Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News Friday 12/16/05

Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News Friday 12/16/05




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.ph...

3. Re-post stories and announcements you find on DU, providing a link to the original thread with thanks to the Original Poster, too.

4. Start a discussion thread by re-posting a story you see on this thread.




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

Voting future needs you


Will your vote count? Will your vote in 2006 for the crucial gubernatorial, senate and congressional races be what you intended? And beyond that, in the next presidential election?

The New York State Board of Elections has posted draft voting machine regulations for the new machines New York must use next year. But, alarmingly, the proposed standards do not require voting machine vendors to submit their optical scan voting machines for certification by the NYSBOE. There have been too many instances of equipment “failures” around the state and nation and of votes not being accurately counted. The best way to protect the vote is to ensure that there is a permanent voter-marked paper trail record that cannot be lost or altered electronically. And the only machine that simply counts votes such that they cannot be tampered with is the optical scanner.


The NYSBOE is holding public hearings this month in three locations around the state: Rochester was Dec. 13, Albany is Dec, 16 and New York City is on Dec. 20. Written comments are also being accepted until mid-January.

Comments may be submitted to: New York State Board of Elections, 40 Steuben St., Albany, NY 12207-2108 or by e-mail to ldaghlian@elections.state.ny.us.

December 16, 2005, 11:32 AM EST

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/connecticut/ny-bc-ct--diebold-investorl1216dec16,0,1567211.story?coll=ny-region-apconnecticut

CLEVELAND -- Two law firms representing investors are suing Diebold Inc., claiming the Ohio company made misleading comments about its electronic voting machine business that led to artificially high share prices.

The lawsuits filed this week in U.S. District Court in Cleveland claim Diebold was "unable to assure the quality and working order of its voting machine products." The plaintiff claims the company tried to conceal the problems from investors and that Diebold lacked the internal controls necessary to accurately monitor its financial performance.

Both lawsuits seek class-action status.

The North Canton-based company on Friday denied the allegations and said in a statement that "the lawsuits are without merit, and it intends to vigorously defend itself against all allegations."...

Area voting machines could have flaws

by Shane Mizer, 12/16/2005

AccuVote machines used in Humboldt County elections may be vulnerable to hacking, according to a recent test in Florida.

The machines succumbed to security expert tampering in a Leon County, Fla., test observed by elections supervisor Ion Sancho.

snip

Dave Berman, a member of the local electoral reform watchdog group the Voter Confidence Committee and author of guvwurld.blogspot.com, has recently called for McWilliams’ resignation due to his failure to properly safeguard Humboldt County’s elections.

“The conditions for our elections right now guarantee that we are going to have an inconclusive outcome because we’ve got paperless electronic voting machines across the country,” Berman said. “If we can’t verify the vote with a recount, how can we know what the true outcome is? Therefore there is no reason for confidence in the results that are given, just blind trust.”

Diebold spokesman David Bear claimed Sancho’s test was not conducted in a real environment and therefore does not reflect a realistic outcome.

“At no time has he ever included us in his test or followed any industry standards or his own policies and procedures on how to properly conduct an election,” Bear said. “It’s somewhat foolish to be providing people with the ability to bypass securities by supplying passwords and unfettered access. It’s sort of analogous that if I give you the keys to my house and the password to my alarm of course you can get into my house.”

snip

http://www.eurekareporter.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?ArticleID=6504

Discussion:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x405434

Elections supervisor: Some Diebold voting machines can be hacked

Thanks to John Gideon for the link!

BILL KACZOR
Associated Press

TALLAHASSEE, Fla.- Tests show some Diebold voting machines used in Florida and elsewhere around the nation can be hacked by election office insiders to change results, Leon County Supervisor of Elections Ion Sancho charged Thursday.
Sancho said the tests on optical machines that scan paper ballots, conducted for his office and a monitoring group, also indicated they can be manipulated without leaving any evidence of tampering.
"This is not supposed to be possible," Sancho said. "We did it."
Diebold spokesman David Bear discounted the tests as unrealistic because they bypassed normal security procedures.
"If I gave you the keys to my house and I turned off the alarm and told you when I wasn't going to be home, I don't doubt you can get into my house," Bear said. "But is that going to have any effect on the election? Absolutely not."
The Ohio-based company has been criticized for its connections to President Bush, whose brother, Jeb Bush, is Florida's governor.
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/local/13413981.htm

Voting system said to fail
Hacking changed outcome, asserts Florida county
By Associated Press | December 16, 2005

TALLAHASSEE -- Tests on an optical-scan voting system used around the country indicated it is vulnerable to hacking that can change the outcome of races without leaving evidence of fraud, a county election supervisor said.

The voting system maker, Diebold Inc., sent a letter in response that questioned the test results and said the test was ''a very foolish and irresponsible act" that may have violated licensing agreements.

Company spokesman David Bear did not return a phone call yesterday seeking comment.

>snip<

In one of the tests conducted for the election supervisor for Leon County, Ion Sancho, and an election-monitoring group, BlackBoxVoting.org, the researchers were able to get into the system easily, make the loser the winner, and leave no trace of the changes, said Herbert Thompson, who conducted the test.

more-

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/12/16/voting_system_said_to_fail/

No excuses for gaps in election securityOUR OPINION: TESTS SHOW FLAWS IN SYSTEM, NEED FOR PAPER TRAILSome people will think that the Tallahassee election supervisor's experiment of hacking into his voting machines was just a bit of grandstanding. But even if it were -- and we don't think it was -- anyone responsible for, or interested in, accurate election results should pay close attention. The tests by Leon County election supervisor Ion Sancho showed that even voting equipment believed to be secure can remain vulnerable to a determined hacker.
A paper trail
Both the state of Florida and the manufacturer of Leon County's Diebold optical-scan machines had certified that the equipment was secure. Mr. Sancho, who advocates having a paper trail as a backup to all voting equipment, wasn't convinced that the Diebold system, a version of which is used by 29 Florida counties, is completely safe.
So Mr. Sancho conducted two tests. The first experiment tested whether an outsider could break into the system. Good news: The expert hired to crack into the system failed. Next, the tester tried to break in from the inside, as could happen with anyone who has access or gains access to voting machines. This time, the hacker was more than successful. He found the system extremely vulnerable.
For example, although the machine asked for a user name and password, it didn't require it. As a result, the intruder was able to get into the voting machine, manipulate its data and leave without a trace. That's scary. The tests show that any voting system, including the touch-screen machines used in Miami-Dade and Broward counties, is vulnerable.

more-

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/opinion/13419065.htm

From the Howard Dean, Bev Harris, hack the vote video:



Harris: Let's just see what happened here. We'll go back into GEMS the legitimate way, you're the county supervisor, you're checking on the progress of your election, and as you can see now, Howard Dean only has 500 votes, Lex Luther has 900 and Tiger Woods has 100 votes.

Dean: Hm.

Harris: We just edited an election, it took us 90 seconds.


Dean: Bev Harris, this really points out why it's important to have a paper trail-- so people can't alter the results.

Ion Sancho was elected to his first term as the Supervisor of Elections for Leon County, Florida in November 1988. He was re-elected in 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004, serving his fifth term as of January 2, 2005.

During his years of service as Leon County's Supervisor of Elections, Mr. Sancho has devoted special attention to modernizing the county's voting system and increasing the participation of citizens in the democratic process.



Mr. Sancho's credentials include: J.D. Florida State University Law School, 1987: B.A. Social Science, Stetson University, 1978; A.A. Valencia Community College, 1973; State Certified Supervisor of Elections; Nationally certified by the Elections Center as a Certified Elections/Registration Administrator (CERA); Former staff member, Florida House of Representatives, Corrections, Probation & Parole Committee; Center for Policy Alternatives, Voter Participation Advisory Board; Member, The Elections Center; Past Member, Big Bend Saltwater Classic.


Big Bend Saltwater Classic



http://www.saltwaterclassic.com/home.htm


Center for Policy Alternatives



http://www.cfpa.org/

Bush skeptical of voting test but will study Sancho's complaint

By Bill Cotterell
DEMOCRAT POLITICAL EDITOR

Gov. Jeb Bush said today that Leon County Elections Supervisor Ion Sancho may have a reputation as a "maverick" who uses "unorthodox" methods, but that the state will seriously consider Sancho's complaint that it's easy to cheat on some voting machines.

Earlier this week, Sancho said he will replace voting equipment in a dispute with the Diebold company. Sancho said security tests of 160 voting machines showed that they are vulnerable to hacking and manipulation of vote counts.

But Bush said Sancho sort of rigged the tests by allowing hackers to get computer access that they could never attain in a real election.

"It wasn't perfect," Bush said of the tests. "They gave them the source codes."

snip

http://www.tallahassee.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051216/NEWS01/512160355


Discussion:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x405515

DECEMBER 14, 2005

ACORN Press Release

ACORN Defeats Anti-Voter Legal Attacks; Group's Voter Registration Efforts Vindicated as Baseless Lawsuits Collapse

WASHINGTON - December 14 - Today, ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) announced that the last of three politically-motivated lawsuits filed against the group in the wake of its successful 2004 voter outreach drive has been "dismissed with prejudice." Each of the three cases (two in Florida and one in Ohio) were brought by partisan law firms based on unfounded allegations of "voter fraud" against the organization -- and all three cases have been dismissed.

snip

In Florida, Republican attorneys at Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Adler filed two suits against ACORN, working with an ex-ACORN employee, convicted felon Mac Stuart, who had been fired by ACORN for misconduct in 2004. (After his termination and just a week prior to the November 2004 election, Stuart falsely accused ACORN of committing voter registration fraud. In August 2004, Stuart attempted to cash a check written out to Floridians for All, a PAC supported by ACORN that sponsored the Florida Minimum Wage Amendment that was overwhelmingly approved by Florida voters in November 2004.) Last week, Judge James Lawrence King of the Southern District of Florida dismissed Stuart's claims with prejudice, and granted judgment to ACORN on its defamation counterclaims.

The second Florida suit filed by Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Adler was based on false information provided by Stuart, alleging that ACORN had failed to submit 11 voter registration applications in time for the general election. Discovery in this case revealed that the applications Stuart provided his counsel were never collected by ACORN. Judge Jose Martinez of the Southern District of Florida dismissed the claims against ACORN with prejudice because there was no evidence to make a case against ACORN.

Faith E. Gay, Brian Koch and Angela Daker of the Miami Office of White & Case LLP represented ACORN in the two Florida cases. "ACORN has shown that the claims made against it were false and frivolous, and the dismissal of these claims should vindicate ACORN of any alleged wrongdoing," said attorney Brian Koch. In pleadings filed in the Southern District of Florida, Stuart admitted that his allegations of voter registration fraud against ACORN were defamatory.

Similarly, investigations by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and local election officials into voting issues have returned no evidence that ACORN participated in voter fraud. In Florida's Duval County, for example, the FBI found that all 59 cases of alleged double voting were clerical errors by the Supervisor of Elections.

snip

In Ohio, a case alleging conspiracy to commit voter fraud was brought by another prominent Republican law firm. Again, the case was dismissed when no evidence could be produced. In Cleveland and Akron, FBI investigators reviewed registration applications submitted by ACORN and found no evidence of any organizational misconduct.

snip

http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/1214-13.htm

Discussion:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x405370

Military Absentee Voting:

* National Defense Committee Military Absentee Voting Executive Summary - 2004 Election

* National Defense Committee Military Absentee Voting Final Report - 2004 Election

* National Defense Committee Raw Data Local Election Officials Report - 2004 Election


http://www.nationaldefensecommittee.org/pages/absentee_voting.html


An LTTE...



We Need a Better Way for Soldiers to Vote


Wednesday, December 14, 2005; Page A28

A Defense Department survey on military voting found that 79 percent of military personnel tried to vote in the 2004 presidential election and that 73 percent of those actually voted .

But the survey obscured an important fact: Disenfranchisement of military and overseas absentee voters remains high. Between 30 and 45 percent of these potential voters failed to receive their absentee ballots or received them too late to matter, according to surveys by the National Defense Committee and the Overseas Vote Foundation.

snip

It is troubling that the Pentagon office charged with administering the absentee voting program also is the one assessing its effectiveness. Clearly, the process needs to be updated with better technology and systems. But the people with the responsibility for undertaking this mission don't see the problem or want to cover it up. This will not lead to a solution.

snip

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/13/AR2005121301729.html



And a sortof rebuttal:


EarlyVoting Blog

Thursday, December 15, 2005

Continued problems with military absentee balloting

snip

The figures reported by the National Defense Committee (here) differ (they report a 24% "disenfranchisement rate"). Still, anything over a few percentage points would be a point of concern.

There is a problem, however. The numbers in the NDC report are based on the number of absentee ballot request vs. the number actually returned. They do report on the percentage rejected because they arrived too late or had some problems with the address.

But do we know anything about what percentage of absentee ballots were not returned because the individual simply chose to abstain? Obviously, it would be foolish to assume 100% absentee return rate from military personnel.

Perhaps we could compare absentee request and return rates from other jurisdictions. One of the best reporting jurisdictions is Johnson County, Iowa. In this county, more than 94% of ballots requested in 2004 were returned. These figures are dramatically higher than the military return rate, lending some credence to the NDC report.

snip

http://earlyvote.blogspot.com/2005/12/continued-problems-with-military.html

Discussion:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x405369

Diebold and Florida Scramble to Cover Their Collective Asses...

As AP Reports on Devasting Leon County, FL Diebold Voting Machine Hack

PLUS: Only One Class Action Fraud Complaint Has Been Filed Against Diebold So Far, Not Two as Mis-Reported Elsewhere...

by Brad on 12/15/2005 @ 2:52pm PT...

AP has finally taken note of the Leon County, FL hack test. The extraordinary test election which was entirely flipped last Tuesday as reported here previously.

In the bargain -- in light of that devasting test, after which the Elections Director of Leon County reportedly vowed to never allow Diebold's machine to be used in another election and has requested funds to replace all of Diebold's voting machines -- and along with the Securities Fraud suit that was filed against Diebold on the same day, Diebold's PR machine has kicked into overdrive. Though their normal spokesman, David Bear, normally in charge of lying about things having to do with their Voting Machines has been notably missing in action, Diebold has been issuing press releases and sending letters in an attempt to counter and distract from the devastating news of late. And the State of Florida is similarly scrambling to find someone else to blame as well.

From AP's report today on the Leon County hack, Diebold goes on the offensive and conjures up the gall to send a letter attempting to place blame for the incident on Ion Sancho, the Elections Director in the county who was wise enough to let the test move forward in hopes of determining if the machines were as vulnerable as many of us have been charging forever...

snip

http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002163.htm




Detailed MAINSTREAM MEDIA Coverage of the Leon County Hack!

by Brad on 12/15/2005 @ 3:46pm PT...

Excellent detailed coverage of the Leon County hack situation, as discussed in the previous item in reference to AP's coverage and the scramble by both Diebold and Florida to cover their asses. Had I seen the Herald report prior to AP, I would have pointed to it instead. Has been a busy day...

Please read Miami Herald's excellent article therefore, before moving to my analysis of Diebold/Florida's attempted ass-covering in the previous BRAD BLOG item. Here's some of the key points from the Herald :

A political operative with hacking skills could alter the results of any election on Diebold-made voting machines -- and possibly other new voting systems in Florida -- according to the state capital's election supervisor, who said Diebold software has failed repeated tests.

Ion Sancho, Leon County's election chief, said tests by two computer experts, completed this week, showed that an insider could surreptitiously change vote results and the number of ballots cast on Diebold's optical-scan machines.

After receiving county commission approval Tuesday, Sancho scrapped Diebold's system for one made by Elections Systems and Software

...

''That's kind of scary. If there's no paper trail, you have to rely solely on electronic results. And now we know that they can be manipulated under the right conditions, without a person even leaving a fingerprint,'' said Sancho, who once headed the state's elections supervisors association.
...
When the debate hit fever pitch before last year's presidential election, many conservatives said questions about the machinery were a liberal ploy to undermine confidence in the voting system.

Sancho agrees that good security is key, but said he's not sure he won't also have problems with the $1.3 million ES&S system, which he'll also test.


snip

http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002164.htm

Discussion:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x405297

EDITORIAL

Shadow of Doubt


Friday, December 16, 2005; Page A34

WOULD IT BE so difficult for Virginia election officials to arrange for a recount of all ballots cast in last month's excruciatingly tight race for attorney general? Republican Del. Robert F. McDonnell's margin of victory is so minuscule -- just 323 votes out of 1.94 million cast, or barely over one one-hundredth of 1 percent -- that the losing candidate, Democratic state Sen. R. Creigh Deeds, is automatically entitled to a recount. But according to a state circuit court order last week, roughly a quarter of the ballots are to be excluded from next week's recount, although some of them may be reexamined case by case. The three-judge panel was apparently convinced that technical problems made recounting all the ballots not worth the trouble. Perhaps the judges were also concerned that a complete recount might drag on through Christmas. Whatever their thinking, the ruling raises the risk of a clouded result.

About three-quarters of the votes on Nov. 8 for governor, lieutenant governor and attorney general were cast by touch-screen machines, leaving no paper ballots to review. Lawyers for Mr. Deeds had asked for a blanket recount of the remaining ballots, which were tabulated by optical-scan devices as well as by punch-card readers. The judges declined, ruling that if the printouts of the results are clear, they should be the basis for redetermining the vote -- unless the court decides to make exceptions and order that ballots be rerun through tabulators. The technical problem is that there is no easy way to program some of the voting machines to sort out ballots on which it appears that neither candidate for attorney general received a vote, so that they may be examined individually. About 210,000 optical-scan and punch-card ballots would have to be reviewed by hand to cull those "undervote" ballots, which would probably then be the subject of disputes between lawyers for the candidates.


The judges didn't say what standard they would apply, case by case, in deciding whether to order a retabulation of the optical-scan and punch-card ballots. That casts a shadow of confusion over the recount, which is scheduled to take place Tuesday and Wednesday. The state does have a legitimate interest in avoiding a continuous recount of every election. But if the 2000 mess in Florida proved anything, it is that voting machines involving paper ballots are prone to error. That leads us to think it would be worthwhile to recount as many ballots as technically feasible. If the only way to be certain of the result is to sort through 210,000 ballots, then the state ought to do it. The alternative to a thorough recount -- confusion and doubt -- will only undercut public trust in the election of Virginia's chief legal officer.

Mr. McDonnell's attorneys adamantly oppose a retabulation of the optical-scan and punch-card ballots. But let's say that a review of the remaining, touch-screen vote reveals an error that puts Mr. Deeds slightly ahead -- not completely farfetched, given that transpositions and other mistakes were identified in the weeks after the election. You can bet that the McDonnell team would execute a speedy about-face and insist on a thorough recount of the optical-scan and punch-card ballots, just as the Deeds team is doing now. So why not agree from the start to count every vote?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/15/AR2005121501679.html

#####

Tuesday, December 13, 2005


Virginia recounts without counting


Judges decide fairly recounting all ballots in the attorney general's race is too much trouble.



The Roanoke Times




A three-judge panel of the Richmond Circuit Court issued rules last week for a retabulation -- not a recount -- in the razor-thin attorney general's election. Without double-checking ballots, questions will linger over whether more Virginians voted for Robert McDonnell or Creigh Deeds.

McDonnell won the first count by a scant 323 votes of nearly 2 million cast. With less than two-hundredths of a percent separating them, Deeds demanded a recount, which was his legal right.

>snip<

Deeds' attorneys argued election officials should run those ballots through tabulating machines again, separating out undervotes -- ballots on which it appears neither candidate received a vote -- for review. That way if, for example, a machine missed a Roanoke absentee voter's choice because he colored outside the bubble, officials could count the vote.

McDonnell's attorneys opposed that move, arguing that reprocessing the ballots could introduce new errors.


>snip<

No one wants this recount to degenerate into Florida's 2000 debacle with officials peering at hanging chads, but next week's recount goes too far in the opposite direction by removing nearly all chance for correcting mistakes.

the whole thing-
http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/wb/wb/xp-44277

December 14, 2005
Special election time–– and perhaps one here
Nearly two million votes will be recount Dec. 20 to determine Virginia's next Attorney General and two seats in the General Assembly will be filled in special elections next month.

Gov. Mark Warner this week set Jan. 3 as the date for special elections in Virginia's Fourth Senate District and Third House District to fill seats which will soon be vacated. Voters in the Fourth Senate District, which includes Caroline, Essex, Hanover, King and Queen, King William, Middlesex and Spotsylvania counties, will elect a Senator to fill the seat left open when Republican Bill Bolling was elected Lieutenant Governor last month. Democrat Jackie Stump recently announced that he was resigning from the House of Delegates, leaving a vacancy in the Third District, which includes Buchanan, Russell and Tazewell counties.

A recount of votes cast in the attorney general's race is scheduled to take place in Richmond over two days beginning Dec. 21. Republican Bob McDonnell Nov. 28 was declared winner of the race but Democrat Creigh Deeds, who lost by 323 votes, has requested a recount.

If McDonnell is found to be the winner of the recount, State Senator Bill Mims (R-33rd) is rumored to be a likely candidate for appointment to be an assistant state attorney general. If Mims resigns another special election would have to be held to fill his position in the Senate. A number of well-known candidates here are reportedly considering a race to replace Mims.

>snip<

more-

http://www.loudouni.com/2005/12/special_election_time_and_perh.html

Article published Friday, December 16, 2005

Will 'The Hammer' get nailed by the courts?


THE GOP poster boy for shady deals is itching to get back in the thick of things as House majority leader. But the judicial system is a more formidable challenge for Rep. Tom DeLay than hatching partisan schemes or twisting arms.


He can handle multiple charges of ethical misconduct, but criminal charges that carry prison terms are a different ball game.

Still, he can try, can't he? Going for the political jugular has worked before to neutralize opponents so why shouldn't the Texas kingpin try it on anyone who had anything to do with his indictment on campaign money-laundering charges?

His predictable spin on the long-running campaign finance investigation involving him, close associates, and the political action committee he founded was that it was political and nothing more.

It's all a "sham," sniped the man whose ruthless means to political ends as GOP whip earned him the nickname "The Hammer." The Texas prosecutor is a "partisan fanatic" out to get him with a grand jury in liberal-leaning Austin.

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051216/COLUMNIST13/512160320/-1/NEWS

DeLay seeks testimony of grand jurors

AUSTIN (AP) — Rep. Tom DeLay's attorneys filed a subpoena Thursday seeking the testimony of grand jurors, including those who indicted the former House majority leader and those who rejected charges.

Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Tex., talks to reporters after announcing his resignation as House Majority Leader on Capitol Hill last September.
By Dennis Cook, AP

DeLay's legal team wants to prove prosecutorial misconduct by District Attorney Ronnie Earle, who they say "shopped around" the campaign finance case against DeLay to three different grand juries before finding one that would indict DeLay on money laundering and conspiracy charges.

State law prohibits prosecutors from attending grand jury deliberations, but the defense alleges that Earle unlawfully participated in the second grand jury's deliberations and tried to force those grand jurors to indict DeLay. Earle denies the allegations.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-12-16-delay-grand-jury_x.htm

White House: President can back lawmaker

Published Friday, December 16, 2005
WASHINGTON (AP) - The White House yesterday defended President George W. Bush’s decision to insert himself into Tom DeLay’s legal case, saying Bush was employing "presidential prerogative" when he said the former House majority leader was innocent of Texas charges.

On Wednesday, Bush was asked during an interview on Fox News Channel whether he believed DeLay was innocent. "Yes, I do," Bush replied.

The Texas Republican was forced to step down as majority leader in late November after he was indicted on a state charge of conspiracy to violate election laws. Another grand jury indicted him on charges of conspiracy to launder money and money laundering.

"We don’t typically tend to get into discussing legal matters of that nature. But in this instance, the president chose to respond to it," White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan said. "Call it presidential prerogative."

http://www.columbiatribune.com/2005/Dec/20051216News010.asp

Push of wrong button doubles votes in race
But clerk says outcome in District 33 still has Newcomer advancing

Thanks to John Gideon for link!
By MIKE JOHNSON
mikejohnson@journalsentinel.com
Posted: Dec. 14, 2005
A push of the wrong computer key resulted in all votes being counted twice in Tuesday's Assembly District 33 primary, but the mistake did not change the outcome of the race, Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus said Wednesday.

Scott Newcomer beat four other Republican candidates to advance to the Jan. 10 special election to fill the seat vacated by Dan Vrakas in October when Vrakas became Waukesha County executive. Newcomer became the GOP nominee with nearly 38% of the vote.

After the votes were canvassed Wednesday afternoon, Nickolaus described the mistake as an operator error. She said that a worker "hit the wrong button." The error was discovered after one of the town clerks called and pointed out that the numbers listed on the county Web site appeared to be greater than actual turnout, Nickolaus said.

The unofficial results the county posted on its Web site on Tuesday night showed that 7,814 people voted in the primary and that turnout was 17.6%. In reality, only 3,907 people voted and turnout was just 8.8%, according to the certified returns. There are 44,317 registered voters in the 33rd District.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/wauk/dec05/377843.asp

BREAKING: Volusia County, FL Dumps Diebold Too!

Opts for Transparent, Accountable Elections (Instead of Diebold Elections) After a Protracted Battle...

by Brad

12/16/2005

This just in...After various protracted legal battles (funded by the National Federation for the Blind, which had received a $1 million "donation" from Diebold previously) and along with the news...

This just in...After various protracted legal battles (funded by the National Federation for the Blind, which had received a $1 million "donation" from Diebold previously) and along with the news out of Leon County, Florida, Volusia County has now come to their senses and also decided to dump Diebold voting machines!

snip

http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002169.htm

ER Discussion:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x405490

GD Discussion:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5615331

Optical scan has Carteret board's vote

December 16,2005

BY JANNETTE PIPPIN View stories by reporter
DAILY NEWS STAFF

BEAUFORT - Carteret County could be casting ballots in a whole new way in next year's elections.

The Carteret County Board of Elections recommended by a 2-1 vote that the county purchase optical scan machines from Election Systems and Software, which would be a change from the previous electronic touch-screen system it used for 10 years.

snip

Board of Elections member Sue Verdon has said the incident was a human error and has continued to stand by the use of the touch-screen DRE machines. She cast the opposing vote for the optical scan system after opening the discussions with the suggestion that the county go with the touch-screen system by Diebold Election Systems.

snip

Carteret County reverted back to hand-counted paper ballots with its latest elections.

snip

http://www.jdnews.com/SiteProcessor.cfm?Template=/GlobalTemplates/Details.cfm&StoryID=37314&Section=News

Since the Georgia Democratic party is refusing to get behind any candidate for Secretary of State (they're concentrating all funds and support on the Governor's race - Cathy Cox) Bill Stephens (the republican candidate for SoS) is a given. Georgia will have our own version of Katherine Harris and Kenneth Blackwell because the DEM party will hand him the office.

The current DEM SoS candidates can't even get party help with fundraising.

In the case of Bill Stephens, one should take great care to understand that this should be a "personal" issue with the Democrats.

You see, Bill Stephens was a Democrat elected in 2002 who switched parties 3 days after being elected with Democratic party funds to give the new governor a majority in the state Senate. For that move, Stephens was given the most powerful spot in the state Senate - Majority Leader. You'd think, after Zell Miller, the DEM party would at least TRY to punish some of these DEMS...

snip

http://www.countthevote.org/index.htm

GDP Discussion:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2316583

http://www.cleveland.com/newsflash/cleveland/index.ssf?/base/news-21/1134775444236790.xml&storylist=cleveland

12/16/2005, 6:18 p.m. ET
By CARRIE SPENCER GHOSE
The Associated Press

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Opponents of a series of defeated ballot issues that would have overhauled Ohio elections slightly outspent the backers, according to campaign finance reports filed Friday.

Ohio First spent about $5 million since September, most of it on broadcast advertising — about $600,000 more than two groups supporting Issues 2-5, which were defeated by about two-thirds majorities.

The issues would have expanded absentee voting, lowered campaign donation limits, made a bipartisan board to draw legislative districts and removed election powers from the secretary of state.

Spending was about even in earlier reports that covered September through late October. Opponents pulled ahead in the final weeks, according to reports filed Friday, which covered Oct. 20 through Dec. 9...

http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/campaignfinance/campaignFinance.aspx?Section 116


Campaign finance snapshot of Ohio ballot issues

http://www.cleveland.com/newsflash/cleveland/index.ssf?/base/news-21/1134776343262000.xml&storylist=cleveland

12/16/2005, 6:34 p.m. ET
The Associated Press

(AP) — Here are highlights of campaign finance reports filed Friday, covering Oct. 20 to Dec. 9, for ballot issues in the November election:

ISSUE 1: Public works and Third Frontier technology bonds (passed)

Supporter: Jobs for Ohio 2005

_On hand at beginning of period: $2,351,189...