Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

Permalink
View Article Stats      (8 comments)

LET'S CLEAR THE AIR

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend

Become a Fan
Get Embed HTML Code
By (about the author)

Become a Fan Become a Fan  (2 fans)   -- Page 3 of 3 page(s)

opednews.com

The entire history of New York's Election Law, until ERMA, recognized that post-election ballot tampering is so probable that it has never permitted post-election verification of the secure, reliable, publicly observed first count.  Under ERMA, not only is the first count (on software) undependable and concealed from the pubic, but the post-election "audit" is also unreliable, since the ballots being hand counted to verify the first count no longer enjoy the security of uninterrupted public scrutiny enabled by the many authorized watchers at the poll site.  Under ERMA, the integrity of the verification is impugned, leaving the entire count unknowable and unreliable. 

Moreover, since we believe that transparency in a public election demands that many eyes be able to observe the process that results in the count, we are opposed to optical scanners and DREs which hide that process. 

Since we believe in the democratic requirement that everyday people be able to witness the process that results in the count, we are opposed to optical scanners and DREs which conceal the count. 

Since we believe that a democratic electoral system requires the production of reliable, publicly accessible evidence of both how the votes were counted as well as evidence of tampering, we are opposed to optical scanners and DREs which computer scientists have agreed can be programmed to destroy evidence of the count as well as evidence of the tampering.  Without reliable evidence of the count or of fraud, there is no way to challenge the results in a court of law, potentially disenfranchising the electorate and depriving them of their legal recourse to vindicate the loss of their constitutional right.         

Since we believe a democratic electoral system must be designed to detect, deter and reveal fraud, we are opposed to optical scanners and DREs which have been shown to be hackable without detection on a massive, outcome-determinative scale, by a single person who doesn't even have to be physically present.

Since we believe a democratic electoral system must contain safeguards that prevent every known opportunity for tampering, and indeed this is what New York's case law has consistently required of the legislature, we are opposed to optical scanners and DREs which subject the count to known opportunities for tampering and expose the count to new and greater risks made possible by software.  The highest court in New York has repeatedly found that dilution of the count by tampering amounts to unconstitutional disenfranchisement.


We therefore reject software driven voting systems and demand that New York hand count the ballots marked by accessible ballot markers for voters with special needs, and retain its secure, transparent, and reliable lever voting system, with all the attendant laws enacted to secure the lever count. 

Sign this petition if you agree with us.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

 

In 2004, Rady Ananda joined the growing community of citizen journalists. Initially focused on elections, she investigated the 2004 Ohio election, organizing, training and leading several forays into counties to photograph the 2004 ballots. She officially served at three recounts, including the 2004 recount. She also organized and led the team that audited Franklin County Ohio's 2006 election, proving the number of voter signatures did not match official results. Her work appears in three books.

Her blogs also address religious, gender, sexual and racial equality, as well as environmental issues; and are sprinkled with book and film reviews on various topics. She spent most of her working life as a researcher or investigator for private lawyers, and five years as an editor.

She graduated from The Ohio State University's School of Agriculture in December 2003 with a B.S. in Natural Resources.

All material offered here is the property of Rady Ananda, copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009. Permission is granted to repost, with proper attribution including the original link.

"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." Tell the truth anyway.

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

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

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.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
8 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Great stuff by Michael Collins on Monday, Jul 7, 2008 at 10:58:28 PM
we're gonna nail the bastards by Rady Ananda on Tuesday, Jul 8, 2008 at 12:05:09 AM
How Can We Help? by ClearEye on Tuesday, Jul 8, 2008 at 4:46:04 AM
Here's how to help by Rady Ananda on Tuesday, Jul 8, 2008 at 8:21:24 AM
So we are clear... by steve scheetz on Tuesday, Jul 8, 2008 at 7:55:04 AM
yep, that's the whole of it by Rady Ananda on Tuesday, Jul 8, 2008 at 8:33:38 AM
Question by Sheila Parks on Tuesday, Jul 8, 2008 at 8:08:16 AM
both by Rady Ananda on Tuesday, Jul 8, 2008 at 8:36:55 AM

 

Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend


Copyright © 2002-2012, OpEdNews

Powered by Populum