OpEdNews - Diary: Why Is Joan Brunwasser Op-Ed's Voting Editor?

Joan Brunwasser submitted an e-voting machine story to OP-Ed concerning the Alemeda Co.(CA) Board of Supervisors and their supposedly "uninformed" decision to choose Sequoia electronic voting equipment.

::::::::

How Did Joan Brunwasser got to be Voting Editor of anything this side of the John Birch Society is beyond me. If her main focus these past months has been to distribute the DVD "Invisible Ballots," then any reference to her being "non-partisan" must be called into question. "Invisible Ballots" was produced and narrated by G. Edward Griffin of Freedom Force, International. Mr. Griffin is a state monetarist who hasn't liked many of the changes to the Federal Government since 1913 -- including the establishment of the Federal Reserve System -- and the passage of income tax legislation for individuals. Of course, he's in somewhat broader company when he argues that Franklin Roosevelt set up the Bombing of Pearl Harbor. [No doubt to raise the personal income taxes levied against decent Americans who helped win the Second World War. At least FDR paid for as much of his war as he could -- unlike certain current presidents I could name.] And...maybe Griffin just doesn't like any law passed since 1913. This may be conjecture on my part but that would include the Voting Rights Act of the 1960s as well as the 19th Amendment to the US Constitution, which gave Ms. Brunwasser the right to vote. Actually, Brunwasser was only submitting an article submitted by one Allen Michaan -- a theater owner in Oakland. Mr. Michaan further commented about a suit filed in Washington State to render "unlawful" the use of Sequoia computer election systems in Snohomish County. That lawsuit was successful, as Mr. Michaan had reported. But a qualified success. In Lehto v Sequoia Voting Systems and Snohomish Co. the plaintiff, attorney Paul Lehto, won a decision to bar the Sequoia Voting machines previouusly approved. BUT...Mr Lehto's complaint per se was not so much against Sequoia in particular but in his not being able to see his vote counted in general by the process of electronic voting. His suit was directed to the limitations and flaws of the HAVA Act as well as the attitude of Federal Election Assistance Commission in "referring" the matter of accessibilty to a paper record as a "state issue." However...what may already be a "work in progress" is a selective campaign to: 1) bring up issues about 2) electronic voting and 3) certifiable paper trails with 4) safeguarding procedures for 5) specific election boards -- BUT -- only go after counties, states, etc., where Sequoia Voting Systems have been selected and paid for by the election commisssion. Sequoia -- if you're not familiar with its origins -- is a US subsidiary of a Venezuelan firm employed first in the Recall Election of Hugo Chavez in 2004. When all else fails, I suspect that Chavez will be "thrown out there" in the discussion on e-voting -- editorially, if not in actual litigation. Sequoia, incidentally, has no ties to major Republican fund-raisers or Bush Pioneers. That might be too inconvenient for some folks.