Howard Dean on Diebold: "These machines are a problem"

[kpete]

Howard Dean on Diebold: "These machines are a problem"
by David Grossman
Fri Apr 21, 2006 at 10:37:28 PM PDT

The transcript of the breakfast I attended with Howard Dean is now online. http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=11436 The night before the breakfast, I asked folks on here what would be a good question(s) to ask, and the question I ended up asking Dean was from ronald III.

The question was about Diebold and voting fraud and I picked the question because after searching around, there didn't seem to be almost anything on record from Dean or the DNC on the subject (and it's an important subject).

Here's my question and Dean's answer from the transcript (if you've got 15 to 20 minutes and are very interested in Howard Dean, it's a good read):

David Grossman: Governor, one question by way of the blog Daily Kos. How concerned are you and others at the DNC about Diebold voting machines, and...

Dean: Very.

Grossman: ...other issues of voting fraud?

Dean: Very concerned. I am actually calling Democratic public officials. I called one yesterday to try to head off the use of these machines. We spent half a million dollars after the election with a task force, headed by Donna Brazile but made up of academics that were relatively neutral and very careful, to look at these machines very carefully. We concluded that are easily hackable and cannot be verified and that they are not reliable. And we concluded the best machine you can use is an opti-scan machine because at least it has paper ballots and you still get the rapidity of the counting. There are Democratic officials who still use these because they get huge amounts of money from the federal government to buy these kinds of machines, well, not just ... the other machines, the Sequoias and Diebolds and such. I'm not an expert on these machines, although someone did actually teach me how to hack one on live TV once, which was kind of fun. It's pretty shocking -- I know so little about the intricacies of all this stuff so ... I wouldn't pretend I ... I did change the vote totals on the machines, but I don't know if it was really -- could have been a program that was elaborately programmed to fool me into thinking I was doing something I really wasn't doing.



But yes, our conclusion is that these machines are not reliable and they undermine confidence in democracy. I, as you know, keep in pretty constant touch with lots of people around the country, many of the people who supported me for President are people who are very much involved in exposing this. There have been some success stories in North Carolina, for example, the legislature wrote the bill so that essentially Diebold's unwillingness to provide source codes or any kind of reliability disqualified them from the bidding. So, we're pushing back on this hard. Republican legislators seem to think these are great things. We don't get very far in states that are controlled by Republican governors and legislatures, but we have had some success. We believe it's important to keep talking about these machines. These machines are a problem. This is not some Internet conspiracy; this is a serious problem that faces American democracy. These machines are not reliable and they shouldn't be used. We should not be using machines in this country where the results of the vote can't be verified after the fact. Period. Any machines. (emphasis added)

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/4/22/13728/8193

[paineinthearse]

1. Tough crowd

Zip interest in GEN. The "pointer" post in the elections reform post has 12 votes and many responses.

[itzamirakul]

2. I understand that during the 2004 election, Republican technicians came

into selected polling places and "collected the voting data" from the suspect machines. It was pretty obvious that they changed the totals to fit their party's needs.

I never did understand why these GOP vote changers are called "brown shirts" but it seems really stupid to me that we Democrats don't have "our own gangs" checking the vote tallies as well.

[Hekate]

50. Google for "brown shirts" -- it's a Nazi thing. nt

[Junkdrawer]

3. "I'm not an expert on these machines..." - That's the problem - no one is

EXCEPT the people the voting machine makers allow to see the code and the procedures.

Thanks to, yes, Bev Harris, we've caught a glimpse of the Diebold code. And look what that has revealed! But procedures vary from state-to-state and district-to-district. So, in the end, we have suspicions, a small amount of proof, and are facing "the experts" who pooh pooh our concerns.

And that's how it will be until the veil of secrecy is lifted. IF it is ever lifted.

[Stevepol]

38. What do you mean "a small amount of proof"????

We have overwhelming evidence that the 04 election, e.g., was a fraud. As Mark Crispin Miller says, There's no evidence at all that the 04 election was fair, and there's overwhelming evidence of all kinds that it wasn't.

You've got statistics that show beyond any doubt whatever that either the vote was counted fraudulently or the exit polls were screwed up. Which do you think it was? Remember we've got 50 states, and many of the states did exit polls too and they agreed essentially with the Edison-Mitofsky poll.

We've got anecdotal proof of the voting machines flipping Kerry votes to Bush in a hugely discrepant fashion. Miller claims that he was able to find only 4 cases where the machine flipped a Bush vote to Kerry (all in Texas).

We've got all kinds of examples of gestapo techniques being used to weed out the Dem vote, from felon lists to God knows what.

The only thing that argues for a Bush win is the electronic voting machine totals and remember the machines are essentially never audited at all. They are run by trade secret proprietary software devised by some of the most right wing companies in America.

There's enough proof out there now to convict anybody in a court of law. We just don't hear about it because the news media have refused to cover anything remotely suggesting fraud. Wouldn't be good for business don't you know.

[Junkdrawer]

47. Sorry Steve. I speak from frustration. To wit:

In Pittsburgh, we were able to prevent Diebold from selling their machines to the county thanks to the work many of us were able to do examining the source code.

So you know what we're getting? ES&S touchscreens. Talk about a Pyrrhic victory. Now, had we the ES&S source code.....

[Deb]

4. Thank you!

This article is like breakfast,excellent Q&As. I'll be sharing it.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

5. Go Howard. nt.

[BeFree]

6. He's taking notice! Finally

Well, Mr. Dean, why don't you take a look at the HR 550 bill stalled in congress?

That bill, while it fails to outlaw the damned machines, would make the machines open for inspection, require audits of the machines, and clarify the paper trail aspect for federal elections much the same way the state of North Carolina has required.

HR 550 even has a few republicans supporting its passage. The bill needs some pushing, and you, Mr. Dean, can help.

--------------------------

Come to DU's Election Forum to read all about it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=203

[blm]

10. Dean should convene a NATIONAL SUMMIT of ALL Dems on election boards

in every state and bring in the hackers and the data collectors who are working to expose the fraud to present their findings and DEMONSTRATIONS.

[BeFree]

12. Grand Idea, blm

It fits right in with the idea of Taking Back America.

Easily doable, and would bring in a very actively engaged bunch of activists to the good Doctor's movement. After all, the Culture of Corruption is truly manifested in the stolen vote.

[converted_democrat]

14. I agree.. Be a good idea to include Democratic Governors, and

Dem Secretary of States for good measure.. (I know I pluralized incorrectly, but you get the drift.)

[suziedemocrat]

7. I LOVE Dean - but I'm not sure opti-scans are so benign. n/t

[Toots]

8. But they do require a paper ballot and that can be recounted by humans

When Bush* made his statement that only machines could be trusted because they were objective where people were subjective (especially after running on the meme "I Trust the People") I knew we were in deep shit. If Bush* and his Cabal are for it I am adamantly opposed

[Raksha]

23. Elections should NOT be based on "trust"

whether of people or machines, but on transparency and verifiabily. To even use the word "trust" shows that our elections have become a confidence game.

[Cos]

43. optical scan is a great step for now

At the local level, city or county elections officials in many places find the concept of getting rid of the machines and hand counting everything somewhat threatening.

I've spoken to some city and town clerks here in Massachusetts about it. From their point of view, they've been using optical scan for years, it's easy, it works, and it's reliable. And, it really is. I've been a poll watcher for a number of elections, and I've also been a precinct captain and field coordinator. I've seen the numbers at both ends: how many people voted, how many people were identified by the campaign as supporters, what the reported vote totals were ... I've even participated in a hand recount (as an observer on behalf of a campaign, watching a counting team ballot by ballot). I agree with them as far as that goes: the optical scan machines used in Massachusetts probably do give highly accurate results. Not quite as accurate as a hand count, but even a hand count has some error, and when we have an election close enough that the difference between the two kinds of error might swing the result, well, we have all the paper ballots and we can hand count them.

And that's exactly the point: With optical scan, we have hand marked paper ballots. That's far superior to any DRE VVPAT.

If you push for hand counting, I fear a majority of local elections officials will oppose you out of gut reaction, and you get nowhere. If you push for optical scan, you're likely to get support from a majority of them. Once you have optical scan, you can go further, engage them on the issue of transparency, organize a local team of volunteers to hand count the ballots, etc. The key is, getting those hand marked paper ballots in place. Without them, you can't accomplish much.

[Peace Patriot]

9. He says a lot more than "These machines are a problem." Maybe that's

why these MOMENTOUS REMARKS of Dean's on the UN-VERIFIABILITY of our election system, the FINANCIAL MOTIVE of some Democratic leaders in promoting them, and REPUBLICAN PREFERENCE FOR UNVERIFIABLE ELECTIONS, have drawn so little comment. But it was a 3 a.m. post, so maybe that's the problem.

I think you should re-post it in the morning.

All of DU should read these remarks.

---------------------------------------

ANALYSIS

First of all, it should be pointed out that these were off-hand remarks in the course of a breakfast, not a formal statement, and we should therefore forgive Dean the somewhat rambling nature of these remarks ON THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE FACING OUR DEMOCRACY. But I will say this about it, that the gist of these remarks SHOULD HAVE BEEN formalized a long time ago, in MAJOR SPEECHES, PRESS RELEASES and TALKING POINTS, and SHOUTED FROM THE ROOFTOPS in every neighborhood in America, not to mention NAILED TO THE DOORS OF CONGRESS AND THE WHITE HOUSE.

Why that hasn't happened is the great mystery of the Democratic Party--before the 2004 elections, and now. He mentions Donna Brazile. She was the "before"--she and Terry McAulife--who were responsible for the GREAT SILENCE of the Democratic Party, as Tom Delay and Bob Ney designed the destruction of our election system with the "Hack America Vote Act," a $4 billion boondoggle by which RIGHTWING BUSHITE corporations gained control of the tabulation of all our votes with "TRADE SECRET," PROPRIETARY programming code and virtually no audit/recount controls.

Half a million dollars to Donna Brazile for a report that endorses Optiscans--the machines that failed Ion Sancho's security tests in Florida, and which he banned! Money wasted, Mr. Dean. It would have been better spent on funding INDEPENDENT EXIT POLLS.

The war profiteering corporate news monopoly exit polls cannot be trusted--and there IS no other way to verify elections run on "TRADE SECRET," PROPRIETARY programming code, whether it's in touchscreens, optiscans or the central tabulators. Paper trail or no paper trail.

"I'm not an expert on these machines." --Howard Dean

"I know so little about the intricacies of all this stuff...." --Howard Dean

Right. And you are responsible for electing Democrats?

Come on. I don't buy it. I'd like to trust you, Governor. But remarks like that make me wonder. Why haven't you BECOME an expert? Why haven't you delved into the intricacies of BUSHITE CORPORATIONS counting all our votes behind a veil of secrecy?

One of the biggest black holes in Democratic politicians' remarks about these machines--IF THEY SAY ANYTHING AT ALL--regards WHO OWNS AND CONTROLS the source code, which is never mentioned.

And here they are:

Diebold: Until recently, headed by CEO Wally O'Dell, a Bush/Cheney campaign chair and major fundraiser, who promised in writing to "deliver" Ohio to Bush/Cheney in 2004.

ES&S: A spinoff of Diebold (similar computer architecture), initially funded by rightwing billionaire Howard Ahmanson, who also gave one million dollars to the extremist 'christian' Chalcedon Foundation (which touts the death penalty for homosexuals, among other things). Diebold and ES&S have an incestuous relationship--they are run by two brothers, Tod and Bob Urosevich. Together, Diebold and ES&S "tabulated" 80% of the nation's votes in 2004.

Sequoia: Employs former Calif Republican Secretary of State Bill Jones and his chief aide Alfie Charles to sell their machines--the two who initially brought this crapass technology to California--a case of corrupt "revolving door" employment typical of the way Delay/Ney expected PRIVATE corporations to destroy election integrity--the other being lavish lobbying.

These are the people counting all our votes behind a veil of secrecy.

"Republican legislators seem to think these are great things." --Howard Dean

Hello! Earth to Governor Dean! Surprise, surprise! No-brainer, Governor! (I know, I know--at least he SAID it! But jeez...)

"There are Democratic officials who still use these because they get huge amounts of money from the federal government..." --Howard Dean

Yup.

"We concluded that (they) are easily hackable and cannot be verified and that they are not reliable." --Howard Dean

Yup.

"...we concluded the best machine you can use is an opti-scan machine because at least it has paper ballots..." --Howard Dean

Nope.

The "best machine you can use" is a human being! Paper ballots, hand-counted at the precinct level--in the open, with human eyes upon it. ALL the machines have SECRET SOURCE CODE. NONE of the audit/recount controls are even close to being adequate for verification, EVEN WITH a paper ballot.

"You still get the rapidity of the counting..." --Howard Dean

Yup. At the speed of light, inside black boxes that no one can observe, run by "TRADE SECRET" programming controlled by Bushites. Duh.

"We should not be using machines in this country where the results of the vote can't be verified after the fact. Period. Any machines."--Howard Dean

Yup.

And WHY do we? And why was the Democratic Party completely SILENT about it until now? And why was the breaking of that silence a report that endorses optiscans that contain 'TRADE SECRET," PROPRIETARY programming code owned and controlled by Bushite corporations? And why is the Democratic Party opposition to this OUTRAGE--which NEVER mentions *WHO* OWNS AND CONTROLS these machines, and what they have done for George Bush--still barely above a whisper, and only in response to a happenstance question in the course of a political breakfast?

Dean ultimately says some of the right things in this answer to a question, and what he says is mind-blowing, but he leaves a couple of things out. Let me repeat...

"We should not be using machines in this country where the results of the vote can't be verified after the fact. Period. Any machines."--Howard Dean

Non-transparent. Unverifiable. Secret. Speed of light. Bushite-controlled vote counting.

He leaves out Bushite-controlled. And he leaves out former DNC total silence, as this election theft system was put into place, and the current--we can barely hear you--WHISPER of objection by the Democratic Party leadership to this COMPLETE OUTRAGE OF FASCIST CONTROL OF THE VOTE COUNTING.

---------------

"This is not some Internet conspiracy..."* --Howard Dean

Nope. But it IS a conspiracy. And what the grass roots of the Democratic Party--who represent the majority of people in this country--needs to know is just how complicit our party leadership has been in creating non-transparent elections run by partisan rightwing Bushites. Because that's how we got four more years of war--and its attendant billions and billions of dollars in unaccountable, no-bid contract military spending.

--------------

*(Even Howard Dean cannot cleanse his mind of Rovian "talking points.")

Note: Regarding the Diebold test on TV that he was part of, and his obscure inference or suspicion that somebody had programmed the machine to fool him into believing that it was hackable--somebody needs to put Gov. Dean on the phone with Ion Sancho (and with all the other experts and non-corrupt election officials around the country who have cried foul on these machines).

[blm]

11. I say above - Dean needs a NATIONAL SUMMIT of ALL Dems on election boards

in every state. And he needs to do it soon.

While I want to cherry-pick the positive words, the casualness of his remarks struck me as a bit too frivolous. If Dean doesn't make the rigged machines a DEAD SERIOUS issue, it makes it difficult to mount the attack we need to make on a national scale.

[glitch]

16. NATIONAL SUMMIT of ALL Dems on election boards - very good idea.

I am sure they are afraid of turning people off of voting. But what they don't realize is people are already turned off, and cleaning up the system is exactly what would turn them back on. Or at least emphasizing my failsafe:

Don't give it to them, make them steal it.

(followed by investigate, indict, convict, imprison, punitive damages)

[Peace Patriot]

18. Yeah, I agree, BLM--and you say it more succinctly than I do. How

could he be so casual about this ALL-IMPORTANT, PRIORITY #1 ISSUE?

He DOES say he's been working on it, and he hints at the real problem. He's dealing with massive corruption among both Dem and Repub election officials--which is exactly what Tom Delay, Bob Ney and Christopher Dodd intended, with their "Help America Vote for Bush Act" and its $4 billion porkbarrel.

As an official of the party and its chief spokesperson, he has a number of problems. Democratic leaders' corruption and complicity is one of them. Another is--I'm sure--he doesn't want to suppress the vote. And a third is, he doesn't want to suppress donations. And a fourth may be some kind of concern about de-stabilizing the country--although it's hard to imagine a country that is in more trouble than this one, even with no rioting in the streets.

But I think he's taken the wrong strategy in walking this tightrope. The American people are horribly demoralized and disempowered. They DON'T KNOW *WHY* we have this oppressive, murderous, thieving, lying regime. And they NEED TO KNOW WHY. What the hell do you expect with Bushite corporations counting all the votes behind a veil of secrecy? But the Democratic Party has placed an "Iron Curtain" over this realization. And I mean an "Iron Curtain." (--and DailyKos was part of it, so I have no sympathy for them, even though they're good on other issues; they helped SUPPRESS analysis and comment on the 2004 election theft.) That's what Dean is referring to when he says "internet conspiracy" ("This is no internet conspiracy.") Even Dean bought this crap from Brazile/McAulife and all the corrupt Dem legislators and election officials.

The American people need THE TRUTH--and let THEM solve this problem. THAT'S democracy! You shouldn't keep a lid on it--for fear of no one voting, or no one contributing, or no one volunteering. I DO think that's what's going on with Dean. And I think he's wrong.

I think it would be a great RELIEF to those Americans who don't know, to find out that the Bush junta stole a second election, or--since many of them SUSPECT it already--to be presented with the facts about the NON-TRANSPARENT election system, and who was in control of the vote count, and what the inferential evidence reveals (--an overwhelming inferential case that Bush did not win).

I think we can ENGAGE voters in beating the machines in '06 (and in '08, if these non-transparent conditions persist)--and get the massive turnout NEEDED to beat the machines. But you can't do it by letting this demoralization continue--and this poor self-image many Americans have of themselves and the country. You have to tell them WHAT HAPPENED, and how to fix it.

Simple bumper sticker: "Help Us Beat the Machines--VOTE!"

But, a) I think Dean's getting a lot of resistance from corrupted Dem election officials (I've seen them at work in California--and they are bloody awful); and b) fear may additionally be at work-- fear of overly powerful election officials, fear of getting swiftboated like Kevin Shelley was in California, and fear of the sheer power of the Diebod/ES&S/Sequoia cabal (who ganged up on Ion Sancho in Florida), and ultimately fear of the very dangerous people in the White House and behind the White House (the Howard Ahmanson's of this world).

I also sense in Dean fear of the corporate news monopolies (who were complicit with Diebold/ES&S in the 2004 election theft--with their falsification of their exit polls to match Diebold/ES&S's "trade secret" vote tabulation).

"This is not an internet conspiracy." --Howard Dean. What does THAT tell you about the corporate news propaganda "talking points" at work in his head? There IS reason to fear them. They are liars and warmongers and Bush ass-kissers, with five billionaire CEO's controlling all the news and opinion--they are very powerful, and they utterly despise democracy and are into brainwashing and hypnotizing people with illusions about our powerlessness, for one thing, and about rightwing hegemony. In fact, they colluded to destroy HIS anti-war campaign for president. So I'm not saying he should go off "half-cocked," as the saying goes.

But to what extent should we permit the war profiteering Bushite corporations that control news and opinion to dictate the terms of the discussion of Bushite corporations controlling the vote count with secret programming? Dean and the DNC should be seeking to GET AROUND that, not to cooperate with it. Keeping the American people ignorant is not an option! It never should have been.

No question that this a complicated political matter. Dean's side-wise swipe (above) at Democrats who promote the machines because of the HAVA money indicates how complicated it is. As DNC chair, he can't really go after corrupt Dems directly.

But NONE of this means that a major campaign against NON-TRANSPARENT elections cannot be undertaken--in the media, and directly to the grass roots and the people. He doesn't have to say the election was stolen. All he has to say is that NON-TRANSPARENT elections, secret source code, partisan vendors, private corporate control of elections, and crapass hackable voting machines, are NO-BRAINER anathemas in a democracy. People will connect the dots for themselves--and they will be HEARTENED to know that the Democrats know what the game is, and will gladly, joyfully, gleefully join in to beat the Bushite machines!

THAT's how to get votes. THAT's how to restore democracy. Not by lying to people. They've had enough of lying.

One more thing: MONITORING! We need many thousands of vigilant citizens monitoring this next election. We need people watching this thing like hawks--hopefully dozens of people at every precinct and central tabulation point. Dean says, "I am no expert...I don't know the intricacies." Well, he'd better get savvy fast--just like some of us have had to--and be able to provide instructions for monitoring and data-gathering and analysis, and be able to organize such things and cooperate with groups like www.UScountvotes.org, who are planning quick data analysis projects. The DNC should have the whole country mapped out, as to levels of election transparency--or cooperate with groups that have done so.

And, above all, the DNC should fund INDEPENDENT EXIT POLLS in every Congressional election. Honest exit polls are THE essential tool in non-transparent conditions. They're used worldwide for that purpose. Edison-Mitofsky (the corporate news monopoly consortium pollster) cannot be trusted.

As to Dean being "casual" or "frivolous" about this matter--I don't think he really is. He interrupts Grossman's question to say that he is "VERY" concerned about it. But I do think he's got a difficult situation on his hands. We need to do our OWN work on this matter--we, the people--and continue to pressure Dean and the Democratic leadership to help us restore our right to vote. This corrupt, entrenched political establishment is not going to do that on its own.

[Raksha]

30. You make a VERY good point, Peace Patriot!

Re >>The American people are horribly demoralized and disempowered. They DON'T KNOW *WHY* we have this oppressive, murderous, thieving, lying regime. And they NEED TO KNOW WHY. What the hell do you expect with Bushite corporations counting all the votes behind a veil of secrecy? But the Democratic Party has placed an "Iron Curtain" over this realization. And I mean an "Iron Curtain." (--and DailyKos was part of it, so I have no sympathy for them, even though they're good on other issues; they helped SUPPRESS analysis and comment on the 2004 election theft.) That's what Dean is referring to when he says "internet conspiracy" ("This is no internet conspiracy.")<<

The American people desperately NEED TO KNOW WHY their government no longer reflects their will and experience, what they see right in front of their eyes every day. They know they gave up on BushCo a long time ago. They see their neighbors peeling Bush/Cheney bumperstickers off their cars. Everybody they talk to is fed up with the Iraq war and nobody even tries to defend the Bush regime any more. Maybe they don't read DU, but they participate in the occasional online poll and they are aware of Dubya's plunging approval numbers and the growing movement for impeachment. But they don't see their concerns reflected on the national level and they DON'T KNOW WHY they have been disempowered. What's happening is gaslighting on a national scale, aided and abetted by the corporate media AND the continuing silence of the Democratic party.

No get-out-the-vote effort can possibly succeed unless the people are made aware there is a VERY GOOD REASON for their sense of disempowerment and futility. Until then, they are just going to remain trapped in it, paralyzed and unable to act.

I agree with you also about Daily Kos. True, they are good on other issues, but I remember very well how they actively suppressed any discussion of election fraud right after the election, and therefore made themselves one more part of the problem instead of part of the solution.

[blm]

33. Brazille and MacAuliffe are never going to admit that THEY screwed up by

neglecting the machine fraud issue - they aren't wired that way.

We have to push this through the Dem party every which way but loose.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

57. when the heck will they pitch Brazille out?

There are so many good people out there, can't Brazille
decide to "spend more time with family".

Do it for us, Donna, do it for the country.
: )

[BeFree]

15. One of us has to move...

Either the Democratic party moves on this issue, or I move. I will not belong to a party that does nothing to ensure my vote is counted as cast.

I will never again offer a dime of money to the party until it takes a stand against the vote stealing bastards.

I will resign my vice-chairmanship in my county's organization and publicly declare my opposition to a party that can't cover the fundamental elements of democracy: my right to open and honest elections.

Mr. Dean, you have been presented with an option to save our democracy, I hope you use it wisely.

[mod mom]

19. Dean knows but does not have full control of the Dem Party on this.

This is wonderful that he is saying this, but as he says WE SHOULD NOT USE THE MACHINES! We must rid the party of the corporatists who fear loss of control of the party and push forward so that the will of the people and their choice of candidates will prevail.

[blm]

34. Dean is probably meeting the same resistance in the Dem party circle that

Kerry is meeting in the senate. No one can wrap the brains around it and he is getting inside crap from those who have to see it before they'll believe it. Asshats!

[Peace Patriot]

21. BeFree, while I sympathize with your anger, and you are of course

free to do as you think best, I caution against defecting from the Democratic Party on this issue. If we are going to restore our right to vote--in what I think is a narrow window of opportunity to do so, and in time to save this country from disaster--we NEED the Democratic leadership to help us do it. By defecting, you punish the very honorable people, like Debra Bowen in California, and John Bonifaz in Massachusetts, who have come forward to slug this issue out against the corrupt. And you punish Dean himself, whom I think is actually working on the issue as best he can (in his own view of his limitations).

I have been a Democratic voter, and supporter and activist, for forty years. I have often been tempted to defect, as this party's leaders have turned further and further to the right, but I have never done so. And it may be that this party needs to be dismantled and replaced with a more representative party. (It's representative at the grass roots, but NOT in the leadership--the elected officials and other operatives; Dean is the closest we've come.) Clearly, the Democratic Party needs a major housecleaning--or replacement with a political party that represents the majority of people in this country.

But now is NOT the time. If we don't get back our right to vote, and restore transparent elections, it's all over. American democracy will very likely be unrecoverable. We MUST gain the support of the Democratic Party leadership for transparent elections, and it IS happening, gradually. Non-transparent elections are insupportable, and they know it. The issue is gathering steam. The corrupt are becoming more and more exposed. This is what MUST happen, to save our country. The Democratic leadership must be pressured, forced, cajoled and shamed into getting on board. We've got most of them saying at least that there must be a "voter verified paper ballot." That's progress. It gives us some ability to monitor and challenge election results. We need to push them much further--to throw these goddamned Bushite corporations out of our election system. Banning "trade secret" source code may accomplish that. There are several Dem bills in Congress that call for that. (HR 550, for instance, which has over 170 co-sponsors.) I don't put much hope in Congressional action (and I fear it, to some degree). But these official Democratic policy statements help us at the local/state level, where the real election reform movement is happening.

I'm giving them through '08. And then I become Thomas Jefferson. (And YOU know what HE said!).

[BeFree]

56. Did you read my post?

I said I will quit the party if they don't tackle the issue of e-voting machinery. Looks like the deadline is fast approaching, say about August of this year. If the party, nationally, does not come down hard on HAVA, then I will become and independent again.

Until then, I will do what ever I can to see that my party does everything reasonable to make sure my vote - and your vote, too - is counted as cast.

Not that the Dems would miss me, but for my own well being, if the party does not do this basic thing, then I'll have to give up on it. That promise is the best leverage I have to move the party. Either they move, or I do.

[WiseButAngrySara]

39. Excellent point-by-point analysis, Peace Patriot! Bravo! ....n/t

[Raksha]

45. You raise a very good question, and I think I may have an answer.

Re >>why was the Democratic Party completely SILENT about it until now? And why was the breaking of that silence a report that endorses optiscans that contain 'TRADE SECRET," PROPRIETARY programming code owned and controlled by Bushite corporations? And why is the Democratic Party opposition to this OUTRAGE--which NEVER mentions *WHO* OWNS AND CONTROLS these machines, and what they have done for George Bush--still barely above a whisper, and only in response to a happenstance question in the course of a political breakfast?<<

Why indeed...WHY is this issue of the ownership and control of the voting machines never raised by a Democrat? It's a pretty glaring omission, all right, especially a year and a half later when the issue is FINALLY percolating upward from the grassroots, forcing itself upon the party movers and shakers despite their best efforts at stonewalling.

Why be silent about something so obviously against the party's self-interest? The only answer I can come up with is that it wasn't against the self-interest of certain individual candidates. THAT was the price of their silence! They kept silent on the critical issue of ownership and control of the machines IN EXCHANGE FOR LETTING THEM WIN, or maybe even rigging the election in their favor. How difficult would it be, after all? After that, of course, they would be effectively blackmailed if they did try to speak out.

What does everyone think about this theory?

[flpoljunkie]

13. Disturbing. Why aren't the Dems screaming about the "proprietary code?"

You have to wonder at their cluelessness. Don't they understand by now who they are dealing with--the "do anything to win party" of Karl Rove.

[nashville_brook]

31. this is the obvious meme -- PROPRIETARY? eksqueeze me??!!

people used to pay public relations consultants BIG BUCKS to obscure these dirty little facts. they don't even hide this shit anymore. that takes some BALLS.

[RoyGBiv]

48. A few reasons ...

Some of them good ones, most not, others rather neutral. I won't highlight them all, but the most important two, in my mind, are these.

1) The average person on the street doesn't have a clue what "proprietary code" means. If you build a campaign against this crap, that is if you have any interest at all in whipping up at large public support, it usually doesn't pay to use concepts the vast majority of people don't even understand. That said, Dems should be screaming something that says the very same thing, wrapped in an easy-to-understand wrapper, but we're not going to get very far using words and phrases that are understood primarily only by people who are already on board. Furthermore, there's a rather obvious counter to screaming about proprietary code. "Windows is proprietary. Nintey percent of Americans with computers use Windows. Are you saying Windows is bad?" Again, people already on board are going to nod their head "yes," Windows is bad, or if not at least understand this is not a valid comparison. But this is the same kind of thing that gets Dems in trouble in other areas. The opposition can use a position rooted in a poorly understood concept to make it seem as though the Dems are saying that Average American is a bad person, and who wants to listen to someone who says you're a bad person.

2) Related to the above, actually, is the fact that most Dems in positions of influence aren't real sure how they feel about proprietary code in the first place, or at least not how they should address it in the context of this issue, in part because they rely on money from tech companies and people in the tech industry that have a vested interest in not allowing the term "proprietary code" to be asscociated with anything negative. You can't go on a general rampage regarding the proprietary nature of voting machine code without eventually running across the same issues involved in the patent and copyright wars currently being waged behind the scenes every day. People on both sides of the aisle are afraid of this battle, partly because they don't understand it completely, but also because it puts them in the position of taking a stand against their corporate masters.

Or at least that's my view of it. Open source solutions exist and have existed for years for everything from voting to disaster management, but Microsoft nd other proprietary code vendors have been very successful in convincing government officials from both major political parties into not using it because it threatens their hold on the technology industry.

[Patsy Stone]

17. Kick and Rec

for fair elections and Howard!

[nashville_brook]

20. when you "z"-out a cash register, you also count the money

you don't just believe the tape.

why isn't there a similar protocol for VOTING?

[Peace Patriot]

24. Exactly. The Democratic leaders should be demanding a 100% recount

in '06 and '08--and a high, 5% to 10%, auditing recount as the standard, if we stay with electronics, with the paper ballot record taking precedence in any recount. And we, the grass roots of the party, need to face the truth about why this NO-BRAINER accounting has not been done: corruption in our own party, wrought by the $4 billion HAVA boondoggle, the lack of controls on lavish lobbying and "revolving door" employment in the election theft industry, and other ill intentions of the crooked, Bushite designers of HAVA.

But the BLATANT, EGREGIOUS non-transparency of the system that Bushite corporations sold to the states gives me hope that it can be corrected, and that the movement to correct it will grow into American Revolution II: the revolution against our war profiteering corporate rulers.

As is happening throughout Latin America, it can be a peaceful, democratic revolution. THAT revolution has been based on transparent elections--achieved by a lot of hard work on the part of local civic groups, the OAS, EU election monitoring groups and the Carter Center.

We need to do that work here.

[nashville_brook]

25. i heard jimmy carter say that his election-watch group won't observe

US elections b/c we don't meet their minimum requirements. i can't remember the show he was on -- but i know it was long after he was promoting the last book.

it might have been fresh air.

[Cos]

44. Now THAT's a nice analogy!

Thank you, I hadn't thought of that one. I talk a lot about banks and medical records and methods of dealing with the potential for computer bugs and data corruption; I rail against the use of the word "receipt" when talking about ballots; but counting the register at the end of the day is so right on and I've never used it.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

58. great analogy, will have to borrow this

hadn't thought of it -

but imagine if stores only considered the cash register tape,
and didn't count the money.

This would be great also with a picture of the person counting
down the drawer. What if you only counted the ones, or the fives, or
just a few pieces of the money.

I have been an office cashier, but until now, did not see the direct
and complete comparison.

[blm]

59. EXCELLENT and SIMPLE. Start a thread with this theme.

We'll help push it.

[Imagevision]

22. Demand a paper balloted machine or get them out!!

Diebold is a whiz when it comes to its ATM's but for elections they've decided not to have them be verifiable??? The mere notion of this is suspicious!

[Ksec]

26. Howard fkin rocks

I love this guy.

He speaks to me and my concerns. He speaks in plain talking, common sense.

[lovuian]

27. I love Dean and have hope for the Democrats under him

:patriot:

[Peace Patriot]

28. Here's a program for Dean and the Democratic Party leaders:

1. DNC funding of independent exit polls in all Congressional elections in '06. Badly needed!

2. Demand a 100% recount of all Congressional elections in '06, due to the non-transparency of the voting system.

3. In lieu of #2--which will be difficult to get, at this point--organize and fund a major citizen monitoring of all election officials' behavior, all vote tabulation machines, and all results, in cooperation with voting rights and election reform groups.

4. Fund the bumper sticker: "Help us beat the machines--VOTE!"*

5. Encourage absentee ballot or other paper ballot voting, wherever possible. (It isn't the complete solution, but it does provide a paper record, and it is a form of protest against the machines.)

6. Get those 180 lawyers back together.

--------------------------------------------

*(The machine advantage to Bushites CAN be beaten by big turnout--for several reasons: The election theft industry does not want to jeopardize future fascist control of our government by being too obvious in their vote stealing. If it's close, they can easily steal it. If it's not close, stealing it is not so easy without showing their hand. Simple as that. Secondly, it's my surmise that the machines had to be pre-programmed in 2004 and were not so easy to change on election day itself. That's why they had to do the highly visible and illegal suppression of the Democratic vote in Ohio and other places. The machine percentage advantage that had been pre-programmed in many places in the country wasn't big enough to overcome Kerry's win. Finally, big citizen participation--even in a rigged machine context--is a big plus for democracy, whatever the outcome, and it is heartburn to the fascists. They want us demoralized. Say "NO" to demoralization!)

[Peace Patriot]

29. SOME RESOURCES FOR AMERICAN REVOLUTION II:

Hopeful signs - latest news:

California voters sue the state over Diebold:
www.VoterAction.org is suing the state of California and 18 Calif county registrars on behalf of 25 California voter/plaintiffs, on the illegal Diebold "certification" by Schwarzenegger appointee Bruce McPherson.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2180496

Maryland rejects Diebold:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x418263

Florida - anti-trust accusations against Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia, re: heroic Florida election official Ion Sancho:
(FLA AG subpoenas the companies)
http://www.computerworld.com/governmenttopics/government/legalissues/story/0,10801,110192,00.html
http://www.tbo.com/news/politics/MGBKSY8W8LE.html
(info & discussion)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2183630

Utah county clerk fights back!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x419226

-----

More resources for American Revolution II:

www.votersunite.org (MythBreakers - easy primer on electronic voting--one of the myths is that HAVA requires electronic voting; it does not.)
www.UScountvotes.org (statistical monitoring of '06 and '08 elections--they need donations)

(Activist sites with links to state activist groups or info)
www.votetrustusa.org (news of this great movement from around the country)
www.votersunited.org (good general info, and state links)
www.verifiedvoting.org (great activist site)
www.solarbus.org/election/index.shtml (fab compendium of all election info)

www.freepress.org (devoted to election reform)
www.bradblog.com (also great, and devoted to election reform)
www.TruthIsAll.net (analysis of the 2004 election)* :patriot: :applause: :patriot:
www.votepa.us (well-organized local group of citizen activists in Pennsylvania, where important legal issues are at stake, including state's rights over election systems)
Provisions of the PA lawsuit:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x423739

The Voter Confidence Resolution
http://tinyurl.com/rlnr2 (“We Do Not Consent”)
http://guvwurld.blogspot.com (GuvWurld blog main page)
http://tinyurl.com/amryg (Voter Confidence Resolution

www.debrabowen.com (Calif Senator running for Sec of State to reform election system)
www.johnbonifaz.com (running for Massachusetts Sec of State on strong election reform and antiwar platform)

*Some tributes to TruthIsAll, who is very ill:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x417007
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x417231
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x675477

Congressional bills:

Russ Holt's HR 550 requires a real paper ballot, bans secret software in "voting machines", and has more than 170 co-sponsors, but the audit required is too weak, it promotes electronic voting and centralized power, and the secret software might be permitted to continue in the central tabulators (the bill is not clear). To sign the HR 550 petition: http://www.rushholt.com/petition.html
At lot of discussion at DU of the loopholes/pitfalls in HR 550:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x422926
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x421136
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=422967&mesg_id=422967
(Note: Senate Bill-SB 330 and House-HR704 simply require a "voter verified paper audit trail" (VVPAT), which may be best for the moment.)


Also of interest:

Michael Collins (Autorank)'s searing election reform article for New Zealand's Scoop.com
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x971363

Bob Koehler (-- four recent election reform initiatives in Ohio, predicted to win by 60/40 votes, flipped over, on election day, into 60/40 LOSSES!--the biggest flipover we've seen yet; the election theft machines and their masters are now dictating election policy!)
http://commonwonders.com/archives/col321.htm

Bob Koehler's latest: "Take this box and stuff it" (3/16/06)
http://commonwonders.com/archives/col337.htm
(More Koehler:)
www.tmsfeatures.com/tmsfeatures/subcategory.jsp?file=20051124ctnbk-a.txt&catid=1824&code=ctnbk

Amaryllis (Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia lavish lobbying of election officials - Beverly Hilton, Aug. '05)
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x380340

------------------------------------------------

Throw Diebold, ES&S and ALL election theft machines into 'Boston Harbor' NOW!

:think: :patriot: :woohoo: :patriot: :think:

-----------

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it." --Thomas Jefferson, The Declaration of Independence

[WiseButAngrySara]

41. I was going to bookmark this thread for your above two posts, and then I

ran into this one...they keep getting better and better! I thought about TIA when I first started reading this thread, and wondered how he is doing. I observed that you noted above that he is still very ill? I'm so sad to hear that that is the case. TIA's exit polls analyses were in large part responsible for my addiction to DU.

[DFW]

32. Right after the 2004 election

There were multiple reports out of Ohio of a "company" technician who, after the "results"
were reported, came around to collect the hard drives of all the electronic voting machines.
He only missed one, which was way out somewhere, and in a precinct with only 600 registered voters.

The thing is, when this lone machine was examined, it gave Bush something like 3900 votes in a
precinct with 600 registered voters. Blackwell's goon called it an unfortunate "glitch" (remember
Robocop?), and said it shouldn't reflect on the reliability of the rest of the machines that didn't
get examined. (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) He forgot to explain why not.

Like in The Freedom Toast's song "Diebold, Diebold" (to the tune of A Bicycle Built for Two):

Touch screen, touch screen, you leave no paper trail.
It’s a good thing that you can never fail
You gave Bush four thousand seven
In a town of just eleven
But you can’t speak, so there’s no leak
And we can’t find who programmed you.

Now if one considers that 800,000 of Ohio's votes were tabulated by these machines, we might
be forgiven for extrapolating a bit, and demanding the inauguration of President Kerry, even
though we know it ain't gonna happen.

But raising our voices loudly and frequently won't hurt, and it will not be ignored. A friend
of mine who is high up enough in the DNC to have had more than one C-Span camera on him this
morning when Dean was overseeing the closing DNC meeting's cereminies, has been receiving
pastes from this board and others from yours truly on the subject of the rigged voting machines,
and he has been passing them on to Howard Dean. Howard is running on overdrive at this time,
working full time on the "50 State Strategy" as well as fundraising and as much day-to-day stuff
as he can stand. Poor Judith is probably not thrilled about all this, and I know Howard gets back
to Burlington when he can just to remind her that he's still there.

Another thing that the Republican voting machine makers got away with was going to court and having
their machines declared "private property," and thus subject to forensic examination by expert third
parties only if they gave their consent (they don't). My brother works on secret high tech computer
projects for ther Defense Department, and he has told me that he could detect if such a machine was
tampered with, but only if he was allowed to examine it. With the court decision, the Republicans
give the results that their machines say are the results, and then abscond with the hard drives so
as to make verification of their claims impossible. Thus, in Ohio 2004, Bush won for the sole reason
that Diebold and friends said he did, and for no other reason. Indeed, "we don't know."

Either American Democracy has been reduced to Soviet standards, or we need to know. Another way of putting
it is: if the Republicans think the results are as they treport them to be, how come they are so intent on
making sure no one can verify their claims? Rotten eggs don't stink nearly as much.

I think with everything else he has on his mind, and not being a computer expert, Howard is making a decent
amount of noise about the manipulability of the voting machines. The one thing he/we must do is not let up
the pressure. Verify them, or scrap them, preferably the latter. But don't blast Hhoward for not being obsessed
with the matter. That is the domain of those who have the technical knowledge to tell what was done. Howard
already went on some show to show how to manipulate one of the machines, but that is because someone showed him
how. The person who did that is the one to go on TV and show how to detect it. Of course, the trouble with
that is, we all know who owns the TV stations....................

[Wilms]

35. k(pete) &R n/t

[autorank]

36. Right, I totally agree. So is the whole damn e-voting fraud factory.

The "bipartisan" Help America Vote Act of 2002 is neigher bipartisan or helpful. It's an illusion generator for Republican victories and a permanent majority. Now that's the fact.

Here's the clear exposition http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0604/S00233.htm

I'm glad Dean is speaking out. More, "Let Dean be Dean" he's just getting warmed up.

Recommended (thanks kpete).

[Stevepol]

37. Howard Dean just got some money from me, if he keeps hitting this issue

hard!!!

I hope he sends me another letter wanting contributions. I'll send him something now, along with a letter thanking him for making this issue a top priority. That's the best that can be done.

Zogby did a poll, according to Mark Crispin Miller, and found that 80% of the American people prefer a PAPER BALLOT!!!!

This is a key issue. THIS IS THE KEY ISSUE from now on until we have our democracy back and it has to be hard over and over and over by every Dem politician till the Repubs get it.

[WiseButAngrySara]

40. knr kpete! ....n/t

[Cos]

42. He's been saying this for years

... ever since his run for president began in 2002/2003. I'm surprised you couldn't find anything on the record.

What he's saying has grown more detailed over time, of course, as he learns more about it. In early 2003 when I asked him about the issue, he was already very concerned about it, but at the time, it was more like "this is something people ask me about everywhere I go, and it's a serious issue we need to do something about." By the time he ended his run for president in 2004, he was definitely ready to try to at least ban paperless DREs. One of the first national actions the new DFA undertook, when Dean was still running it, was to partner with MoveOn, TrueMajority, and VerifiedVoting to collect hundreds of thousands of signatures (the bulk of them from DFA and MoveOn) and hold press conferences in a bunch of states on the same day. We handed the petitions in to each secretary of state and asked them to sign pledges to require paper ballots.

Here you can <a href="http://www.verifiedvoting.org/article.php?id=2508">see me handing in the DFA/MoveOn/etc. petitions</a> at the Massachusetts elections division office, while our co-organizer Scott talks to the reporter. (I think the way that article presented my comments is slightly misleading, though it is true that the state of elections in Massachusetts in 2004 complied with what the petition called for: we have hand marked paper ballots and no DREs of any sort.)

As DNC chair for the past year, Dean hasn't been out talking policy to the public and the press much. He's focusing on reforming the internal processes of the DNC: shifting to small donor fundraising, putting organizers on the ground in every state, finding precinct captains for every precinct, and so on. But this is not a new issue for him, and what you quoted from the transcript sounds like exactly what he's been saying since at least 2004 if not earlier.

[annabanana]

46. Send Dean a message!

http://www.democrats.org/a/party/chairman/index.php

go here and click on "Tell Gov. Dean what you think"

[Hekate]

49. thank god thank god thank god thank god thank god.....

I feel such a sense of relief that Howard Dean is aware and is working on this issue. I know nothing is solved -- yet. And I know we are still in gravest peril. But it is just huge that we've gotten through to the good doctor.

Hekate

[garybeck]

51. but he doesn't get it about optical scans

they BARELY better than touchscreen voting machines. going to optical scan is not the solution

[BlooInBloo]

52. Paper ballots. Videotaped counting....

Overseen by reps from both sides, and 2 judges, one chosen by each side. After the count, the videotape of the counting is released to the public.

Does that achieve what we want in fairness and transparency?

[nolabels]

53. "This is not some Internet conspiracy; this is a serious problem "

So stop posting about it here at DU :rofl:

Really the more information I get off the internet the more the day to day so called normal world seems like a BFL. It's like you know how and what they want to deceive the general public about by how the story is being fabricated. It's like in real life they never were really good liars but in their news director and editor fantasy world of news they are even worse

[slay]

54. "These machines are not reliable and they shouldn't be used. "

DAMN STRAIGHT!!! Wonder how many more rigged elections it's gonna take before people really realize just how bad the situation is though. :(

[DFW]

55. That is the scary part

The more rigged elections we have, the less anyone will be able
to anything about it. The more rigged elections we have, the more
power is in the hands of those who rigged them.