BBV: Diebold paid $1 million to the blind - inside story on that

BevHarris

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-15-04 08:16 AM
Original message

BBV: Diebold paid $1 million to the blind - inside story on that

Edited on Tue Jun-15-04 08:21 AM by BevHarris

The current focus for Black Box Voting is on kickbacks and money trail investigations. We have three stories -- the first one broke last week (partially).

We decided that the best way to run the money trail stories is in national mainstream press, without my byline and mostly, without my name even appearing. That's for two reasons:

First, we will get a lot more traction with national press coverage, but they are often reluctant to cover it if they can't appear that they broke the thing themselves.

Second, it isn't the safest idea in the world to go traipsing around the country stirring up stories on kickbacks under my own byline.

So here, we're going to have two stories converge a bit - this one also relates in a minor way to the League of Women Voters reversing their stance.

I began the money trail investigation in Ohio. I was planning to investigate one particular set of officials. They are still on my plate, because I stumbled into something else that caught my attention.

For some reason, my instincts told me to drive to Mercer County, Ohio, to appear at their meeting about whether to buy touch screens.

A bit of background:

Ohio senator Teresa Fedor made a brilliant move in the state senate, forcing the counties to reaffirm the contracts they'd signed if they really wanted touch screens. The National Federation of the Blind stepped in and filed lawsuits in all 31 counties, threatening to sue for civil rights violations unless they bought touch screens.

With CASE Ohio activist and lawyer Susan Truitt, I went to Mercer County, 5 hours away. This county has just 28,000 voters, and just one voter who is visually impaired. Thus, it is bizarre for them to consider spending half a million on Diebold touch screens instead of $300 for a single tactile ballot.

The Mercer County officials seemed a little stunned that we showed up. The prosecuting attorney came down and made a big show of reading the settlement offer from the National Federation of the Blind into the record. This made me sit up and listen! First, in pending litigation they usually go into executive session and settlement offers aren't available to the public. (I immediately did a public records request for that document).

It was worded only slightly nicer than this: "We'll make our lawsuit go away if you immediately buy those touch screens."

Since almost all the 31 counties were contracting for Diebold touch screens, I started to wonder about the relationship between the National Federation for the Blind and Diebold. I'd heard there was an ATM lawsuit and a payment.

Here's what I found

1. The NFB sued Diebold and NCR over ATMs that weren't accessible. They settled with NCR and Diebold, and the two firms retrofitted -- but ONLY DIEBOLD PAID MONEY TO THE NATIONAL FEDERATION FOR THE BLIND. Diebold paid $1 million.

2. Then the NFB went on a lawsuit spree, suing a whole string of banks to get them to buy retrofitted ATMs.

At this point, I called Andy Stephenson. "Seems weird that only Diebold paid cash in addition to retrofitting. Wonder if there have been more payments from Diebold."

Instantly, he said, "The banks the NFB sued -- did they then buy Diebold?"

He went looking for that while I went looking for more.

I found:

3. The National Federation for the Blind announced a formal PARTNERSHIP with Diebold on the ATMs. They were on a shakedown cruise, we sue - we make this go away if you buy Diebold.

Andy found:

4. Yup. The banks that got sued then bought Diebold.

I found:

5. Inside source at Diebold: At least six banks are trying to drop Diebold ATMs. When they did the redesign, quality problems arose and the banks are unhappy. These banks include the biggies, like Wells Fargo and U.S. Bank.

6. What's wrong with this picture:

First, the organizations should DISCLOSE that they have taken payments, and especially, any partnership agreements with Diebold, when they lobby for the voting machines.

Second, the lawsuits were selectively filed -- and didn't say to get an accessible option (there are at least three) but said only to get touch screens. And the lawsuits weren't filed against all counties that don't have touch screens, just against those who were in the process of purchase negotiations.

==================

Enter the New York Times.

Adam Cohen, head of the editorial board of the New York Times, called me wanting to do a story on the vendors who hired former public officials. I gave him the rundown on what I know on that. "But you should do a story on the blind," I suggested. "It's politically incorrect. You've got the clout to do this, though."

I told him what we'd found. He perked up, kept me on the phone for nearly an hour. Then called back to tell me he'd confirmed the $1 million (that's an easy confirm, it's on the Internet). I sent him the lawsuit from the NFB, a bunch of documents, and Andy's research.

Last Thursday, the article appeared in the New York Times. The very next day, the NFB dropped its lawsuits in Ohio.

Of the 31 counties, only five are going ahead with touch screens.

=================

But there's more: According to insiders, Jim Dickson of the AAPD was planning a dramatic and theatrical bit at the League of Women Voters, to dissuade them from changing their stance. Something like -- planting someone at every microphone in the caucus and dominating the floor. Dickson gets very loud and dramatic.

I guess they thought it wasn't such a good idea to draw such attention to themselves, just days after the New York Times revealed that his group had taken $26,000 from the vendors.

There will be more.

This is the smallest of the three stories on kickbacks and money trails.

Bev Harris