Yes, there was fraud in the '06 elections due to electronic voting machines. We won't win again in '08, UNLESS we have Real election reform. Verified voting/ Paper trails are NOT the solution, according to vote-fraud experts.

**Please** call your elected officials - Tell them to support a new bill introduced by Dennis Kucinich, HR 6200, calling for paper ballots and hand-counts. ** This is the new bill that can save our democracy ! **

http://blip.tv/file/82767

http://www.kucinich.us /

http://www.solarbus.org/election/archives.shtml (excellent link - recent '06 election fraud/problems)

We must push our reps on this one.

before impeachment, Iraq, stem cell or minimum wage - democracy has to be safe guarded. Period.
I shudder when I see lists of things that omit this. I hope we don't have ADD! Props to Kuchinich for working on that!

being exposed, with so many watching. but the presidency? that's different.

See here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=2647179

that's the only form of technology I'll support.

They scan ballots and verify them based on signature verification. It could be very easy to program them to have extremely strict standards for matching a Dem signature vs, very loose standards to match a Repub. You shouldn't support this technology either.

The only way to protect votes from being manipulated or rejected is to have them on paper ballots with humans viewing them.

And even if the scanner lies, the physical ballots give us the opportunity to audit. Does the Kucinich bill require mandatory REAL audits of all elections? It should.

At least when they are used for absentee ballots. The discarded ballot would just be thrown away not part of a recount.

I know in some areas they have been examined and most of the "overvotes" found to be fraudulent.

And skip all of the middle steps. If all votes are on a paper ballot and the ballot will be retained anyway for recounts then just count those ballots and eliminate the machines. There is no benefit to them and I bet the mostly senior citizens working the polls would appreciate the simplicity.

It has worked for hundreds of years (and before that, the Greeks used simple black and white stones). It allows perfect transparency: interested parties can simply watch (and must be allowed to do so).

1) Any sort of election method reform would be vastly more effective with VVPB electronic voting.
2) Electronic voting allows disabled people (mainly the blind) to vote with the same privacy that non-disabled people are able.

Perhaps just for those that need it then? I experienced problems at my polling place because of the fear and lack of ability many people have with technology. Even if all fraud is eliminated (of course that's impossible) there still remains the impracticality of the elections on these machines without a substantial infrastructure change in place. There needs to be major training before election days, perhaps requiring a certification of understanding and skill. There should be an impartial but capable technician at each polling place. And there should be a backup alternative, quickly implemented when inevitable technical problems arise.

All of this of course would be expensive, extremely difficult to implement, would require but not get a federalized uniform solution for all voting places that doesn't exist now and never did. In order to do it right with machines, even the ones with VVPB, it would take so much more than the system in place to do it right and it would be impossible to truly make it work without losing any votes (like the ones that never get placed by people leaving because they can't wait through technical difficulties).

I think that a standardized ballot system with proper education for the voter as wella s poll worker, election day being a holiday, and an understood extended period of time counting paper ballots would be more beneficial than all of the machines in the world.

And I work in IT so it's not like I'm not computer friendly.

by a party which has a pattern of theft and deception.

who have no idea what they are doing. On election day I had to wait to vote because two poll workers had to gather spools of tape spilling from the voting machines off of the floor. They were all so tense from the stress of dealing with the computers. A bit annoying at a supermarket but should never be allowed when the country is at stake.

Even the most open code, the most bi-partisan technology has to be operated by ordinary citizens. I don't trust their competence beyond paper.

If it allowed the vision impaired to make and review their selections using the machine and then printed out a paper ballot that would be the ballot of record.

I would accept a machine only as an accessibility device that assists in the preparation of the ballot, but does not "hold" votes in the form of eBallots or count votes. The paper ballot is the only ballot of record.

I understand the accessibility issue, but compromising ballot security in favor of accessibility really doesn't make sense. Don't the disabled deserve to have their votes counted the way that they intended?

--which can be counted like the other paper ballots. VOTING and TABULATION are two distinct processes. Paperless electronic tabulation should never, under any circumstances whatsoever, be allowed.

For more than one race, optical scanning is more accurate than handcounting, but handcounting is more accurate for single races. Therefore have opscan of paper ballots (which can be generated by machines for disabled people) strictly audited by randomly selecting single races from various precincts for confirmation by handcounting.

That must be mandated for optical scanners.

sure, we have to have PAPER -- that's a given.

but in our reforms, aren't we are trying to solve the problem of TABULATION error/fraud? PAPER BALLOTS can be mis-tabulated repeatedly -- so we need MEANINGFUL audits -- such as can be acheived with the EXIT POLLS aren't adjusted to fit the "vote."

meaningful audits + transparent, believable exit polls = verifiable results.

but it seems to me that the Exit Polling/Reporting Procedures needs attention as well as the voting machines.

Andy made me repeat that over and over and over until I had it straight. He even almost seemed a tinsey-bit frustrated when I kept goofing it up.

The terminology is critically important.


"VOTER VERIFIED PAPER BALLOT AS THE BALLOT OF RECORD"

This is the record of last resort, the one that must be counted, the one that will be true. Andy was right. I have no problem with hand counting. The only interest in machine counting is the media in their horse race to get results (ANY results, apparently) quickquickquick..

My addition to Andy's diction is that any machine used in counting must have open source software.

:applause:

There are indeed, a number of things that must be done to secure the election process.

These range from machines being replaced with a paper ballot and a marking pen or pencil, to the ballots being counted by hand, in public view and perhaps on live TV in real time.

And then counted again by different people, on live TV, in real time. Perhaps several times.

Take too long? Tough crackers ! Who says there is a time limit on perfecting our election process?

HR 6200 requiring use of paper ballots

Title: To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require States to conduct Presidential elections using paper ballots and to count those ballots by hand, and for other purposes.

Sponsor: Rep Kucinich, Dennis J. (introduced 9/27/2006)
Cosponsors (19)

Latest Major Action: 9/27/2006 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

Thank you Ohio District 10 Voters for Re-Electing Congressman Kucinich.
Thank you Ohio Voters for Electing our new Senator Sherrod Brown.

Cosponsors for HR 6200

1. Rep Brown, Corrine - 9/27/2006
2. Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy - 9/27/2006
3. Rep Conyers, John, Jr. - 9/27/2006
4. Rep Filner, Bob - 9/27/2006
5. Rep Grijalva, Raul M. - 9/27/2006
6. Rep Gutierrez, Luis V. - 9/27/2006
7. Rep Hastings, Alcee L. - 9/27/2006
8. Rep Hinchey, Maurice D. - 9/27/2006
9. Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. - 9/27/2006
10. Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila - 9/27/2006
11. Rep Johnson, Eddie Bernice - 9/27/2006
12. Rep Kaptur, Marcy - 9/27/2006
13. Rep Lee, Barbara - 9/27/2006
14. Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. - 9/27/2006
15. Rep McDermott, Jim - 9/27/2006
16. Rep McKinney, Cynthia A. - 9/27/2006
17. Rep Solis, Hilda L. - 9/27/2006
18. Rep Waters, Maxine - 9/27/2006
19. Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. - 9/27/2006

FOR ANDY!

"VOTER VERIFIED PAPER BALLOT AS THE BALLOT OF RECORD"

We won't forget.

And we won't stop until we have a ...
"VOTER VERIFIED PAPER BALLOT AS THE BALLOT OF RECORD"

And when we finally do have a ...
"VOTER VERIFIED PAPER BALLOT AS THE BALLOT OF RECORD"
we will remember what you did, what you sacrificed, what you worked for, even though you didn't get to see it.

All so we will one day have a ...
"VOTER VERIFIED PAPER BALLOT AS THE BALLOT OF RECORD."

If you've made it this far, say it with me now, "VOTER VERIFIED PAPER BALLOT AS THE BALLOT OF RECORD!"

By Andy Stephenson
July 13, 2005

The following was written by Andy April 29, 2005. It is a draft, about which he said, "Just putting thoughts on paper right now. So in case something happens to me, god forbid...I have it down for others in the future."

What a ballot is. It is not merely a piece of paper it is me...it is my voice. Each of us should guard it more than we would our most prized or precious possession. That ballot protects our other possessions. Without it you have no say. Over the last couple of years I have been adamant about the need for a voter verified paper ballot. It has been the driving force behind what I have done and will continue to do. To me, my ballot is the most sacred sacrament of the secular religion we call Democracy.
Andy

I have traveled around this country meeting with Election Officials such as Mischelle Townsend. I sent her into a tailspin when I put a camera in her face. Mischelle Townsend as you remember was the County Registrar in Riverside CO. Ca. Mischelle is a drippy sweet kind of woman but underneath beats the heart of a true viper. Mischelle has unwavering faith in Sequoia Voting Systems. She is a huge proponent of paperless DRE's. Where is Mischelle now? Well last I heard she was at home tending to her father-in-law's knee. She spent her last day at work holed up in her office with the door closed to avoid cameras. David Elliot is another viper. David was the head honcho over at NASED. He was the one person most responsible for allowing DRE’s to be approved for use. David was another really bad guy. He told me that he would have liked to have been able to talk less formally “without the camera.” I am sure he would have. But hey…I wanted to keep him honest. David retired from service to the state to attend to a “nervous condition.” Another piece of work was Scott Konopasek. Scott was the Registrar in San Bernardino Co Ca. Scott was the man responsible for DRE’s in two places, Snohomish WA and San Bernardino CA. Scott once remarked that Bev and I were waging “Jihad”, but not in a “Palestine Israel sense of the word, but in more of a Northern Ireland sense of the word.” Excuse me but WTF? Scott is now a “consultant” I worry when former elections officials become consultants. The one thing all these people have in common is an undying faith in paperless voting. I would say that they were all crooked but that would get me sued so I won’t say it. But I had no faith that they were protecting the ballot.

Now I know that I have gotten off track here and talked about all the bad guys in elections but there are people protecting your ballot. Some examples are Freddie Oakley of Yolo County California, Ion Sancho of Leon County Florida and Kevin Shelly and Julie Anne Kempf formerly of King County Washington. These people are examples of people working hard to protect our right to vote and in the case of Julie Anne losing their job in the process. I have talked here about the people but not ballots up to this point. There is a reason for that. The first group of people is out to get your ballot the second wants to preserve your ballot.

There are currently many definitions and thoughts on the subject of ballots. Some would argue that paper records or paper trails can serve the same purpose as a paper ballot. All legislation I see coming from Washington these days talk of Paper records/trails that are kept in a similar manner as ballots. They are to be the official record of the election and are to be used in case of manual recounts. As an example of how hard this would be, let’s look at Diebold’s VVPAT. A long register receipt type “paper trail” is printed. Granted it is better than what does not come from their DRE’s now but it would be very difficult to “hand” count. So why spend money on it, if it does not really do what we want it to do? It is similar but not the same as a ballot. Imagine a 75 year old trying to read the small type on that paper trail. Some, such as our first group of people would argue that an electronic version of the ballot is ok and perfectly acceptable. David Dill explains that voting on DRE’s is like handing your ballot to a man behind a curtain, telling him how you want to vote, he fills in your choices and you never see the ballot again. This is UNACCEPTABLE! Our ballot must be human readable we must be able to discern our own choices and not leave it to a machine interface. Now this is not always possible as in the case of the blind but there are technologies that help the blind to vote in secret that produce a ballot. Equipment such as Automark produces an optical scan or human readable ballot. The ballot is printed on a heavy weight 8 1/2 x 11 sheet of paper with standard markings. Any human or optical scan machine can read these ballots and they are ideal for hand counts should the need arise.

Now there are many people that say we should be all hand counted paper all the time. In an ideal world we would do that. But realistically that is not going to happen. Elections offices in most jurisdictions if not all, are under funded. Elections officials struggle with tight budgets and in most cases do a damned good job with what they have. Not all elections officials are bad and many want to run good clean elections. Keeping the system honest is up to us. With proper auditing and truly random recounts optical scans are the safest and most accurate way to count an election. The trouble starts when the votes are sent via electronic means to a central tabulator. I would also add that the tabulator needs to be as secure as Ft. Knox because after all our votes are more precious than gold.

to hand counted paper ballots. We've been using a machine of some kind for far too many years. I know the old lever machines were introduced in the 1930's!!!

There's no reason why we can't make electronic voting auditable, and verifyable. Every large business in the world relies on computer technology. There are audits done all the time to verify that no one is cheating, and at least once a year, a public accounting firm does a very thorough audit and verifies reports to the SEC. I know it can be done, and we really all have to face the reality that we will NEVER go back to paper and pencil.

Why don't the vote reform people stage a Boston Tea Party, and throw mock voting machines into the Boston Harbor!

He sees it as an obstacle to fed manipulation of elections.

It is the most transparent procedure and it must be the way in which our votes are counted.

This is something everyone needs to put their support behind if they want to see fair elections.

is made.

Proposal:

Voters name, as is typical now, is recorded as admitted.

Voters are then assigned to a specific machine. The time a voter is assigned to a specific machine is recorded.

Printed ballot could be as follows:

Pres: G. Bush (R)
Gov: J. Bush (R)
Senate: No Vote
Congress: K. Harris (R)

Prop 3 - Gay Marriage Ban: Yes

. . .

The ballot would also have a printed bar code for quick counting, and the time/machine number/ballot no. printed at the very top and very bottom of the ballot for audit/tracking purposes.

The voter reviews the ballot, and if not acceptable, surrenders to an election worker for machine reset, spoiling of ballot, and revote. Spoiled ballots are retained. Printed ballots are placed in locked box by voter, just like the old days.

At the close of voting, ballot box is broken open. Ballots are separated by machine, and then into lots of no more than 50 votes per machine. For machines with multiple lots, the lot number is marked on the ballot in ink.

Machine count of each lot is then made using a hand held optical scanner, the printed totals for each lot attached to the lot, and the results of each lot submitted to the elections office. As a part of this process, total number of ballots per machine are compared to the voter assignment record.

As soon as practicable, but not exceeding seven days following the election, a complete manual count/audit to confirm the results of the machine count are performed. In the event of a discrepancy, the manual count results, after rechecking and validation, shall govern.


This process provides for: A quick count the night of the election; Recording of results by lot to help prevent tampering and aid auditing; and most importantly, a complete manual count to verify/audit.

All we need to add is a $100 printer to each machine.


A similar protocal to the above could be used for optical scan ballots (break into lots, machine count night of election, complete manual count/audit following election).

The critical item is the full manual count/audit.

No one is going to game the software for the machine count devices if a full manual count/audit of the paper ballots is to follow.

Proprietary, who cares? If their machines start having 'accuracy' problems as revealed by the manual counts, there will be hell to pay.