|
|
(more...)
, (less...)
Add to My Group(s)
Permalink
View Article Stats
Add to My Group(s)
View Article Stats
Here's do-it-yourself letter & cautionary note re: Diebold/ES&S senate antitrust hearing
By Bev Harris (about the author)
Become a Fan (3 fans) -- Page 2 of 6 page(s)
We recommend making it clear that any additional techno-extravaganza or concentration of power harm must not result from this committee review of the ES&S monopoly actions.
Here is our letter, with contact list and links to a Word document version of the do-it-yourselfer letter:
* * * * *
The Honorable Senator Charles Schumer
United States Senate
Rm 313, Hart Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-3203
Dear Senator:
Oct. 12, 2009
Black Box Voting is writing to urge you to remedy efforts to centralize power over U.S. elections, specifically the sale of Diebold Inc's Premier Election Solutions to Election Systems & Software, Inc. ("ES&S"), a monopoly which we contend is illegal under U.S. antitrust laws, specifically the Clayton Act, Title 15 U.S.C. 18 et. al.
We commend you for undertaking to review this acquisition and urge you to take appropriate steps to undo the deal and remedy its consequences. However, this is also a cautionary letter urging you to "at least, do no harm" -- we ask that you address this while also avoiding further centralization such as additional empowerment of the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), which is another form of consolidation of power.
At issue here is our public right to public elections -- a human right, because without public elections we lose sovereignty over the instruments of government we created and pay for. Without sovereignty over our government, we lose liberty itself. Concealing crucial election processes from the public makes elections no longer public and in fact, executes a subtle change in our originally designed democratic form of government. Consolidating and concealing election processes from the public transfers power from the public to a small group of insiders.
Consolidation of the industry that executes the mechanics of elections puts both the public and election officials in an untenable position: If ES&S is permitted to monopolize elections, the public will be confined to a position of reliance on its continued management in perpetuity as well as the unregulated good will of the company. ES&S will have achieved a transfer of power from elections officials to itself, and also from the public to itself, and will put itself in a position to shut down or delay time-sensitive federal elections -- in fact, a national security consideration.
So, while avoiding any further centralization or consolidation, we urge you to examine and remedy the ES&S monopoly.
COMPLAINT THAT THIS ACQUISITION IS A MONOPOLY, SHOULD BE PROHIBITED UNDER THE CLAYTON ACT, TITLE 15 U.S.C. 1-27 et. al.: Prior to the acquisition, ES&S has served 47.7% of the purchasing jurisdictions in the United States. If the acquisition is allowed to stand, ES&S will hold 74.7% of the U.S. electronic/computerized supply of voting devices as market share.(1)
Below is a link to evidence that it IS a monopoly, along with examples and citations showing its anticompetitive and harmful effects. But before getting to that, let's deal with the issue of whether the eggs can be unscrambled after an acquisition like this.
The sale was announced Sept. 2, 2009. I wish to direct your attention to after-the-sale antitrust actions pertaining to similar situations. U.S. antritrust enforcers have required other companies to divest themselves of acquisitions, even if the acquisition was done many months earlier(2) and even when it was not subject to permerger notification(3).
ES&S has claimed that this acquisition is not subject to U.S. antitrust laws because the deal was under $60 million. First, that is not true because there is no specific dollar figure exempting corporations from antitrust laws. Second, while there are calculations to determine whether premerger notification is required, U.S. antitrust laws apply regardless of whether a deal meets premerger notification requirements.
REMEDIES REQUESTED: Black Box Voting urges the U.S. Senate to: (a) Investigate the issues raised with this acquisition; (b) Assist the appropriate agencies to compel ES&S to divest itself of all of Diebold/Premier's tangible and intangible assets related to the development, manufacture and sale of the relevant products; (c) Assist in obtaining an award to the United States for the cost of this action; and (d) Grant the United States such other and further relief as the case requires.
CONCISE, SOURCED BACKGROUND MATERIAL (21 pgs, incl. footnotes & appendix):
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/BBV-AntiTrust-Letter.pdf (1,100 KB)
Become a Fan (3 fans) -- Page 2 of 6 page(s)
Here is our letter, with contact list and links to a Word document version of the do-it-yourselfer letter:
* * * * *
The Honorable Senator Charles Schumer
United States Senate
Rm 313, Hart Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-3203
Dear Senator:
Oct. 12, 2009
Black Box Voting is writing to urge you to remedy efforts to centralize power over U.S. elections, specifically the sale of Diebold Inc's Premier Election Solutions to Election Systems & Software, Inc. ("ES&S"), a monopoly which we contend is illegal under U.S. antitrust laws, specifically the Clayton Act, Title 15 U.S.C. 18 et. al.
We commend you for undertaking to review this acquisition and urge you to take appropriate steps to undo the deal and remedy its consequences. However, this is also a cautionary letter urging you to "at least, do no harm" -- we ask that you address this while also avoiding further centralization such as additional empowerment of the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), which is another form of consolidation of power.
At issue here is our public right to public elections -- a human right, because without public elections we lose sovereignty over the instruments of government we created and pay for. Without sovereignty over our government, we lose liberty itself. Concealing crucial election processes from the public makes elections no longer public and in fact, executes a subtle change in our originally designed democratic form of government. Consolidating and concealing election processes from the public transfers power from the public to a small group of insiders.
Consolidation of the industry that executes the mechanics of elections puts both the public and election officials in an untenable position: If ES&S is permitted to monopolize elections, the public will be confined to a position of reliance on its continued management in perpetuity as well as the unregulated good will of the company. ES&S will have achieved a transfer of power from elections officials to itself, and also from the public to itself, and will put itself in a position to shut down or delay time-sensitive federal elections -- in fact, a national security consideration.
So, while avoiding any further centralization or consolidation, we urge you to examine and remedy the ES&S monopoly.
COMPLAINT THAT THIS ACQUISITION IS A MONOPOLY, SHOULD BE PROHIBITED UNDER THE CLAYTON ACT, TITLE 15 U.S.C. 1-27 et. al.: Prior to the acquisition, ES&S has served 47.7% of the purchasing jurisdictions in the United States. If the acquisition is allowed to stand, ES&S will hold 74.7% of the U.S. electronic/computerized supply of voting devices as market share.(1)
Below is a link to evidence that it IS a monopoly, along with examples and citations showing its anticompetitive and harmful effects. But before getting to that, let's deal with the issue of whether the eggs can be unscrambled after an acquisition like this.
The sale was announced Sept. 2, 2009. I wish to direct your attention to after-the-sale antitrust actions pertaining to similar situations. U.S. antritrust enforcers have required other companies to divest themselves of acquisitions, even if the acquisition was done many months earlier(2) and even when it was not subject to permerger notification(3).
ES&S has claimed that this acquisition is not subject to U.S. antitrust laws because the deal was under $60 million. First, that is not true because there is no specific dollar figure exempting corporations from antitrust laws. Second, while there are calculations to determine whether premerger notification is required, U.S. antitrust laws apply regardless of whether a deal meets premerger notification requirements.
REMEDIES REQUESTED: Black Box Voting urges the U.S. Senate to: (a) Investigate the issues raised with this acquisition; (b) Assist the appropriate agencies to compel ES&S to divest itself of all of Diebold/Premier's tangible and intangible assets related to the development, manufacture and sale of the relevant products; (c) Assist in obtaining an award to the United States for the cost of this action; and (d) Grant the United States such other and further relief as the case requires.
CONCISE, SOURCED BACKGROUND MATERIAL (21 pgs, incl. footnotes & appendix):
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/BBV-AntiTrust-Letter.pdf (1,100 KB)
Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Roll back monopolistic ES&S / Diebold acquisition
Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers
http://www.blackboxvoting.org
Bev Harris is executive director of Black Box Voting, Inc. an advocacy group committed to restoring citizen oversight to elections.
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
Comments
The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.
This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.
| No comments |