3) WE DON'T REALLY KNOW: How this computerized tabulation will occur. Who is the vendor? Who programmed it? Who owns the server?
The Iowa Democratic Party has a bit of a black hole as well, with an automated cell phone-initiated computer tabulation. In 2004, this was handled by a fellow named David Vogelaar and his colleague, Andrew Brown. We don't know if they are the ones writing the program this time, but regardless -- any time data goes through this kind of process, questions arise as to how the program works, whether citizens can check what went in to compare with what came out, and so forth.
WHAT TO DO: Get photos of the results sheets, which are supposed to be signed off on by precinct leaders. E-mail the photos to Black Box Voting. Do not interfere with any of the goings-on. Get video if you can. Upload the video to youtube.com and e-mail a link to Black Box Voting or post it directly in the IOWA FORUM at Black Box Voting.
4) THE LAST CONCERN: This brings us to the last concern regarding the Democratic Party caucus procedures. For both parties, the telecommunications routing of the data enroute from the precincts to the final announced totals is important. Who has access to this along the way?
There is an interesting situation with the Iowa Democratic Party's official caucus site. It is called "iowafirstcaucus.org" -- http://www.iowafirstcaucus.org -- and this is not actually owned by the Democrats, but the site says it is "paid for" by them.
The domain name and the server for iowacaucusfirst.org appear to be owned by The Forbin Project (weird and creepy science fiction name, Google it) -- maybe someone's idea of a joke. The Forbin Project is part of VGM, and the principals of VGM/Forbin seem to be big Republican donors, and very vested in privatized national healthcare providers. What I found interesting was the candidates they have chosen to donate to -- like Randy "Duke" Cunningham of San Diego (why were these Iowa guys supporting him?) and George Voinovich, and another fellow who's under investigation in Iowa named Nussle.
The Iowafirstcaucus server provides the location mapping for the precinct caucus locations. In fact, to find out where to go if you want to observe or participate in Democratic caucuses, go to http://www.iowafirstcaucus.org.
THE ACTUAL OWNERSHIP OF THE SERVER WILL BE IMPORTANT IF: If for some reason the computerized central tabulation and results server is routed through or sitting on iowafirstcaucus.org, that's a conflict of interest problem, in my book.
AREN'T THESE JUST "UNOFFICIAL RESULTS"?
This argument has actually been used to float the idea that rigging the Iowa caucus results for the media might not actually be an election crime. Hmm.
Look, the results in Iowa officially do one thing: They impact which candidates every American can vote for, through a disproportionate influence on "candidate viability." Because Iowa has the very first presidential preference contest in the nation, Iowa makes or breaks candidate fundraising and the positioning granted them in television coverage.
ONE LAST THING...
As I searched for expenditures on the disclosure forms for the Iowa Democratic Party and the Republican Party of Iowa, I found that these forms are missing from the state Web site. After much searching, which involved locating archived backup copies on another Web site, I did find the 2004 expenditures for the Iowa Democratic Party. Each party is required to file a report of each expenditure each year on Jan. 19. Where are these forms? Why are they not online at the state reporting site where they belong?
Questions we should be looking at include who's paying for all the public facilities used for the caucus. If the parties are not being charged rent, an argument can be made that the caucuses are actually quasi-public events that should be subject to public records requests. If the space is donated, it should appear as an in kind donation. We should be able to see on the expenditure forms who they get their cell phones from, what web sites and internet servers they are using, who's paying the programmers, whether they use any other vendors.
Sure would be nice if the required disclosure forms were -- you know -- disclosed.
*tip of the hat to BBV member John Dean, who has helped look into some of the programming and IP routing issues
I believe Iowa keeps it this way because they make MONEY from all candidates running … the reason Kucinich wasn’t there is because because his Iowa field director operates from a home office rather than a rented storefront.
Following is statements from CBS news and jwharrison Blog ,,,
“In a statement included in the Kucinich release, the Register said it "was our determination that a person working out of his home did not meet our criteria for a campaign office and full-time paid staff in Iowa." The person they are referring to is Kucinich Iowa Field Director and State Coordinator Marcos Rubinstein, "who coordinates campaign activities from his home office in Dubuque, bolstered by a dozen-or-so other senior campaign staff who have traveled the state over the past several months," according to the Kucinich campaign.
The Kucinich campaign calls the exclusion "arbitrary and unreasonable."
"The Iowa caucuses have been portrayed as having national implications, and if the Register has decided to use hair-splitting technicalities to exclude the leading voice of the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party, then the entire process is suspect," it said in the release."
And here’s something to ponder … although Dennis Kucinich was left out, Alan Keyes was not.
by
chris ferry (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 12 comments)
on Monday, December 31, 2007 at 12:05:05 PM
Attn all Oped News readers- this is THE most important story of the day-no the year! What is the point of the endless bickering over candidates when they are planning on fixing the elections AGAIN! If they can, they will no doubt.
PLEASE JOIN ME IN SPREADING THIS EVERYWHERE!!!!!!
and please consider running for Congress in order to change our election process for the better
www.peacecandidates.com
by
Nadia (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 49 comments)
on Monday, December 31, 2007 at 12:20:13 PM
Not everybody lives in Iowa. What can I do in Delaware where our black box voting left Bush with a 5% increase between the exit polls and the official vote in 2004? Kerry won. But it contributed to the supposed majority popular vote for Bush that wasn't which made Kerry throw in the towel. Tampering with primaries is just as bad as with the general elections. Both deny the citizens their rightful say in this critical process.
by
Pat Williams (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 82 comments)
on Monday, December 31, 2007 at 3:35:46 PM
I can't understand this. Why should there be any contravercy over an open system. You register, you take a card into the booth, you circle the name of your canditate, you drop it into the box, every hour the box is dumped on the table and sorted out by name, counted and called out. Then they can be sent to a central hub for a final tally and broken down by districts. What the h3ll is so hard about this?
by
Louis Park (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments)
on Monday, December 31, 2007 at 7:11:17 PM
ELRON - VOXEO: The Israeli Defense Firm That Tallies the Iowa Caucus
The Iowa caucus is only a few days away and the nation's attention will be directed to the results, which signify the beginning of the U.S. presidential race. But does anyone watch who tallies the results of the Iowa caucus?
The Iowa caucus results were tallied in 2004 by a company that is headed by a man whose company was bought by Elron Electronics, the Israeli defense firm. I suspect that it will be the same this year. Don't expect to see any grassroots political activists doing the tally in Iowa. The Israeli defense establishment takes care of that part of the American "democratic" election process.
by
Damocles (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments)
on Tuesday, January 1, 2008 at 4:17:02 AM
A few caveats on the Voxeo info AND MORE ON WHAT TO DO
1) No documentation has been provided on Voxeo, only a report of verbal interviews
2) Note that the Voxeo information is from 2004 and is not current.
3) The Voxeo information may have nothing to do with the Republican Party, which due to the opaqueness of its procedures, deserves much more scrutiny.
The Voxeo connection has not been proven, but might be with the (missing) expenditure reports for the Iowa Democratic Party and the Republican Party of Iowa.
Christopher Bollyn, who wrote that article, has been on the right track with questions about who programs the automated cell phone tabulation program. Other important questions still need to be answered about the routing of the telecommunications and the server holding the data.
Yesterday the Iowa Democratic Party announced the Web site that will host the precinct results. Remember, precinct results are one-half the equation, the other being citizens to take EVIDENCE -- not tell stories -- of the actual precinct results while they are at the caucus. ONLY YOU, THE CITIZENRY, CAN MAKE THAT HAPPEN. Photos, video, of the following:
1) Republican - show of hands votes.
2) Democrat - warm body counts
3) Both Parties - any obstructiveness or attempts to impose social consequences, by ridiculing, calling people with cameras names (eg "conspiracy theorist" and any attempts to obstruct. Do not provide justification by doing ANYTHING that can be deemed "interference" with the goings-on.
PHOTOS: Get photos of the final results at the caucus, preferably signed by the precinct officials.
PROPAGATE: Upload photos to multiple web sites. Upload video to YouTube or GoogleVideo. Distribute the links to multiple sources
BE SPECIFIC: Identify who took the video or photo using real name. Privately (via e-mail to the Web sites of your choice) send your contact information. If you uncover evidence of importance, it does no good unless it can be authenticated, meaning someone has to have your contact into. Identify the location the video/photos were taken. You can use the Iowa Forum at blackboxvoting.org to upload -- just register and log in and hit the "upload" button while posting a message.
It's a little odd to me that this site is not owned by the Iowa Democratic Party, only "paid for" by the Iowa Democratic Party, and the notation at the bottom that it was designed by Strategic Media appears to tie it back to The Forbin Project and VGM Group.
Questions remain. Anyone who can send me the complete expenditure reports for the Iowa Democratic Party and The Republican Party of Iowa gets two points.
by
Bev Harris (78 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 21 comments)
on Tuesday, January 1, 2008 at 11:23:10 AM
Looks like you are finally getting somewhere with this Bev..
... and I for one admire the heck out of you!
I'll never forget the early days after election 2004 when you, me, Bob Fitrakis, Brad from Brad blog and a few others were seemingly the only folks raising hell about Ohio. To see what you have managed to accomplish since then is amazing.
by
Steven Leser (209 articles, 44 quicklinks, 32 diaries, 1372 comments)
on Tuesday, January 1, 2008 at 2:58:16 PM
John Howard gets two points times six - he has uncovered three years worth of expenditure reports for the Democrats and three for the Republicans. I have uploaded the documents and here they are:
The 2005 document for the Democrats shows a single $500 payment to VOXEO. This single payment of $500 in June 2004 does not corroborate that VOXEO tabulated the Iowa 2004 caucus votes. The amount is way too small and the date is questionable. It is very interesting, though, and I think more will unravel that will support Bollyn's statements that VOXEO may have tabulated the results.
Next comes his assertions on the Israeli connection and Elron. These do not necessarily check out; will know more tomorrow when I receive more documents.
The core issue with the VOXEO connection has nothing to do with whether it does or does not have an Israeli connection, but rather, does VOXEO answer the question of "who is the vendor for the cell-phone-initiated automated tabulation service for the caucuses?"
Identifying the vendor is important, and it is equally important to identify the routing of the information going out to the public. A middleman in the process could easily wreak havoc in Iowa, where the presidential selection process is not subject to public records, is not subject to public election administration laws, and is missing some checks and balances -- in the case of the Republican caucuses, missing MOST of the key checks and balances.
by
Bev Harris (78 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 21 comments)
on Tuesday, January 1, 2008 at 10:45:36 PM
8 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
