Last year, a child predicted this result and called for action

Debateusa doesn't really have an archieve so this is currently not up anywhere. But Natasha gave me permission to post the entire article because of its relevance to what happened Tuesday. What I want to know, is why we didn't act when there was still time?

Voting in America - Is It DOA?

By Natasha H. (age 12).

"Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes, decide everything" - Joseph Stalin.

On December 12, 2000, when the U.S. Supreme Court decided the outcome of the election did not matter and effectively appointed George W. Bush President, Americans saw the death of the right to vote in America. When the recount results showed Gore won Florida and the Presidency six out of six ways of counting all the votes, the news media buried the outcome of the count at the end of articles or omitted it entirely from their stories and the public didn't care enough to take their county back. The fact that an impostor who had stolen the White House failed to stop the events of 9/11 didn't matter. If Americans wanted to restore Democracy and true security, they would have to act. They would have to stand up like responsible citizens and do something other than going about their daily routines in the usual manner.

In 2002, when voters in Florida and Texas watched voting computers change their votes from Democrat to Republican before their eyes, no one cared - not even the DNC. The DNC had had advance warning about the problem. Yet, did the DNC demand a voter-verifiable paper trail for the 2002 election? Did it demand that all voting computers without one be shutdown? If the answer to these question had not been "no," Americans might have seen a different outcome in terms of who controlled Congress and in the state races, such as in Georgia (where the computers lost votes that had already been counted for the Democratic governor and changed the outcome of the governor's race overnight) and Texas (where the Republican gained control of both houses for the first time since Reconstruction). In some races, the computers gave the Republicans a vote count of 18,181 - which translates to A-HA-HA. Yet the DNC and the voters weren't smart enough to figure out that the joke was on them.

Fortune Magazine recently ranked paperless voting machines as the worst technology of the year. Studies by Johns Hopkins University and UCLA have shown massive flaws in the electronic voting systems with the potential to change the results of elections. Recently, Walden O'Dell, the chief executive of Diebold, which was on the verge of putting it's voting systems into Ohio, wrote a letter stating that he was committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to George W. Bush in 2004. Mr. O'Dell is very active in the Bush re-election campaign. Presidential candidate John Edwards recently called on Bush to return Diebold's more than $100,000 in contributions. Resident Bush might follow through with this - the day after he finds weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Chuck Hagel knows the value of computerized voting. He is the former CEO of ES&S (Election Systems and Software), a voting software company that saw him through two upset victories in Nebraska in 1996 and 2002, and is currently a major shareholder in McCarthy & Company, ES&S's parent company. In 1996, he became the first Republican to win a Senate victory in Nebraska in 24 years. He might have won legitimately but, given the obvious bias of ES&S and the lack of a voter-verifiable paper trail to prove who won, there is a great deal of question regarding whether he actually won or should instead turn the office over to the real winners of the two races.

One of many problems with computerized voting is that, in America, the programs are not in the public domain ready to be torn apart and inspected by any amateur or expert computer programmer to check for accuracy or rigging. They remain the property of the software corporations (mostly Republican) who create them and are licensed to the registrars of voters. Because there is no paper trail on most of these machines, no voter can prove how they actually voted. Because of the secrecy of the source code, the registrars of voters cannot credibly assure the public of the accuracy of the mechanism. This is in contrast to Australia, where the source code for the voting software can be viewed over the Internet. Anyone can check out the accuracy. Why do we deserve less?

Where are the riots about the loss of the right to elect leaders? Why aren't millions marching in the street demanding to be re-enfranchised? Americans grow up letting others think for them, first their teachers and their peers, and then the government and the news media. In grade school, natural curiosity and a quest for truth are considered grounds for drugging kids into normality and subservience. Now when common sense tells us that there is something funny going on with the voting, Americans would rather sit and accept what the government and the media tells them rather than check out the truth for themselves. With the voting computers, Americans have no way to check out the truth. They cannot watch the votes being counted or check into the integrity of the program doing the counting. The votes are counted in secret by counters who may have been programmed to count each Republican vote three times while only counting one out of every three Democratic votes. The counters can dispose of the evidence of the actual count at the same time. If a candidate cannot win an election, what better way to win than by using an easily riggable, secret system that can guarantee the desired victory while eliminating any evidence that the candidate really lost. Americans might have a more accurate result if they let a game of cards decide an election.

Last April, at the Orange County Democratic Party Central Committee meeting, this writer's father performed a demonstration of a computer program he wrote. Instead of using hundreds of thousands of lines of code in which most voting corporations can hide the rigging, my dad's program had less than 300 lines of code. It had security. Each voter received a password so only eligible people could vote. The voters were allowed to verify their votes on the computer before they were counted. In every case the votes were verified by the voters as being recorded accurately. The first question asked whether the voter was for or against the legalization of child slave labor in California. The second question involved a choice between Osama Bin Laden and Bill Lockyer for governor. When the computer counted the votes, Osama Bin Laden was the Orange County Democratic Party's unanimous choice for governor. The group also unanimously supported the legalization of child slave labor in California. There was no paper trail and so no one could make a case that they had voted otherwise. Strangely enough, shortly after voting unanimously against Bill Lockyer, members of the OC Democratic Central Committee threw Bill Lockyer a wedding reception. Now before anyone just jumps to the conclusion that the Orange County Democrats are a bunch of terrorist-sympathizers or child haters, this writer has a confession. I watched the members cast their votes. In reality, Lockyer won by a large margin and child slave labor went down by a sizable margin as well. However, if this had been a real election with no onlookers, Osama would be in Sacramento and I would be slaving away. My dad selected 100% for the winning results as he knew some people might play games and he wanted to make the point. However, he could have chosen 51% for Osama's victory, or any other percentage he wanted.

My family and I want Dennis Kucinich to be the next President of the United States. So if electronic voting cannot be stopped by then and rigged computers rule the primaries and the general election, I hope my dad is asked to write the program for these voting computers. Dennis normally wins elections in his district (which is half made up of Republicans) with 74% of the vote, so this would be a good margin to program for his victory in both the primaries and the general election. Unfortunately, most of the voting software is owned by Republican-controlled corporations, my dad is too honest to support the theft of democracy - even to put the best candidate (Dennis) into office - and Dennis, himself, is the essence of honesty.

Besides, all Dennis needs to win the nomination is honesty in the media and an honest counting of the votes. That is why, of all the candidates, Dennis has taken the lead in fighting an attempt by Diebold to suppress information about electronic voting and the lead in co-sponsoring and calling for passage of Rush Holt's "Voter Confidence and Increased Accountability Act of 2003," H.R. 2239. "...this bill would:

· Require all voting machines to produce a voter-verified paper record for use in manual audits and recounts

· Ban the use of undisclosed software and wireless communications devises in voting systems

· Require that electronic voting systems be provided for persons with disabilities by January 1, 2006

· Require all voting systems to meet these requirements in time for the general election in November 2004

· Require that electronic voting systems be provided for persons with disabilities by January 1, 2006

· Require mandatory surprise recounts in 0.5% of domestic jurisdictions and 0.5% of overseas jurisdictions." <1>

Three bills have been introduced in the Senate. These were proposed by Bob Graham, Hillary Clinton and Barbara Boxer. Bob Graham's is the only one that is identical to Rush Holt's bill. If Graham's and Holt's bills pass their respective houses, there will be no need for a conference committee to slow down the implementation. It is important for every member of Congress who wants election results to be certain rather than in doubt to back Holt's and Graham's bills. It will help give all the candidates a fair chance. Because of the wide ownership of voting software companies by Republicans, it is also in the interest of Republicans to push these bills through so they will be able to prove they really did get elected.

In the meantime, in Orange County, California, the Democratic Party is encouraging every eligible voter to register for permanent absentee status. This is also good advice for anyone living in an area where there is computerized voting with no paper trail. As a last resort, absentee ballots will serve as a voter verifiable paper trail.

It's time for every true patriot in America to stand up and demand restoration of the right to vote and to have our votes accurately counted before the 2004 election. Bush's first term has brought national disasters of an unprecedented scale, wars, international ridicule and contempt for the United States, an overthrow of our Bill of Rights, recession, joblessness, poverty for a large sector of American society, mad cow disease and the extinguishment of the right of Americans to have their votes determine their future. Imagine what horrors another four years of Bush would bring. Now is the time to act. Demand the immediate passage of Rush Holt's and Bob Graham's bills. Call everyone you know and ask them to demand passage of these bills. Refuse to support any member of Congress who will not get behind these two bills. If we sit back now, we may never get another chance at democracy.

1. http://www.kucinich.us/supporter_resources/isuespdfs/ElectronicVoting.pdf

DebateUSA.com © 2003

The text contained on this page was submitted by either the author and/or their legal representative, who have willingly opted to display their work on this site. This material is NOT in the Public Domain and all rights and privileges are reserved. All context copyright © of respective author and/or DebateUSA.com are reserved and may only be copied or used on any website, newsgroups, or anything having to do with the Internet with the expressed written consent of respective author and/or management of DebateUSA.com. Any and all reproduction of this work MUST contain proper accreditation to both author and this web site. This work is used by permission.