Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News Tuesday 8/29/06

[Melissa G]

Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News Tuesday 8/29/06



Different equipment, Different results

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 "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.



If you want to know how post "News Banners" or other images, go here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=371233#371391







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

[Melissa G]

1. Voters Find Some Machines Harder to Use

Thanks to Deep Modem Mom for the post and the DU discussion here..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2479095


Voters Find Some Machines Harder to Use


By SEWELL CHAN
Published: August 28, 2006
With New York State facing a looming deadline to modernize its election technology, a new report offers evidence that one of the two major types of voting machines being considered has a higher rate of unrecorded votes, suggesting that it is too confusing for many people.



Graphic: Different Equipment, Different Results The report, which the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law intends to release today, examined election records from thousands of counties across the nation since 2000. It is likely to animate long-simmering debates across the state’s 62 counties, which face a December deadline for deciding how to replace antiquated voting equipment.

snip
The Brennan Center disagrees with the state board’s interpretation that a full-face ballot is required in New York.

In January, the Connecticut attorney general, Richard Blumenthal, concluded that contrary to a widely held belief there, Connecticut law did not require full-face ballots.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/28/nyregion/28voting.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1156824494-BG63s9z1hw/oJcDPTQG9NQ

[Melissa G]

2. Vote Pad: A queen of hearts sort of day. "Off with their heads!"

Thanks to amaryllis for the post and the DU discussion here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x447297



Vote Pad: A queen of hearts sort of day. "Off with their heads!"
http://www.vote-pad.us/Media/CertificationDenied.asp

"Off with Their Heads!" cried the Queen of Hearts

"How am I to get in?" asked Alice again, in a louder tone.
"Are you to get in at all?" said the Footman. "That's the first question, you know."

It was a Queen of Hearts sort of a day in California on August 9, 2006. The Secretary of State's advisory panel was hearing public comments regarding the pending certification of the Vote-PAD, a non-electronic assistive device designed to help voters with disabilities mark and verify a paper ballot independently.

Voting integrity advocates held signs supporting the certification of Vote-PAD. They told of countless failures of computerized voting systems. They spoke about recent discoveries of easily hackable "back doors" into the vote totals on those systems, which have been certified. By contrast, "Vote-PAD is no more hackable than a #2 pencil," said one.

Notwithstanding this and the letters praising the Vote-PAD from dozens of people with visual and motor disabilities, the Secretary of State's staff was recommending against certifying the Vote-PAD for use in California.

The Queen started by describing the testing process, "We asked them to vote independently on the Vote-PAD, and we told them exactly what to do the entire time."

"Excuse me," said Alice, "but how is that independent?"

"That's not the point," said the Queen. "The point is that they weren't able to vote independently."

"But you didn't let them," objected Alice.

"Don't be impertinent," said the King.

"Yes!" murmured the jury.

"Let's be clear on one thing," spoke the Queen. "When disabled people tried to vote on the Vote-PAD, their error rate was unacceptably high and they took an excessively long time."

"Compared to what?" asked one of the jurors.

"Nothing," said the Queen. "Nothing at all. We have no standards."

"They've begun asking riddles," thought Alice.
"--I believe I can guess that," she added, aloud.

"What was the error rate on the voting systems you've approved, and how long did people take to vote on them?" asked Alice.

"We haven't used people with disabilities to test the other systems," said the Queen. "We know nothing about that."

"Nothing whatever?" asked a voting integrity advocate.

"Nothing whatever," said the Queen.

"That's very important," the King said, turning to the jury.

"So, how do you know they did worse with the Vote-PAD?"

"Because!" said the Queen.

"Of course!" said the jury. "That makes sense!"

"That's very curious," Alice thought.

The Queen continued, "Everyone had to vote four write-in candidates. They made over half their mistakes on the write-in votes."

"Wait!" objected a juror, "Write-ins are a universal problem. They're a problem on every voting system."

A county registrar spoke up, "And why so MANY write-ins? That's such a small part of a real election, and it was such a big a part of the testing."

"Who ever saw one that size? Why it fills the whole window."

"And voters wouldn't hop-scotch around the ballot the way you told them to, said another registrar. "It's unnatural, confusing."

Alice was wondering if anything would ever happen in a natural way again.

"Hush, hush!" ordered the Queen. "We were stress testing the system."

"But," cried Alice, "That wasn't stress testing the system. It was stress testing the people with disabilities!"

"Regardless," the Queen dismissed the comment with a wave of her hand and went on, "Blind people can't verify write-in candidate names reliably on the Vote-PAD."

"They can't verify write-in names at all on the Hart InterCivic eSlate," Alice objected, "and you certified the eSlate."

"I don't think they play at all fairly," Alice began, ...

"Off with their heads!" cried the Queen.

After a lull, Alice pointed out, "Blind people can verify their ballots with Vote-PAD."

"But they can't verify other people's ballots," countered the Queen. "They have to be able to verify other people's ballots."

"That's not a regular rule," said Alice, "you invented it just now."

In response to joint applications submitted by Vote-PAD, Inc. and California counties, Secretary of State Bruce McPherson's voting system staff set up two days of certification testing of the Vote-PAD in July.

With no training or experience in usability testing, the Secretary's staff and computer voting system consultants conducted "usability" testing on the Vote-PAD.

This event marks the first time the Secretary has ever used people with disabilities to test a voting device intended for use by people with disabilities, despite the fact that it has certified numerous such systems.

During the test, participants were not allowed to vote independently on the Vote-PAD, but were instead subjected to an artificial voting environment where they were frequently interrupted by staff during the voting process. From this critically flawed testing, the Secretary concluded that they would not be able to vote independently.

"We appreciate the participation of the people with disabilities, and we believe they performed quite successfully, given the unrealistic, trying conditions to which they were subjected," said Ellen Theisen, President of Vote-PAD, Inc. "Especially considering that in a recent Rice University usability test conducted on able-bodied, experienced voters, 16% of the ballots contained errors," she added.

Two human factors experts, Dr. Valerie Rice and Noel Runyan, submitted written testimony stating that the testing process put together by Secretary of State's staff violated basic principles of usability testing. These experts pointed out that any results would be unreliable. The Secretary ignored the testimony of these experts and agreed with his non-expert staff's negative assessment of the results.

Friday, August 25, 2006, Secretary McPherson signed a letter denying certification to Vote-PAD, thus denying California voters a paper-based, accessible alternative to computers.

The Registrars in six California counties wanted to provide the Vote-PAD to assist their voters with disabilities. Instead, they will be forced to use computerized voting machines, which have never been tested for accessibility by Secretary McPherson, and which have been the subject of great concern regarding their security and reliability. Now, these registrars are at risk of being embroiled in the lawsuits recently filed in California by disabilities organizations and voting integrity advocates opposing the use of the computerized voting machines.

"Off with their heads," boomed the Queen.
"Off with their heads," agreed the jury.
"Off with their heads," echoed the Secretary of State.

Theisen remarked, "Secretary McPherson simply rubberstamped the staff's contorted testing and evaluation."

"Curiouser and curiouser!" cried Alice.


Contact: Ellen Theisen
President of Vote-PAD, Inc.
360-437-9922
[e-mail]

[Melissa G]

3. FLORIDA JUDGE RULES JEBS VOTER REGISTRATION RULES UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

Thanks to kpete for the post and the DU discussion here..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x447258


FLORIDA JUDGE RULES JEBS VOTER REGISTRATION RULES UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

Judge Blocks Fla. Voter Registration Law

By CURT ANDERSON
The Associated Press
Monday, August 28, 2006; 1:29 PM

MIAMI -- A federal judge on Monday declared a new Florida voter registration law unconstitutional, ruling that its stiff penalties for violations threaten free speech rights and that political parties were improperly exempted.

The 48-page ruling by U.S. District Judge Patricia Seitz means that state authorities cannot enforce the provisions of the law. It took effect Jan. 1 and has been blamed by several labor unions and nonprofit groups for effectively blocking voter registration drives across the state because of the financial risk.


"If third-party voter registration organizations permanently cease their voter registration efforts, Florida citizens will be stripped of an important means and choice of registering to vote and of associating with one another," Seitz wrote.

The law also "unconstitutionally discriminates" against third-party registration groups because it does not apply to political parties, Seitz added.

more at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/28/AR2006082800502.html

[Melissa G]

4. Mexican Court Rejects Voting Fraud Charges

Mexican Court Rejects Voting Fraud Charges


By JAMES C. McKINLEY Jr.
Published: August 29, 2006

MEXICO CITY, Aug. 28 — Felipe Calderón seemed virtually assured of being designated president of Mexico next week after the country’s highest electoral tribunal on Monday threw out legal challenges from his leftist opponent, who claims that widespread fraud warped the results of last month’s national election.

The seven-member tribunal stopped short of officially designating Mr. Calderón, a conservative, president-elect. But it ruled unanimously that the opponent, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, had failed to prove that irregularities in many polling places stemmed from fraud, nor had he proven that the errors affected him more than his opponent.

The judges said in open court on Monday that they had ordered the votes from scores of polling places annulled for irregularities found in a partial recount, but that the final result would not change. They also made it clear they found no evidence of fraud.

“Based on all the annulments that were deemed necessary, all the parties lost a considerable number of votes, but that did not affect the result,” said Magistrate José Alejandro Luna Ramos.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/29/world/americas/29mexico.html?hp&ex=1156910400&en=4e53ea79b0820157&ei=5094&partner=homepage

[Melissa G]

5. Kerry revives 2004 election allegations

Thanks to Rose Siding for the post and the DU discussion here...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2480979


Kerry revives 2004 election allegations
WASHINGTON - Sen. John Kerry didn't contest the results at the time, but now that he's considering another run for the White House, he's alleging election improprieties by the Ohio Republican who oversaw the deciding vote in 2004.

An e-mail will be sent to 100,000 Democratic donors Tuesday asking them to support U.S. Rep. Ted Strickland (news, bio, voting record) for governor of Ohio. The bulk of the e-mail criticizes Strickland's opponent, GOP Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, for his dual role in 2004 as President Bush's honorary Ohio campaign co-chairman and the state's top election official.

"He used the power of his state office to try to intimidate Ohioans and suppress the Democratic vote," said Kerry's e-mail.

Kerry, D-Mass., conceded the election when he lost Ohio and its 20 electoral votes. A recount requested by minor-party candidates showed Bush won by about 118,000 votes out of 5.5 million cast. But Kerry's e-mail says Blackwell "used his office to abuse our democracy and threaten basic voting rights."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060828/ap_on_el_ge/ohio_kerry

[Melissa G]

6. New Poll: Perry continues to fall, Bell continues to rise, C4n3p crashes

Thanks to Czolgosz for the post and the DU discussion here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=180x36182

New Poll: Perry continues to fall, Bell continues to rise, C4n3p (Strayhorn)crashes
The latest Wall Street Journal poll on the Texas gubernatorial race is out.

34.8% - James "Rick" Perry (continuing his downward spiral to his lowest point yet)
23.1% - Chris Bell (continuing to rise to his highest point yet)
22.7% - Richard "Kinky" Friedman (remains stuck in third)
9.6% - Carole Keeton "Rylander McLellan But-Not-Grandma" Strayhorn (crashes through the floor into the single-digit basement to her lowest point yet)

If this were a three-way race, it would be neck and neck between Bell and Perry with all the momentum heading Bell's way. Kinky's vanity campaign may prove to be Perry's saving grace. There is polling analysis on the Stop Kinky blog:

"Bell also threatens Perry. Several recent polls have identified Perry's current level of support at 35% with a continuing significant downward trend. This would be disastrous for an incumbent in most situations, but Perry is less threatened because the 65% of the vote which is currently "not Perry" is divided among three significant alternative candidates (plus Libertarian James Werner whose support is negligible). Of all the candidates, Bell's support is most consistently trending upward (most recent polls have identified Bell's current levels of support between 18% and 21% and raising). There are two historical voting trends which strongly indicate that the upward trend of Bell's support will continue to even higher levels.

First, Perry, Strayhorn, and Kinky have very well established name identification among Texas voters. Bell, on the other hand, is identified by less than half of likely Texas voters. We know from previous elections, once a candidate achieves a very significant level of name identification with a likely voter without achieving that likely voter's support, it becomes substantially more difficult for the known candidate to win that voter's support. The fact that Bell has the most room to increase his name identification indicates that he also has the easiest task of building his support. Moreover, we also know from past elections that Bell's name identification will rise as the election nears as a result of the fact that Bell is the nominee of a major party. Among likely Texas voters who can identify the names of all four main candidates, Bell is polling at 28% to Perry's 32%, which is barely outside the margin for error.

Second, Bell (and Perry) will receive a boost from straight-party voting which polls undercount (people answering polls generally deny voting the straight-party ticket but past elections confirm that about half of Texas voters choose a straight-party ticket in a statewide election during a non-presidential year). In recent non-presidential elections, about 23% of the Texas electorate has voted for the straight-party Democratic ticket (and about 28% have voted the straight-party Republican ticket). Moreover, in recent past elections where the Democratic candidate has accepted the party's nomination but essentially chose not to campaign, those types of statewide Democratic candidates have nevertheless received about one third of the vote (despite the fact that pre-election polling consistently identified levels of support much lower than 33% of the Texas electorate for such non-campaigning Democrats). When statewide Democrats mount a campaign, they generally receive about 43% of the vote during non-presidential elections. Undoubtedly, if Bell could achieve Democratic Party unity, he would easily win, but Strayhorn and Kinky will certainly disrupt the party unity for both Democrats and Republicans."

More (including a comparative issue analysis plus more polling analysis implying that c4n3p might not be done just yet and why Kinky's numbers have peaked) here: http://stopkinky.blogspot.com.

[Melissa G]

7. No excuse for no district election

No excuse for no district election

Link for DU discussion here..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=180x36202




By Heber Taylor
The Daily News

Published August 29, 2006 - Updated 51 minutes ago

Gov. Rick Perry should call a special election to fill the unexpired representative term in the 22nd Congressional District.

There’s some urgency to this request. The deadline for calling a special election is today.

The district has been without a congressman since June, when former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay resigned in the middle of a scandal.

On Nov. 7, voters will decide which candidate will assume the seat when Congress convenes in January.

They may as well decide — at the same time — who will represent the district until then.

http://news.galvestondailynews.com/story.lasso?ewcd=44d77283f349a99e

[Melissa G]

8. Grounds For Democratic November Optimism Continue

Townhall.com
Grounds For Democratic November Optimism Continue
By Paul Weyrich
Tuesday, August 29, 2006



Some time ago I predicted that the Democrats would win control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate this November. Despite what I felt was a lucid explanation for that assertion, some readers wanted a more expanded explanation.

Voters are clearly in a sour mood. Not only did Connecticut Senator Joseph I. Lieberman lose his Democratic primary, but a freshman Republican in Michigan lost his House seat. And in what has to be a terrible humiliation, Governor Frank Murkowski came in a distant third in the Alaskan Republican primary. After 22 years in the Senate, this conservative Republican went home and sought out the Governorship. He won handily. But as soon as he took office, after having polled state GOP leaders as to who would be the best nominee to replace himself, he appointed his daughter, Senator Lisa Murkowski. Few saw her winning a full term in her own right but she did, although narrowly, in the Republican landslide election year of 2004. That convinced the Governor that he could be nominated and elected once more. The voters had a different idea. In the end, he had less than 20% of the primary vote. Other incumbents, although victorious, were given a hard time during their own primary elections.


U.S. President George W. Bush poses with a racing suit presented to him by 2005 NASCAR Nextel Cup champion Tony Stewart (R) and his team including team owner Joe Gibbs (3rd R) on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington in this photo taken on January 24, 2006. NASCAR fans, or more specifically "NASCAR dads," were highly courted voters in 2004, a group targeted by conservative Republicans after their earlier successes with suburban "soccer moms" and blue-collar "Reagan Democrats." Picture taken January 24, 2006. To match feature POLITICS NASCAR REUTERS/Jason Reed/Files (UNITED STATES) Representative Chris Cannon (R-UT) comes to mind. This is the sixth-year itch election. Voters going back a century or more, with the exception of the 1998 elections, have punished the party in the White House by handing an average of 30-some seats to the opposition. 1998 was the one and only exception because President William J. Clinton campaigned hard and stoked up racial issues to the point that the Democrats picked up five seats. He told his minority audiences that if enough of them would vote for Democratic candidates Congress would never impeach him. That strategy seemed to work until Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-TX) sent Members one-by-one to a special reading room where the FBI's dossier on Clinton was on tap. Even the skeptics returned from that reading room ready to indict the President of the United States. If the polls are correct then this November truly will be a sixth-year itch election.

snip
Political analysts calculate that whereas only three Republican seats were in danger in early 2005 the number now is higher than 40. Only 15 seats are necessary for the Democrats to win this time. Rumor has it that House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) already measured the office of the Speaker for new drapes and carpeting in the event that she gets to occupy the position.

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/PaulWeyrich/2006/08/29/grounds_for_democratic_november_optimism_continue

[Melissa G]

9. Report Finds Voting Machines Error Prone

Report Finds Voting Machines Error Prone
Karen DeWitt


ALBANY, NEW YORK (2006-08-28)
New York University's Brennan Center finds that the electronic voting machines that the state is thinking of authorizing for purchase are the most prone to mistakes of any kind of system currently in use in the nation. Larry Norden, co- author of the report, says there was a higher rate of lost votes than with other voting systems.

"The machines... were confusing for voters to use," Norden said.

In New York State, there is a law, called the full-face ballot law, which says all of the races for every single office open in New York must be displayed on one single page.

That means New York can't use ATM- like machines that feature just one race on each page, and which allow the voter to scroll sequentially from one election contest to the next. Norden says the more choices that a voter has to make on one page, the more chances for mistakes.

http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wxxi/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=960282§ionID=1

[Melissa G]

10. Election officials fret over ballot compliance

http://washingtontimes.com/

Election officials fret over ballot compliance
August 29, 2006


ANNAPOLIS (AP) -- State election officials notified the Court of Appeals yesterday that they do not have time before the Sept. 12 primary election to remove Tom Perez from the ballot as a Democratic candidate for attorney general.

The State Board of Elections filed a motion asking the court to allow Mr. Perez's name to stay on the ballot, with notices posted prominently in polling places that he is not eligible to serve as attorney general and that ballots cast for him will not be counted.

The state's highest court tossed Mr. Perez off the ballot Friday, saying he had not met the qualification that candidates for attorney general must have practiced law in Maryland for 10 years. Mr. Perez has lived in Montgomery County more than 10 years, but most of his legal work has been done in the District for the federal government.

"There simply is not time in the 15 days remaining before the election for the 24 local boards of election to prepare an entirely new ballot," said Linda H. Lamone, state elections laws administrator.

http://washingtontimes.com/metro/20060828-110409-3541r.htm

[Melissa G]

11. Assistant CA SoS Provided Unofficial Busby/Bilbray Election Results

Thanks to emlev for the post and the DU discussion here..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x447290

BLOGGED BY Emily Levy ON 8/28/2006 7:57PM
Assistant CA SoS Provided Unofficial Busby/Bilbray Election Results to Hastert!
Did Congress Ask California for Permission to Nullify a California Election???
Are You Dizzy Yet?…There's More! Effort to Recall Dennis Hastert Begins!
Guest blogged by Emily Levy

You know by now that Brian Bilbray was sworn in as Congressional Representative before the June 6 election in San Diego County, CA was certified. You might even remember reading on The BRAD BLOG that the official swearing in was preceded by a public "mock" swearing in. You learned last week that this premature act is now being used by the defendants in the Busby/Bilbray election contest as an attempt to nullify the election in California's 50th district. But today (drum roll please) Michael Collins of Scoop Independent News reveals that it was Assistant California SoS Susan Lapsley who provided the election results to the House.

Collins points us to the Congressional Digest…

Representative-elect Brian P. Bilbray presented himself in the well of the House and was administered the Oath of Office by the Speaker. Earlier the Clerk of the House transmitted a facsimile copy of the unofficial returns of the Special Election held on June 6, 2006 from Ms. Susan Lapsley, Assistant Secretary of State for Elections, California Secretary of State Office, indicating that the Honorable Brian P. Bilbray was elected Representative in Congress for the Fiftieth Congressional District of California.

Says Collins in more keen analysis of what the hell is going on here in what can only be seen as an extraordinary power grab by D.C. Republicans…

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3339#more-3339

[Melissa G]

12. Please Folks: Turn our eyes and hearts south to Mexico

Thanks to Wiley50 for the post and the DU discussion here...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2000393
some great links included...

Please Folks: Turn our eyes and hearts south to Mexico

Folks,
Within the next two weeks, our brothers and sisters in Mexico
will stage the revolution
that we should have had the organization
and guts
to do in 2000 and 2004

The people are rising up.
More of them than the government can possibly put down

snip
Please keep informed on the situation
Daily

Here:

www.narconews.com

and here:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oaxacastudyactiongroup/?y...

[Melissa G]

13. Court Told - Constitution Says Votes DON't Have To Be Counted (Raw Story)

Thanks to kpete for the post and the DU discussion here..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1997692

Court Told - Constitution Says Votes DON't Have To Be Counted (Raw Story)
Miriam Raftery
Published: Monday August 28, 2006

.......................

“The specific intent of Congress on June 13 was to deprive this Court of jurisdiction,” Lehto testified. “If they can do that, they can do anything.”

Lehto urged Judge Hofmann to uphold the Constitution as a whole, including provisions which state that the federal government is a government of limited power and that governments receive power from consent of the governed. He further noted that Article 1, section 5 of the Constitution does not prevent recounts and cited state election codes granting the State the power to regulate the time, place and manner of elections. “The State can control the count of votes and the recount of votes,” he added.

Lehto agreed that the core responsibility lies with the House to remove a member of Congress. But he added that the Court has the power to determine if election fraud occurred, and to present any such evidence to Congress. Should Congress fail to act, Congress could suffer political consequences, he observed.

“We have a pattern of evidence to hide the truth in elections,” Lehto argued, adding that it “rises to the level of…aiding and abetting fraud.” He cited evidence of voting machine “sleepovers” which gave “ample opportunity” for just one person to alter the entire election through electronic hacking. He further noted that Haas and Diebold “counted ballots in secrecy.” Lehto added, “We have been prevented and blindfolded from being able to determine if fraud occurred” and suggested that could be “grounds for a new election.”


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1997692

[Melissa G]

14. Brennan Center Press Release.. Improvements in New Voting Technology

Thanks to Vote Trust USA for the link ..
http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1717&Itemid=26


Brennan Center Report Finds Improvements in New Voting Technology Being Implemented in Several State
By Brennan Center Press Release
August 28, 2006
Report Finds Precinct Count Optical Scan and Scrolling Touch Screen Systems Have Lower Lost Vote Rates - Faults Continued Use of Full-Face Ballot Touch Screen Systems






The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, today released a report and policy proposals, concluding that two of the most commonly purchased electronic voting systems today are better at recording voter intentions than older systems like the punchcard system used in Florida in 2000. At the same time the report faulted one electronic voting system under consideration in New York and in use in parts of New Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Kentucky and Tennessee that continues to unduly hamper voters’ ability to easily and accurately cast a ballot for their preferred candidate without undue burden, confusion and delay.



“Ever since the words ‘butterfly ballot’ and ‘hanging chad’ entered the American lexicon in November, 2000 it’s been clear that we need to do more to ensure that voters can easily cast their ballot for the candidate of their choice and make sure their vote is actually counted as intended,” stated Michael Waldman, the Brennan Center’s Executive Director.



The Brennan Center report, The Machinery of Democracy: Usability of Voting Systems, examines, among other things, the extent to which current voting systems correctly record voters’ intended selections, i.e., the systems’ “effectiveness.” Specifically, the report looks at the residual vote rate for each major voting system in the 2004 presidential election. The “residual vote rate” is the difference between the number of ballots cast and the number of valid votes cast in a particular contest. Residual votes thus occur as the result of undervotes (where voters intentionally or unintentionally record no selection) or overvotes (where voters select too many candidates, thus spoiling the ballot for that contest).





Exit polls and other election surveys indicate that slightly less than 1% of voters intentionally abstain from making a selection in presidential elections. Thus, a residual vote rate significantly higher than 1% in a presidential election indicates the extent to which the voting system’s design or the ballot’s design has produced unintentional voter errors.

Significantly, several studies indicate that residual vote rates are higher in low income and minority communities. The Brennan Center study shows that improvements in voting equipment and ballot design produce substantial drops in residual vote rates in such communities. As a result, the failure of a voting system to protect against residual votes is likely to harm low-income and minority voters and their communities more severely than other communities.

Among the report’s key finding’s:

• Precinct Count Optical Scan (PCOS) and Scrolling Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting systems are more accurate at recording voter intention than older voting systems. In 2004, residual vote rates were less than 1% for both technologies.

• Full face DRE systems continue to be plagued with an unacceptably high residual vote rate. In 2000, 2002 and 2004, it exceeded that of either PCOS or scrolling DRE systems.

• Residual vote rates among voters earning less then $25,000 are higher on full faced DRE’s (2.8%), than on either PCOS (1.4%) or Scrolling DRE’s (1.3%).
“The good news is that most states are selecting machines and designing ballots that will record more voters’ choices accurately. The bad news is that major jurisdictions like Philadelphia, and perhaps New York City, plan to use voting technology that is known to have high error rates,” said Lawrence Norden, Associate Counsel at the Brennan Center and lead author of the report.

“This report makes clear that there is a real difference between so called ‘full face’ systems and all other voting technology. Put simply, full face systems make it harder for people to cast their vote. We should be encouraging all election officials to reject full face ballot requirements and adopt technology that is user friendly for all voters,” stated David Kimball, an Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Missouri-St. Louis, and a co-author of the report.

The report also makes a number of recommendations to increase the accuracy and ease of use of electronic voting machines, no matter what system a jurisdiction is using. This includes conducting usability testing on ballots before finalizing their design, using plain language instructions in both English and other languages commonly used in the jurisdiction, and placing such instructions in the top left of the ballot frame.


Related Documents

The Brennan Center Voting Technology Initiative
The Machinery of Democracy: Usability of Voting Systems (August 28, 2006)

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1717&Itemid=26

[Melissa G]

15. Web Site to Outline Voting Options for Troops Overseas

Thanks to John Gideon for the link...
http://nyjtimes.com/cover/08-27-06/VotingOptionsForTroopsOverseas.htm

Web Site to Outline Voting Options for Troops Overseas



By Sara Wood
AFPS

A new Web site being developed by the Defense Department will provide information on electronic voting options for servicemembers and other U.S. citizens living overseas.

The Integrated Voting Alternative Site, which is scheduled to be accessible Sept. 1, will include information from all 55 states and territories on the various electronic ballot request and delivery alternatives available to U.S. citizens living overseas covered under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, said Scott Wiedmann, deputy director of the Federal Voting Assistance Program. The IVAS will be found on the Federal Voting Assistance Program Web site, and will be updated to reflect changes to state laws, he said.

The by-mail ballot system is still the preferred, and most used, voting method for troops and citizens overseas, Wiedmann said, but it isn’t always available, so DoD developed electronic alternatives starting in 1990.

“Servicemembers, just like any other American citizen, have the right to participate in the electoral process,” he said.

http://nyjtimes.com/cover/08-27-06/VotingOptionsForTroopsOverseas.htm

[Melissa G]

16. Alaska: Diebold Failures Mar Primary Election

Thanks to Vote Trust USA for the post!


Alaska: Diebold Failures Mar Primary Election
By Warren Stewart, VoteTrustUSA
August 27, 2006
Another primary election has been marred by voting technology failures. As usual, election officials were quick to defend the technology and the integrity of election results, eagerly dismissing any concerns. According to an Associated Press article problems with Alaska's Diebold TSx touchscreen voting machines forced elections officials to hand count and manually upload vote totals from several precincts across the state. Touchscreen machines in Kodiak, Nenana, Healy, Tok, and Unalakleet counties were unable to upload their vote totals to the Division of Elections' central computing system.

Division of Elections Director and former Mrs. Alaska Whitney Brewster (pictured at right) noted "just because they're not being uploaded doesn't mean they're not being recorded accurately." Of course there is no reason to assume that they were recorded accurately either.

State Democratic Party spokeswoman and former state representative Kay Brown was quoted in an Ars Tecnica post "there are many systematic problems with Diebold machines that have been identified in many contexts," and feels that the occurence of "technical glitches with the machines is not surprising." Brown has been a vocal critic of Diebold's technology since a 2004 election in which a catastrophic hardware malfunction caused the company's machines to miscount votes and report inexplicable 200 percent voter turnout in just under half of Alaska's House districts.



Brown has written several articles criticizing Diebold, including one posted earlier this month on VoteTrustUSA in which she observed that Diebold's hardware may have been certified fraudulently, and is therefore illegal according to Alaska state law.

While Brewster was defending her machines Brown pointed out that the slowdown caused by the touchscreen machines is indicative of larger problems with the machines. “I can say there are many systematic problems with Diebold machines that have been identified in many contexts. That there were technical glitches with the machines is not surprising, and it’s one indication of the kinds of things that can go wrong with the machines and it’s something to be concerned about.”

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1712&Itemid=113

[Melissa G]

17. Indiana: ES&S Agrees To Pay State $750,000

Thanks to Vote Trust USA for the article!





Indiana: ES&S Agrees To Pay State $750,000
By Warren Stewart, VoteTrustUSA
August 28, 2006
MicroVote Still Under Investigation

Indiana Secretary of State Todd Rokita has announced the settlement of an enforcement proceeding concerning Election Systems & Software (ES&S) in which the voting machine vendor agreed to contribute $245,000 to help the State fund a Voting System Technical Oversight Program (VSTOP). According to the Secretary of State’s office, that program will provide counties and the State with much needed technical support in the use of election equipment and the establishment of voting system standards. In addition to the VSTOP contribution, ES&S has agreed to pay almost $500,000 to the 27 counties it had contracted with to pay for training videos, onsite support and additional services such as ballot layout assistance and voter outreach through the 2007 elections, especially for disabled voters.

The state's began investigating ES&S even before the state’s May 2 primary, when Rokita's office accused it of breaking the law by providing poor service, defective equipment, and uncertified voting system software. The problems included improperly programmed memory packs used to tally votes in machines, mistakes on ballots and missed deadlines. Later, the investigation was expanded to include problems that several Southern Indiana counties had after the polls closed for the primary. Rokita's office had frozen over $300,000 in HAVA payments to counties pending the completion of the investigation. That money now will be released.

The state still is investigating separate complaints involving Indianapolis-based MicroVote General Corp., according to Rokita.

The ES&S agreement resolves the dispute without any fines or judgments and allows ES&S to deny any criminal wrongdoing. ES&S Senior Vice President John Groh acknowledged customer service had not lived up to the company's own standards. According to an Associated Press article, Groh said ES&S had compiled a "bible" of lessons learned from the Indiana situation and was changing some of its business practices as a result. ES&S has doubled the size of its election support staff for all states, adding about 50 workers overall, and is reconfiguring its staff into teams for each state, he said.

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1714&Itemid=113

[Melissa G]

18. Mexico: Lopez Obrador ‘Will Not Accept’ Election Ruling Favoring Calderón

Mexico: Lopez Obrador ‘Will Not Accept’ Election Ruling Favoring Calderón
August 28, 2006
Mexico’s top electoral court has thrown out allegations of massive fraud in last month’s presidential election, handing almost certain victory to conservative Felipe Calderón.

Leftist challenger Andrés Manuel López Obrador says the judges’ unanimous rejection of his complaints is “offensive and unacceptable for millions of Mexicans.” He vowed not to recognize a government led by Calderón and the ruling National Action Party.

The seven-judge Federal Electoral Tribunal reported it examined 375 challenges to the July 2 election, and discarded about one-half of one percent of the 41 million ballots, due to irregularities. The court said it found no evidence of massive fraud, or any indication that further recounts would tip the election from Calderón to López Obrador.

The court’s action cost each of the two main presidential candidates roughly the same amount of votes, and shaved fewer than 5,000 votes from Calderón’s reported victory margin. Earlier tabulations had shown the former energy minister winning by 244,000 votes - less than six-tenths of one percent.

http://mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/28/mexico-lopez-obrador-will-not-accept-election-ruling-favoring-calderon/

[Melissa G]

19. Recount Decision Postponed

Recount Decision Postponed



Disgruntled voters seeking an invalidation or recount of the June election between Rep. Brian Bilbray and Francine Busby will have to wait a few more days to find out if a state court will hear their case.

Superior Court Judge Yuri Hoffman said today that he'll rule Tuesday whether he has the authority to hear their case.

The suit, filed on behalf of two voters against Bilbray and Mikel Haas, the San Diego County registrar of voters, alleges that voting machines -- some of which were taken home by poll workers in the days before the election -- might have been tampered with. Moreover, it alleges that Haas "deliberately concealed and frustrated the ability of the public to determine whether or not fraud occurred," by restricting the public's ability to examine records related to the election.

David King, Bilbray's attorney, conceded that the judge could order a recall but argued that the state court lacked the jurisdiction to unseat a member of Congress. Under the Federal Contested Elections Act, King said, the plaintiffs should have filed a complaint with the House Administration Committee, which could have considered the matter.

http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/articles/2006/08/28/this_just_in/565recount.txt

[Melissa G]

20. Why the Republicans can win elections -- despite their poll numbers, scand

BuzzFlash interview: Tom Hamburger
Why the Republicans can win elections -- despite their poll numbers, scandals, and awful record


"One Party Country:The Republican Plan for Dominance in the 21st Century" is a must read for anyone who wants to fully understand the strengths of the GOP in the mechanics of maintaining party dominance -- that is to say, in addition to outright stealing elections. Written by two Los Angeles Times reporters, it dispassionately details the Republican Party/Rove infrastructure for putting in place institutional and strategic obstacles that make it extremely difficult for Democrats to return to power in any branch of the national government. One area of keen interest for BuzzFlash in "One Party Country" is the means by which the GOP has been able to "microtarget" voters through the creation of a massive data base, not unlike -- we guess -- the one assembled by the NSA. For all we know, ChoicePoint (the GOP/Bush data mining firm that was responsible for the infamous Florida voter "felon's purge" in 2000) is behind both tht NSA data mining and the GOP data mining "vault." Nonetheless, microtargeting has been a key tool in boosting GOP voter turnout. It is used both for positive and seedy pitches to voters, appealing to both policy issues and the basest of emotional manipulation. With the decline of the Democratic urban "precinct" voter base, technology has become an increasingly important election tool. The Republicans, who are the party of marketing triumphing over substance, know the tricks of the trade.

snip
Tom Hamburger: Microtargeting is a technique used in commercial marketing as well as political campaigns to identify very narrow niches of interest. It’s also known as niche marketing. It refers to the careful, very specific targeting of individuals -- in this case, voters -- by special interests, buying habits, and demographics. The Republican Party has made exceptionally good use of this technique, employing it very aggressively in 2004 in battleground states like Ohio and New Mexico. We make the case that microtargeting and the use of very sophisticated databases explains the Republican edge in those states, and thus even explains the results of the 2004 election.

snip
Tom Hamburger: Felicia Hill lives outside of Dayton, and she’s married to a UAW union auto worker. She's a registered Democrat who has traditionally voted for Democratic presidential candidates. In the rule book by which politics is traditionally played, she would not be a target for Republican Party mobilization. She simply wouldn’t be on the list of people who were likely to vote Republican. But, thanks to this database, which the Republicans call Voter Vault, the Republican party activists in Ohio had some detailed information about Felicia Hill. Though she was in a Democratic precinct, had voted in Democratic primaries in the past, and was an African-American woman married to an auto worker, they knew she also sends her children to private schools. She’s a member of a conservative Evangelical church. She is a member of a golf club and subscribes to golfing magazines.
These accumulated interests were known to Republicans who were actively engaged in an African-American outreach effort in Ohio in 2004. And so Felicia Hill, for the first time during this campaign, found herself the recipient of a multitude of Republican Party entreaties, many of them personal telephone calls inviting her to specific events. Some were mailers that appealed to her special interests. Because she sends her kids to private schools, for example, she is interested in school vouchers -- and that’s an issue the Republicans are talking a lot about, the Democrats not so much. She told us she found herself subtly feeling for the first time that the Republican Party was a place where she could feel at home.

http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemID=21286

[rumpel]

21. On DU: Poll worker fired over touch-screen voting comment

Thanks to amybhole

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2004322

[Kurovski]

22. Thank you, Melissa G!

The "G" stands for "Genuinely Great"! :applause:

[Melissa G]

26. Thank You Kurovski! We appreciate the K&R...

applause is nice too...:hi:

[kpete]

23. K&R

[rumpel]

24. NV: Angle seeks new GOP primary for Nevada congressional seat

Las Vegas Sun
Today: August 29, 2006 at 16:0:29 PDT

By SANDRA CHEREB
ASSOCIATED PRESS


RENO, Nev. (AP) - Assemblywoman Sharron Angle went to court Tuesday seeking a new Republican primary election, bucking pressure from a high-ranking party leader to end her contest against Dean Heller for Nevada's 2nd District congressional seat.

Angle lost to Heller by 421 votes in the Aug. 15 primary. The GOP victor faces Democrat Jill Derby, am 18-year university system regent, in the Nov. 7 general election.

At a brief news conference in Reno, Angle said she's pursuing her quest to defend "every person's right to vote."

"This to me is the higher calling," Angle said.

During questioning by reporters, Angle acknowledged she received a phone call from U.S. Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., urging her to abandon the effort.

According to Angle, Ensign told her, "Sometimes you have to sacrifice your principals for the greater good."

But Ensign insisted on Tuesday he said nothing of the sort.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/nevada/2006/aug/29/082910230.html

[freedomfries]

25. K & R