BBV: Why is The League of Women Voters against paper ballots?

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/15/opinion/L15VOTE.html

To the Editor:

In our view, a system requiring a voter-verified paper trail will fail to add significantly to security while adding costs and complications to the voting process and undermining disability and language access (editorial, Dec. 8).

A federal law passed in 2002 requires electronic machines to retain a paper record of every vote cast; voters must have the opportunity to review their votes before that permanent ballot is produced.

Instead of a voter-verified paper trail, there are safeguards that should be put in place now to improve security for the 2004 election. Among these are a prohibition on wireless and Internet connections and the development and enforcement of statewide security plans for voting machines.

KAY J. MAXWELL
President, League of Women Voters
of the United States
Washington, Dec. 9, 2003
--------------
I can't simply accept their arguments as sincere, because they don't make sense. Obviously, the ability to do a recount with paper ballots checked by the voters adds significantly to security. Obviously, a touchscreen machine which can display a foreign language can continue to do so after a printer is added.

Does the League of Women Voters have a conflict of interest?

not making ANY accusations here, just suggesting that understanding the political make up of the leadership of LWV might be something to check out.

If you think its impossible, thin AARP.

Ms. Maxwell is a member of the board of the Connecticut Public Affairs Network and a former board member of Planned Parenthood of Connecticut Public Policy Fund and the Women’s Campaign School at Yale University. She is a member of the International Women’s Forum, the Independent Majority Political Action in Connecticut (IMPACT), the Women’s Foreign Policy Group, and the Congressional District 4 Advisory Council of the Connecticut Permanent Commission on the Status of Women. Throughout the 1990s, Ms. Maxwell was an active member of The Forum for World Affairs and currently serves as a member of its Advisory Council.

http://www.lwv.org/about/president.html

That's not a conservative organization, is it?

But rather who was on the committee/working group/whatever that put together this recommendation.

The US has become a very strange place. What once didn't seem like conservative organizations may have become just that.

It is hard to imagine why someone would be opposed to a paper trail. So the task is to try to gather available information and see who contributed to this decision.

Can officials at the League of Women Voters accept gifts from lobbyists?

I have no evidence they have. I'm just asking whether it's legal.

I'm in favor of the paper ballot legislation, but the arguments against it make sense to me. Ideally a debate, with hearings, would happen in Congress.

I asked David Dill here at DU about the opposition from groups like this, and he said they were sincere but misguided.

How does adding a printer affect a toucscreen machine displaying a foreign language?

If their arguments make sense to you, please explain.

adds a mechanical element to the machines that wasn't there before.

Also the added cost of putting the printers on.

Also the new procedures for handling the paper.

two different issues.

Diebold makes ATMs.

The core of an ATM is the paper.

Saying that a company that has actually had to re-engineer their processes to EXCLUDE paper would charge more to add it back is outrageous.

.....it's far easier and less expensive to maintain the small thermal printers than it is to maintain the old lever type machines still in use in places like New York. How often do you think the the printers in the average cash register or bank cash machine require maintenance? :shrug:
Keep in mind those machines are in use every day, some like the ones in stores open 24/7 are in use around the clock and still require very little maintenance! The average voting machine is used only once or twice a year and only about 1000 or fewer people vote on each machine.
The OEM cost of the printer in any quantity is less than $50.00 each.
When you look at it in the context of a machine that will be used to elect those in charge of a multi-trillion dollar economy, the costs are negligible. :)

:kick:

Actually, it's 150 - 300 votes per machine, even in a large polling place.

I've got that quote from several vendors.

Even a newer, home quality type laser jet could handle that.

......I was being generous! :P

the lazy, the ignorant and the diabolical.

From what I've heard the directive inside the LWV on the position against VVPB came from the top down, when usually LWV goes bottom-up.

Obviously they've had outside influences on their decision based on the lack of simple reasoning that their arguments reflect. These same arguments have been reflected by other organizations so its nothing new. It is just a shame that these people do not understand technology and the obvious dangers it plays to the votes of the people. With a VVPB these dangers are lessened, but they don't get it.

to machines, make the machines less accessible to the disabled?

And you'll see they have a history in enabling vote fraud.

:mad:

Maybe they're pulling an AARP. It might be good to see who is in their leadership and see where they get their funding. Follow the money is usally a good way to unravel these types of mysteries.

Yes, this decision came from the top down and is counter to the way the League does things.

There are many, many League members upset about this.

However, the body of the League still feels like they have to follow the "rules," even though the hierarchy did not.

Unfortunately, that works in favor of Maxwell and crew. They can and probably will be voted out, but the damage is done.

As an individual, a member can oppose the machines, but not as a League representative.

I would encourage all League members to throw out tradition this one time, and do what is necessary to oust Maxwell and gang.

"It is safe to say that almost nobody in America is aware of the activities of NES on election night. The on-air scripts of each TV network during the years since the founding of NES have seldom, if ever, mentioned its existence. The silence smacks of collusion among press "competitors" to keep NES away from public scrutiny A portion of the study read:

"The United States government has no elections office and does not attempt to administer congressional elections. The responsibility for the administration of elections and certification of winners in the United States national election rests with a consortium of private entities, including 111,000 members of the national League of Women Voters. The formal structure of election administration in the United States is not capable of providing the major TV networks with timely results of the presidential and congressional elections. In the case of counting actual ballots on national election night, public officials have abdicated responsibility of aggregation of election night vote totals to a private organization, News Election Service of New York (NES). NES is a wholly-owned subsidiary joint-venture of national television networks ABC, CBS and NBC and the press wire-services AP and UPI. This private organization performs without a contract: without supervision by public officials. It makes decisions concerning its duties according to its own criteria. The question and accountability of News Election Service has not arisen in the nation's press because the responsibility NES now has in counting the nation's votes was assumed gradually over a lengthy period without ever being evaluated as an item on the public agenda. (Underlined for emphasis. Ed.)

This privately owned vote counting cartel (NES) uses the vast membership of the network-subsidized League of Women Voters as field personnel whose exclusive job is to phone in unofficial vote totals to NES on election night. NES also operates a "master computer" in New York City, located on 34th Street. (Because the League of Women Voters has about it a perfume of volunteerism and do-goodism, the fact that it is actually a political club with a political agenda and a hungry treasury is shrouded by the false myth that it is a reliable election-day watchdog.)

The NES mainframe computer has the capability, via telephone lines, of "talking" back and forth with county and state government mainframes. During the important 60-day certification period after an election, the counts in the county and state mainframes can still be manipulated by outsiders to conform to earlier TV "projections."

Without this capability of using the NES mainframe to "balance the books " between initial network projections of Bush as "winner" and the final official totals published two months later, Bush may have lost the election to Dukakis.

It is the prescription for the covert stealing of America."

Bottom of page here: http://www.votescam.com/chap1.html

.....by our old friend R. Doug Lewis from the Election Center.

Please contact the League of Woman Voters and let them know how YOU feel and that you won't support them. Better yet, let them know you will activly fight them over your right to open verifiable elections! Contact both the national and your local offices.

League of Women Voters

1730 M Street NW, Suite 1000,
Washington, DC 20036-4508
Phone: 202-429-1965
Fax: 202-429-0854

Contact us

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

:kick:

Dear Dr. X:

Your email was referred to me by the LWV of Massachusetts office staff. I have forwarded your publication to Jeanette Senecal at the LWVUS office, as she is the national League staff person following the voting machines issue. I have also shared your paper with board members of LWV of Massachusetts who are involved with election issues. Thank you for sending it to us.

Regarding your question, each level of the League (local, state and national), by action of its board of directors, makes decisions about how it will interpret its positions on issues and whether and how it will take action in support of those positions. State and local Leagues are thoroughly involved in the process of studying national issues and advising LWVUS on what new national positions should be adopted, but once a national position is established, the LWVUS board bears the responsibility of interpreting it as new circumstances present themselves. The LWV of the United States, therefore, did not consult formally with the LWV of Massachusetts or the LWV of Boston in connection with the issue of paper verification for electronic voting machines, though it is possible that informal dialogue may have occurred.

Though I'm sure you are following this issue on the LWVUS website, I want to make sure you have seen the latest LeaguE-Voice Newsletter, which contains the following item and link:

>WHAT DOES THE LEAGUE HAVE TO SAY ABOUT ELECTRONIC VOTING?

>You can read the League's position as well as other expert opinions on Direct Recording >Electronic (DRE) Voting Systems at: >http://www.lwv.org/join/elections/hava_resources.html

Thank you for your interest in this important issue. I understand from our state League office staff that you are not a member of the League of Women Voters, and I would like to invite you to consider joining us. For more information about the League and about joining, please visit our website, www.lwvma.org, where you can request membership information or sign up and ask to be billed for dues. If you are interested in joining the LWV of Boston, please contact the LWVM office (617-523-2999 or lwvma@lwvma.org) and ask them to have the LWV of Boston contact you about membership.

Again, thank you for contacting us, Dr. X. We appreciate your interest and would be delighted if you choose to become a League member.

Best regards,

Erin

Erin S. Pastuszenski
LWVM Membership & Training VP
epastuszenski@lwvma.org
ErinSP@aol.com
508-359-8064
fax: 508-359-8064
Your email:

From: X
Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 4:10 PM
To: lwvma@lwvma.org
Subject: Where you stand on paper ballots.



Hello, I realized a few days ago that the official position of the
League regarding electronic voting machines and paper ballots
is based on wrong information. I am told that the national board
never consulted the local chapters on this issue. I would like
to know if the Boston chapter was ever consulted. I have a thourough
document written by an expert in the field, rebutting the points
made by the League regarding this issue.I include it, hoping you
will find the time to read it and distribute it. This is a serious issue,
and I believe the League is being seriously misled by voting machine vendors
on this issue. I have no conflict of interest in all this, I'm not in the
election business and don't hold any public position. I can provide you
with additional information if you like.Thank you very much!

As Michael Moore points out, ten dedicated progressives in any community is enough to take over any local "Democratic Club". Imagine what a well-financed effort could do.

and I say, why can't they have it?

There is no reason for the LWV to do this, except that they are actively being Freeped.

LWV is dying. Their membership is in a steady decline. In my state it's going down the tubes, quick.

I spoke to the head of LWV in my state. She thinks the decision was made before they had the information they have now. She was here, speaking to a group who thought they were interested in forming a chapter - and I think she was surprised at the vehemence with which their position on BBV was opposed. It seems like LWV isn't listening to the chapters - but that may be a communication breakdown caused by the decline in organization and membership.

.......as in Free Republic had nothing to do with this!
This was a well orchestrated attempt by R. Doug Lewis, The Election Center and a number of other right wing thugs to subvert democracy by manipulating the public perception of the problems inherent in our voting system. They started years ago by helping to found the National Association of Secretaries of State and the National Association of State Election Directors. The very people who are in charge of how our elections are held on a state by state basis.
They then started a campaign to win over support of the national leaders of groups like the League of Woman Voters and the American Association of People with Disabilities If you check out the above web sites you'll find one common denominator, paperless elections! (Well two common denominators, BOGUS REASONS for paperless elections!) They might have pulled it off if not for people like Bev Harris, DemActivist and Eloreal. They are the real heros in all of this. They've done the bulk of the work in making this a national issue. Now it's our turn. Write, call, fax and e-mail anyone and everyone you can as if your future depended on it.
IT DOES! :scared:

Here's a poll you can vote on from the Federal Election Reform Network which is the home of the National Commission on Federal Election Reform, organized by the Miller Center of Public Affairs and The Century Foundation to recommend ways to improve the accuracy and fairness of federal elections.

The current poll question and results for this week are:

Would you feel confident about your vote using a computerized voting machine?

26% - Very Confident
22% - Mostly Confident
22% - Somewhat Uncertain
30% - Not at all Confident

52% are 'Somewhat Uncertain' or 'Not at all Confident'! This is an issue we CAN and MUST win! :evilgrin: Please take a moment to register your vote.

Kick!

The link for dosen't work with the forum software! Click on this link for the computer voting confidence poll!

http://www.reformelections.org/index.php

Thanks! :evilgrin:

:kick:

Thanks for posting this. I just emailed three LWV offices about my concern with their position.

Come on folks, every letter helps keep the heat on them! :evilgrin:

:kick:

and pushed for electronic voting. this was their baby since 2000, and they didn't assess the security risks. Admitting it now, they fear, would undo the plan they've already had in place before BBV irregularities were discovered.

this is a huge organization that runs like a bureaucracy. They've also invested a ton in their anti-chad campaign. Flip flopping may set the organization back a bit in the short run - but sticking to their guns could be devastating to them in the future. They made a bad decision and have to live with it one way or another. I hope they can see the big picture.

I don't think they're evil, just proud.

......have a relationship that pre-dates 2000! :evilgrin:

:kick:

wrong side of this issue.

My first guess is some sort of funding quid pro quo. Who ponies up the biggest donations to the LWV?

to AARP. They've been taken over by conservatives.