALWAYS wrong; then (b) officially counted by the counties and the state; and then (c) officially re-counted [but not all by hand] by said governmental units because of the extreme closeness of the outcome. / What WAS "aborted" was the re-re-count (by hand) of ballots from selected counties as petitioned by the Gore campaign. Here's what I really believe about Florida 2000. (1) If everybody there who voted for President had succeeded in casting a ballot which clearly registered their true intent, Al Gore would be President today and we'd be in somewhat-better (i.e., less-worse) shape than we now are. [Also, since Joe Lieberman would be Vice President, our Middle East policy would be more even-handed and the Road Map would still exist. Ohhh, yes it would. Think about it. Nixon & "Red" China. See? It takes somebody who is immune from the charge of anti-Semitism to push the Likud around.] / However, (2) if every single legally *countable, voter-intent-discernible*, ballot cast in Florida had been re-re-re-counted until the Cows came Home --- Bush would still have won. Unfortunately. |
|
13 Sep 03 - 10:05 AM (#1018118) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Alice Pooka, I would add to that, if everyone in Florida who was legally registered to vote who went to the polls to vote was ALLOWED to vote, (not fraudulently purged from the polls) Gore would have won. |
|
13 Sep 03 - 10:25 AM (#1018122) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Alice that should have been "purged from the rolls", not polls. - alice |
|
13 Sep 03 - 05:26 PM (#1018302) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: McGrath of Harlow In any election the count isn't finished until all the recounts are finished, however many it takes. Until that point all the counts are just provisional. And whether the final result would have meant victory for Gore or fort Bush is essentially irrelevant. The point is, those who set out to succeeeded in obstruct the process of the count, and succeeded in doing so, were acting as enemies of the democratic constitutional process. |
|
15 Sep 03 - 03:03 PM (#1019388) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: GUEST,pdq Refresh, in light of today's blocking of recall election of Gray Davis in California. Punch card voting machines given as reason/excuse. |
|
15 Sep 03 - 08:00 PM (#1019586) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: John Hindsill There are no voting machine problems, only problem voters. There are no voting machine problems, only problem judges who don't have to answer to the electorate. |
|
15 Sep 03 - 09:04 PM (#1019606) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: Donuel You can talk to Bev Harris who literally wrote the book on the electronic voting scam...sorry blue clicky is offline http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=340147&mesg_id=340147 http://www.democraticunderground.com/duforum/DCForumID70/3718.html http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=325947&mesg_id=325947 |
|
16 Sep 03 - 02:29 PM (#1020054) Subject: RE: BS: Fixing the voting machine problem in USA From: GUEST,pdq coppied, less permission, from Donuel's first listed web site: "anyone in Seattle -- KIRO 7-10 Dave Ross show, This guy is trotting out the same old flawed arguments against the paper trail. I think there about 30 minutes left. So far, he says you can't have paper because a) you can't have two ballots boxes (lame) b) same problem as Florida where people can't interpret them (lame -- Dave Ross said "why not just have the machine print it, we can all read it, then you can audit and we can all understand it) c) Adler says you shouldn't have paper ballots because of the multiple languages (lame: a computer can print the same language on the screen) d) of course, the blind can't read a paper ballot (but AccuPoll produces a scannable paper ballot that gives out an auditory verification) I'm standing firm: We WILL NOT accept any system that tells citizens to depend on a handful of cryptographers or computer scientists who say "trust us, we'll make it safe." Next: caller comments on which system they want" Good to see that this issue is not being subjected to the usual partisan ideological warfare. Both left and right want to see honest elections, especially when the other side is in control. |