BOE CHIEF VU OUT: Election Reform, Fraud, & News Sunday 02/11/07

BOE CHIEF VU OUT: Election Reform, Fraud, & News Sunday 02/11/07

"After nearly four years with the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections I have decided that the time is right to pursue new career options. When I came to the Board my objective was to move the election process from a punch card world of hanging chads to the new technology of touch screen voting. This was a once in a generation challenge for those who work in the world of elections. Now, after facing some serious challenges, we are well on the way to successfully integrating electronic voting into our elections system. The time is right to turn the leadership of the Board over to new hands. By leaving now, there will be ample time to find a new director and to provide that person with the time necessary to plan for a successful 2008 presidential election year," Director Michael Vu said.
:nopity:

All members welcome and encouraged to participate.
:patriot:
Please post Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News on this thread.
If you can:
:argh:
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.

Please "Recommend" for the Greatest Page.
:patriot:

OhioChick was the early bird on this news. Tue Feb-06-07 12:17 PM

Here is the main DU discussion of the news as it broke.
There are links to many related articles:

Cuyahoga Co. Elections Director Resigns (OH)
UPDATED: 1:30 pm EST February 6, 2007

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2719564&mesg_id=2719564

New faces needed for Cuyahoga elections

Editorial
The News-Herald, OH
February 9, 2007
02/09/2007
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17830858&BRD=1698&PAG=461&dept_id=21846&rfi=6

When it comes to Michael Vu, the task ahead of the Cuyahoga County Elections Board seemed so obvious.
The man brought in to resurrect what for years has been a troubled elections operation instead has presided over two consecutive debacles that made the county a laughingstock.
So, when the board met this week with Vu to negotiate his departure as elections director, the outcome was pretty much guaranteed.
Hold on there, weary Cuyahoga County voter.
While Vu's March 1 resignation looms, there's another, far more troubling aspect.
It seems the board arranged to have Vu hang on through June as a consultant. That time period, if you haven't figured it out, includes the May primary.
It's a ridiculous notion that Vu will be able to steer the county to a clean May election.
...
Cuyahoga County's oversight of elections has consistently humiliated Ohio.
These problems are now so chronic it's bewildering that the county's voters aren't screaming about this shoddy leadership from the four board members.
While the county made some progress in November, it still was so in disarray that a judge forced a polling place to remain open until 9 p.m. - delaying results in a statewide election in the process.
The troubles in 2006 followed a 2004 election that involved two board workers who just recently were convicted of illegally rigging a recount to avoid a more thorough investigation of votes cast.
These are only the highlights of Vu's record. His predecessor was mired in underachievement, as evidenced by absentee ballots invalidated because they were counted twice; ballot shortages; misplaced ballots; votes cast by unregistered voters and voters who were not told of a change to their polling place.
The Cuyahoga County Elections Board needs new blood to accomplish wholesale change.
County residents must not tolerate the status quo. Demand that the board resign as a sign they're willing to restore integrity to the election process.
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17830858&BRD=1698&PAG=461&dept_id=21846&rfi=6

Vu's Waterloo
An unwieldy Board of Elections and unwieldy equipment left director no margin for error, then he made mistakes

The Plain Dealer, Cleveland
February 9, 2007
http://www.cleveland.com/politics/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/opinion/117101566836680.xml&coll=2

When Michael Vu arrived at the Cuya hoga County Board of Elections, he was a 27-year-old wunderkind charged with overseeing the transition to electronic voting and with professionalizing a historically dysfunctional operation. A little more than three years later, Vu is leaving with neither task complete and with a few splatters on his reputation. Some of that is his fault, but much of it is for reasons beyond his control.

Vu came from Utah, where staging elections is considered serious work, not another arena for political infighting. He took on an agency with little ethos of accountability. Hired for technical savvy, he was out of his element.

When Vu tried to reorganize his top staff, he could neither move nor remove people with powerful patrons. He irritated Democrats on the county Board of Commissioners, which controlled his purse strings, and in the county prosecutor's office, which supplied him with legal counsel widely viewed as mediocre, at best. Though a registered Democrat, Vu worked so closely with the board's Republican chairman that some party regulars questioned his loyalty - as if partisanship ought to matter in his job. Ohio's now-departed secretary of state, Republican J. Kenneth Blackwell, also complicated life for Vu and elections officials in every other county by ignoring them, then issuing last-minute rulings that stoked confusion at the polls.
http://www.cleveland.com/politics/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/opinion/117101566836680.xml&coll=2

Ohio's spreading stolen 2004 election scandal claims another victim

Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman
The Free Press, Columbus, OH
February 10, 2007
Thanks to OpEdNews Post
& Thank you L. Coyote for the Recap of events!

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_bob_fitr_070210_ohio_s_spreading_sto.htm

With two felony convictions already in its wake, Ohio's spreading stolen 2004 election scandal has claimed another victim---Michael Vu, the controversial executive director of the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections.

Hired in 2003 with the support of the Democratic Party, Vu was in charge of administering the electoral process in Ohio's biggest county. Centered in Cleveland, Cuyahoga County regularly gives huge majorities to Democratic candidates, and was expected to help put John Kerry into the White House in 2004.

But as chaos ensued on election day, long lines, malfunctioning machines, suspiciously low turnouts in inner city precincts, lost ballots and dubious vote counts turned Democrats against Vu. Independent researchers calculate that the irregularities may have cost Kerry thousands of votes.

Vu also supervised the purchase of some $20 million in electronic voting equipment, a decision bitterly opposed by grassroots activists, and featured in a major documentary film recently broadcast nationwide on HBO. Upon installation for the 2006 election, much of the equipment malfunctioned.

Most damning were felony convictions stemming from the botched recount of 2004 presidential ballots that was, according to Cuyahoga County prosecutors, "rigged." Forced by the Green Party and Libertarian Party, the recount process required recounting precincts chosen at random. But a jury has convicted two Cuyahoga poll workers of, among other things, choosing the precincts based on specific criteria, which is illegal. Though Vu remains unindicted, the convicted workers were operating under his supervision.

Vu fell out of favor with the county Democrats who brought him in as election after election was engulfed in chaos. Calls for his removal rang out from the election protection community, including the Columbus Free Press.

Vu was then supported by Robert Bennett, chair of the Board of Elections. Bennett also serves as chair of the Ohio Republican Party. The two Democrats on the BOE tried to have Vu removed, but Bennett and the other Republican on the board voted to keep him. The board remained deadlocked when then-Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, a Republican, refused to cast a ballot, thus saving Vu's job.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_bob_fitr_070210_ohio_s_spreading_sto.htm

"Vu was then supported by Robert Bennett, chair of the Board of Elections. Bennett also serves as chair of the Ohio Republican Party. The two Democrats on the BOE tried to have Vu removed, but Bennett and the other Republican on the board voted to keep him. ..."

One of the amazing aspects of the Cuyahoga story is how GOP state boss Bennett stayed out of the discussion for two years. It is good to see these authors mention him now. But, will they ever mention the vote-switching? Don't hold your breath!

OHIO 2004: 6.15% Kerry-Bush vote-switch found in probability study

Edited on Sun Jan-28-07 03:08 PM by L. Coyote
Defining the vote outcome probabilities of wrong-precinct voting has revealed, in a sample of 166,953 votes (1/34th of the Ohio vote), the Kerry-Bush margin changes 6.15% when the population is sorted by probable outcomes of wrong-precinct voting.

The Kerry to Bush 6.15% vote-switch differential is seen when the large sample is sorted by probability a Kerry wrong-precinct vote counts for Bush. When the same large voter sample is sorted by the probability Kerry votes count for third-party candidates, Kerry votes are instead equal in both subsets.

Read the revised article with graphs of new findings:

The 2004 Ohio Presidential Election: Cuyahoga County Analysis
How Kerry Votes Were Switched to Bush Votes

http://jqjacobs.net/politics/ohio.html

N.J. voting machines face twin challenge
A lawyer calls them uncertified. A professor calls them easy to rig

Kevin Coughlin
Star-Ledger, NJ
February 11, 2007
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/index.ssf?/base/news-11/1171172999136630.xml&coll=1

The electronic voting machines used in most of New Jersey were never properly inspected as state law demands, according to a new legal claim filed by voter rights activists. Had the machines been tested, they would have proved to be a hacker's dream, the activists say.

This week Newark attorney Penny Venetis, representing a coalition of plaintiffs, will ask a judge in Trenton to decommission machines used by 18 of the state's 21 counties.

Similar models of the computerized touch-screen machines made by an Oakland, Calif., company, Sequoia, are currently being tested by a Princeton University computer scientist, who says they easily could be rigged to throw an election.

Venetis filed legal papers Friday claiming the state never certified some 10,000 Sequoia AVC Advantage machines as secure or reliable as required by law.

"There is zero documentation -- no proof whatsoever -- that any state official has ever reviewed Sequoia machines," Venetis, co-director of the Rutgers Constitutional Litigation Clinic, said in an interview. "This means you cannot use them. ... These machines are being used to count most of the votes in the state without being tested in any way, shape or form."

If Mercer County Assignment Judge Linda Feinberg agrees with Venitis to pull the plug on the electronic machines, it will create a giant headache for state election officials, who already are struggling to meet a January 2008 deadline to retrofit all voting machines with paper printouts. The state would have to find a way to recertify or replace them -- or come up with a lot of pencils and paper ballots -- in time for April school elections.

A spokesman for the state Division of Elections had no comment.

The problem goes beyond a lack of documentation, according to Andrew Appel, a Princeton computer science professor.

Appel bought five Sequoia machines for a total of $82 from a government auction Web site last month. Sold by officials in Buncombe County, N.C., after a decade of use, they are virtually identical to the machines Essex County bought for $8,000 apiece in 2005, Appel said.

For Appel, it was a lucky find. Sequoia and other voting companies have refused to let academic experts peek inside their proprietary software and machines. Appel had to submit only minimal personal information and a cashier's check to close the deal.
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/index.ssf?/base/news-11/1171172999136630.xml&coll=1

Sequoia Makes Like Diebold And Gets Hacked By Princeton

Warren Stewart
VoteTrustUSA
February 11, 2007
http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2255&Itemid=51

A New Jersey Attorney Will Ask A Judge To Decertify Sequoia AVC Advantage Machines

A Princeton Professor Paid $86 For What A NJ County Paid $40,000 For

In a report in Sunday's The Star-Ledger it was revealed that Sequoia AVC Advantage Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines used in 18 of New Jersey's 21 counties were improperly certified for use by the state.

Venetis filed legal papers Friday claiming the state never certified some 10,000 Sequoia AVC Advantage machines as secure or reliable as required by law.

"There is zero documentation --- no proof whatsoever --- that any state official has ever reviewed Sequoia machines," Venetis, co-director of the Rutgers Constitutional Litigation Clinic, said in an interview. "This means you cannot use them. ... These machines are being used to count most of the votes in the state without being tested in any way, shape or form."

At the same time Princeton Computer Science Professor Andrew Appel revealed that he bought 5 of the Advantage voting machines from an on-line government equipment clearinghouse for a total of $86. Virtually identical machines were bought in 2005 by Essex County New Jersey for $8,000 apiece.

Professor Appel and his team put the 5 machines to good use according to the article. A Princeton student picked one machine's lock "in seven seconds" to access the removable chips containing Sequoia's vote-recording software, Appel said.

"We can take a version of Sequoia's software program and modify it to do something different --- like appear to count votes, but really move them from one candidate to another. And it can be programmed to do that only on Tuesdays in November, and at any other time. You can't detect it," Appel said last week.

And what does Sequoia have to say for itself?
Citing more than a century in the election business, Sequoia Voting Systems asserts on its Web site that "our tamperproof products, including ... the AVC Advantage, are sought after from coast to coast for their accuracy and reliability." While promising to look into Appel's claims, Sequoia's Michelle Shafer asserted that hacking scenarios are unlikely. "It's not just the equipment. There are people and processes in place in the election environment to prevent tampering and attempts at tampering," she said.

Appel counters:
But Appel said voting machines often are left unattended at polling places prior to elections. He is confident his students and other recent buyers of 136 Sequoia machines sold on GovDeals.com --- where bidders also can find surplus coffins, locomotives and World War I cannons --- will crack Sequoia's code.
:patriot: :patriot:
http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2255&Itemid=51

How I bought used voting machines on the Internet

Andrew W. Appel
Princeton, NJ
February 8, 2007
http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~appel/avc/

Recently I bought some used AVC Advantage voting machines, made by Sequoia Voting Systems in 1997. I've been studying voting technology and policy for some time, and it will be interesting to perform experiments on these machines.

In early January 2007, the county of Buncombe in North Carolina advertised for sale on the Internet auction site govdeals.com several Sequoia AVC Advantage voting machines. There were 136 machines sold, in lots of 10 machines, 4 machines, and 5 machines, for a total of 18 lots. The auctions closed on January 16 and January 26, depending on the lots. The auction site govdeals.com is, apparently, meant for federal, state, and local governments to sell surplus equipment. Any person can qualify to bid on and purchase equipment through this site.

I purchased one lot of 5 machines, for a price of $82 for the lot. Registering to bid at govdeals.com is just like registering to bid on e-bay--no questions asked except name, address, e-mail, and telephone number. The government had no information about me or my motives in obtaining the voting machines at any time before or after the auction and delivery of the voting machines to me. I paid for the machines by cashier's check. I had these machines shipped to me in Princeton by commercial carrier, where they arrived on February 2, 2007.

On February 3, 2007 I examined the machines. The machines arrived in operating order. The machines, originally sold to Buncombe County in 1997 for $5200 each, appear to be almost identical to machines used in Mercer County, New Jersey, where I vote. The only difference that I discerned is that instead of a green "x" to indicate a vote, there is a green arrow. This difference is very minor and does not, for example, mean that the internal software is different.

To get to the motherboard of the machine, I just opened the back door with the key (that came with the machine) and unscrewed 10 screws that hold in place a sheet-metal panel. Although I used a key to open the lock, the lock itself is a fairly simple one: I watched a Princeton University student pick the lock of my machine in about 7 seconds.

I was surprised at how simple it was for me to access the ROM memory chips containing the firmware that controls the vote-counting. Contrary to Sequoia's assertions in their promotional literature, there were no security seals protecting the ROMs. Indeed, I found that certain information in the "AVC Advantage Security Overview" (from Sequoia Voting Systems, Inc., 2004) was untrue with respect to my machine.
...
The AVC Advantage can be easily manipulated to throw an election because the chips which control the vote-counting are not soldered on to the circuit board of the DRE. This means the vote-counting firmware can be removed and replace with fraudulent firmware. Under the sheet-metal panel (the "CPU cover"), I found the circuit board containing computer chips, other electronic chips, and four chips that--unlike most of the chips on the circuit board which are soldered in place--are mounted in sockets so that they can be removed and replaced. These are ROM (read-only memory) chips that hold the computer program (firmware) that operates the voting logic. These chips are not held in place by any seals. They can be removed using an ordinary screwdriver and they (or other ROM chips containing other firmware) can be replaced simply by pressing them into place. You can see the ROM chips in the picture above; they have the white labels pasted onto them, and you can see me in the process of prying one loose with a screwdriver.

Like the purchasers of all the other lots sold by Buncombe County, I am now at leisure to examine the contents of the firmware on the ROM chips, and to modify it. If I had the inclination to cheat in an election (which I do not) I could prepare a modified version of the firmware that subtly alters votes as the votes are cast, with no indication of the alteration made visible to the voter. I would write this modified firmware onto new ROM chips. Then, if I had access to one of New Jersey's voting machines (for example, in an elementary school or firehouse where it is left unattended the night before an election), I could open the door of the machine, unscrew 10 screws, replace the legitimate ROM chips with my own fraudulent ones, reinstall the cover panel with its 10 screws, and close the door of the machine.
http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~appel/avc/

Clearing of D-13 evidence opposed

Stacey Eidson
Bradenton Herald, FL
February 9, 2007
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/local/16657924.htm

SARASOTA - The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida and other voter advocacy groups are concerned Sarasota County is preparing to clear crucial information contained in the touch-screen voting machines used during the November election without receiving permission from a court.

Attorneys representing the voter groups filed an emergency motion Wednesday asking the court to prevent Sarasota County Supervisor of Elections Kathy Dent from "altering or otherwise destroying critical, relevant evidence in the case."

David Becker, senior staff attorney for People For the American Way, said his organization received a letter from Dent's counsel this week that indicated the county planned to begin unsealing a portion of the voting machines in preparation for the March 13 election.

"The letter from Dent's counsel threatened to start clearing voting machines that are currently evidence in the ongoing litigation without getting any kind of court order or getting any kind of approval or agreement from all the interested parties," Becker said. "We are part of this case. Our clients are voters and taxpayers in Sarasota County whom Kathy Dent serves. Nevertheless, she and her counsel apparently do not intend to negotiate in good faith with all parties."

In January, Dent asked permission from the judge handling the case to unseal a portion of the voting machines to be used in the upcoming election.

Dent was out of the office Thursday and could not be reached for comment.
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/local/16657924.htm

Is study of voting machines flawed?

Tom Lyons
Herald Tribune, FL
February 11, 2007
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070211/COLUMNIST36/702110595

A Princeton University professor listed as a key part of a state investigation of the Congressional District 13 undervote anomaly isn't really involved at all.

But the state isn't fibbing. The computer science professor, Ed Felton, just opted out at the last minute. Why?

Felton cited what he calls a major flaw in the plan to examine the computer software codes used in Sarasota County election machines: Investigators, some of them professors at Florida State University, are not being given access to the voting machines used in the election.

They will study machines that may be identical, but that will make it "far from the complete, independent study I had initially thought they wanted," Felton wrote.
...
It does seem that the investigation plan is like having a mechanic look for a problem with your car's computer system by checking other cars of the same model, but not yours. Heck, if there's a problem common to them all, it might work. But how can anyone call it a reliable way to rule out problems in your car?

Tom Lyons can be contacted at tom.lyons@heraldtribune.com or (941) 361-4964.
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070211/COLUMNIST36/702110595

Bush sticks with same calamitous playbook

Jim Mullins
Op-Ed
Sun-Sentinel, FL
February 8 2007
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/opinion/sfl-08forum09feb08,0,7988596.story?coll=sfla-news-opinion

Yogi Berra had it right -- "It's déjà vu all over again," for we are now witnessing the same exaggerations and outright deception about Iran that the Bush administration fed to the American people four years ago as the prelude to the disastrous war on Iraq. His insincere protestations of a resort to diplomacy, U.N. resolutions and U.N. inspections were a cover for preparations for an Iraqi invasion.

It began weeks after 9-11 with the pull-out of Special Forces troops from Afghanistan, leaving bin Laden's al-Qaida on the loose; California desert warfare training of tens of thousand of U.S. troops; increasing naval deployment in the Mediterranean and Persian Gulf; and acceleration of air-strikes in Iraqi no-fly zones.

President Bush's playbook hasn't changed. A 2002 State of the Union address branding Iran as an "Axis of Evil" state put it in the same demonized category as Iraq -- even though Iran denounced Osama bin Laden's 9-11 attack, participated at U.S. invitation at the Bonn meeting on Afghanistan's future, and pledged three times the U.S. amount for Afghan reconstruction. And despite Iran's cooperation, a secret Iranian proposal of dialogue without preconditions on all issues between the U.S. and Iran was rejected by Bush.

Two years ago, the Bush administration began leaking disinformation intended to sow suspicion of Iran's nuclear ambitions. An unsigned drawing taken from a stolen laptop of an excavation that could have many uses but was defined as a nuclear test site soon emerged. ("Curveball's" mobile labs reincarnated.)

The charge that Iran had produced weapons-grade uranium fell apart after an investigation by U.S. and U.N. scientists had determined that the minute amount found on centrifuges in Iran was there when they were bought from Pakistan -- as Iran had contended. (The Niger uranium fraud revisited.)
...
Solid evidence is available of a constantly expanding military buildup for an Iranian invasion. Journalist Seymour Hersh warned a year ago of Bush's plans, obtained from U.S. military and intelligence officials. U.S. aircraft carriers and minesweepers surround Iran. The U.S. has persuaded Bulgaria and Romania to allow us to situate enough land-based aircraft for a massive raid on Iran.
...
Bush gambled on Iraq with a losing hand. His "doubling down" with an Iraqi escalation and his "going for broke" in Iran are indicative of an addiction to risk that has brought us, as former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski testified last Thursday, to a "historic, strategic and moral calamity."

Americans should quickly add their voices to the brave and patriotic American military and intelligence officials, retired and active, who oppose escalation in Iraq and an invasion of Iran.
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/opinion/sfl-08forum09feb08,0,7988596.story?coll=sfla-news-opinion

:hi:

How diplomatic...



snip

"Mandating a 10% audit for all races would be a high burden on many States. And in the vast majority of races, a shift of 1% of the votes would not alter the outcome of the race. For that reason, we might say that while less than ideal, we are willing to live with the risk that audits will not catch the 1% counting error in races where such an error is not going to change the outcome of the race.

But in races decided by less than 1% (in recent history, this has represented less than one percent of all federal elections), we might say we are unwilling to accept this risk."

snip

Look out. It's a pdf.

http://www.brennancenter.org/dynamic/subpages/download_file_47860.pdf

Discussion:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x467504