My friend and colleague Mary Ann Gould is a co-founder of the Coalition for Voting Integrity and host of the radio show "Voice of the Voters" in the Greater Philadelphia area and on the internet. She is a great lover of democracy and has been working very hard for the last few years to restore and protect our right to have our vote counted as cast.
We have all heard for quite a while that our members of Congress would never agree to a ban of the DRE voting machines (touch-screen). Mary Ann raises a very good question: how do we know that that this is true? And its corollary: has anyone actually asked them?
In order to know how to proceed prior to the 2008 election, we want to get on record NOW what our elected officials think. Gathering up-to-date information is the first step towards bringing about change. Mary Ann is putting together a group of individuals who will take it upon themselves to make a number of calls in the next few days to the DC offices of our members of Congress.
They will be asking only a few essential questions: 1. Do you want DREs (touch-screen voting technology) to be banned from our elections? 2. Would you support legislation that mandates their banning in time for the 2008 election? 3. If the answer to #2 is no, would you support legislation that mandates their banning by 2010?
Responses will be gathered and posted at OpEdNews for all to see. Constituents are encouraged to exercise their right to call their reps' offices to register displeasure with their position and try to change their minds.
While this may seem like busy-work, it is critically important. Please consider setting aside an hour to do this. Your help could make a big difference. Democracy is not a maintenance-free zone. It takes a lot of time and effort to keep it in working order. Whoever said, "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance" wasn't kidding. (I know; it was Thomas Jefferson.)
Please forward this to anyone you know who is concerned about the anti-democratic direction our elections have been heading and is willing to do something about it. If one hundred people step forward, we will each have fewer than five calls to make. How much time can that take? Is this too much to ask? Frankly, I don't think so.
If we can't get one hundred citizens interested and involved in this, what does that say about participatory democracy, the perceived importance of our elections, or what the future holds for our country? I shudder to think what that level of apathy might mean for all of us. This reminds me of the negotiations that Abraham had with God over the fate of the residents of Sodom. I don't think it's overstating the case to say that without fair elections, we are steadily sliding down that slippery slope towards something that resembles democracy in no meaningful way.
Stats indicate that over 1200 people read my review of "Sicko" last week at OpEdNews. I'm sure at least part of that (if not most of it) is because of the timeliness of this damning look at our failing health care system. The passions that Michael Moore incites also surely were a factor. However...If only one tenth of all those people who read my review were to sign up for the initiative described above, we would have what we need and there would be no undue burden on any one person. Is that beyond our reach? Are you up to the challenge? For better or worse, we will soon know that answer.
You may respond directly to me at joan@OpEdNews.com or to Mary Ann at gouldco@attg.net . Please don't wait. We have heard that "election reform" legislation will be called to the floor for a vote soon, possibly within the next few days; your efforts NOW can make a critical difference in whether our elections do what they were designed to do (to securely, accurately and transparently record the voters' will) or not. If it turns out that we have more lead-time to work on this, we'd rather be safe than sorry.
Heartfelt thanks in advance for stepping forward to help share this task. We welcome your participation and support.
Joan Brunwasser is a co-founder of Citizens for Election Reform (CER) which exists for the sole purpose of raising the public awareness of the critical need for election reform. We aim to restore fair, accurate, transparent, secure elections where votes are cast in private and counted in public. Electronic (computerized) voting systems are simply antithetical to democratic principles.
CER set up a lending library to achieve the widespread distribution of the DVD Invisible Ballots: A temptation for electronic vote fraud. Within eighteen months, the project had distributed over 3200 copies across the country and beyond. CER now concentrates on group showings, OpEd pieces, articles, reviews, interviews, discussion sessions, networking, conferences, anything that promotes awareness of this critical problem. Joan has been Election Integrity Editor for OpEdNews since December, 2005.
This is very important, and could make a huge difference. It may take five minutes or twenty, but it has the potential to stem the tide of a very scarey sequence of events. Please do what this article asks and post your results as a comment here.
Rob k
by
Rob Kall (761 articles, 3850 quicklinks, 320 diaries, 1642 comments)
on Sunday, July 8, 2007 at 6:52:14 PM
My congressman has withdrawn his support for HR-811. We have learned that the co-sponsor list means nothing any longer now that the bill is out of committee. Norm Dicks and Dennis Kucinich have notified Rush Holt that they have withdrawn their support for the bill and according to Dicks' staff many other Representatives have done the same. We need to let other co-sponsors know that they need to read the amended bill; it is not the same bill that went into committee; and withdraw their support.
by
JGideon (881 articles, 49 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments)
on Sunday, July 8, 2007 at 7:44:53 PM
Up until now, the oft-held belief that Congress won't ban DREs has been based on nothing more than rumor and speculation, smoke and mirrors. Instead, let's base our beliefs on something that is rapidly disappearing in this country -- evidence. Count me in.
by
Ellen Theisen (5 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments)
on Sunday, July 8, 2007 at 7:47:17 PM
I just got done watching Aaron Russo's documentary, "America: Freedom to Fascism" for the second time in the past two days.
It is deeply disturbing in that what is spoken of in the documentary seems (from my limited knowledge) to be true to the core. The film mentions that the electronic voting machines are in the least unreliable, and most probably rigged as they allegedly were in the Ohio 2004 Presidential Election. This statement is based on the testimony given by Clinton Eugene Curtis at the Forum on the 2004 Presidential Election on 12/13/2004.
If you are reading this post, and have not seen Aaron Russo's documentary, I highly recommend doing so as soon as possible. You can order a DVD from his website for $10 or for $1 if you buy 100 or more. The web address is: www.freedomtofascism.com
I am in no way affiliated with Russo... just a concerned citizen who wants America to be free again. This will not happen unless our vote actually counts in the immanently CRUCIAL Presidential election. It is not a partisan issue - it is an American issue, so please treat it as such.
I will heed the advice of the author of this article and contact my local representatives. Thank you for putting out the word on this issue of voting integrity/accuracy. I hope and pray that each state will ban the use of electronic voting machines because they have no paper trail & virtually no accountability.
Sincerely,
Jess from Stark County, Ohio
by
JessBlakemore (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 14 comments)
on Sunday, July 8, 2007 at 9:04:35 PM
if you contact mary ann gould at gouldco@attg.net, you can help the larger effort with a very short 'script' of questions and lend the responses to our tally page at OpEdNews.
grab some friends too. we need all the people we can get and we have a very small window of time- the next several days.
JoanB, OpEdNews
by
Joan Brunwasser (133 articles, 3335 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 589 comments)
on Sunday, July 8, 2007 at 9:25:11 PM
The reps have so much to do, they depend upon their admins. Let our reps head admin you will be after his ass and his job if he or she doesn't get your rep to drop this bill like a hot potato.
by
Rob Kall (761 articles, 3850 quicklinks, 320 diaries, 1642 comments)
on Sunday, July 8, 2007 at 9:14:46 PM
the public has the right to know where our reps stand
This is quite an important issue and the answers to these questions must be made public. The public has the right to know where our elected representatives stand on issues related to election reform, because we are the ones who put them in Congress, and they are answerable to us.
If some elected officials believe that the use of DRE's makes it impossible to have verifiable elections, but are afraid to say so publicly because they are afraid that banning DRE's would disenfranchise voters with disabilities, they are in grave error. DRE's run the risk of disenfranchising everyone, because no one can verify that his or her vote is being counted as cast. That is the position in which blind people have found themselves throughout the history of our democracy. As a blind voter, I do not wish to put my sighted comrades at risk by supporting a voting method which is not verifiable. I urge all representatives to come out in favor of banning the use of DrE's. Remember, if you can't see your vote, then you're all voting blind.
Best Regards Suzanne Erb
by
Joan Brunwasser (133 articles, 3335 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 589 comments)
on Sunday, July 8, 2007 at 10:05:52 PM
I'm available to participate in the canvassing of legislators. I'm in Neal's district of Mass. A pretty good guy generally over the years. I'm a former (as of a year ago) Ohioan disgusted at my state's politics, though the new governor is giving it a pretty good shot, having cleared out the Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) Board of Elections miscreants. I also knew personally a previous Diebold president, an ex IBMer of impeccable character who bolted from the company when he saw the impending disaster. Many have tried to get him involved in positive ways, but I believe him when he says he left so he couldn't know more than he did - enough to get out as soon as he saw implications of the group developing the s/w he knew, as an IBMer, to be (probably intentionally) fatally flawed.
Let me know how I can help.
AB
by
Joan Brunwasser (133 articles, 3335 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 589 comments)
on Sunday, July 8, 2007 at 10:11:15 PM
if you are concerned about honest election results...
First, we just got back from seeing Sicko. Wow!
Second, a correspondent of ours posted this on OpEdNews, our favorite blog site. If you are concerned about honest election results, consider volunteering (as we have) to call a group of congressmen to do some research that might be useful indeed. And thanks for your attention!
J& K
by
Joan Brunwasser (133 articles, 3335 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 589 comments)
on Sunday, July 8, 2007 at 10:14:23 PM
hello Joan, I've written pieces for local papers and presented information to groups in St Augustine on the fiasco that's become our voting system. I'm really worried about the Holt bill and want to clarify it for another piece. Any sources besides BBV debates? I'll call my Senators and Rep tomorrow. Regards, ML
by
Joan Brunwasser (133 articles, 3335 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 589 comments)
on Sunday, July 8, 2007 at 10:17:25 PM
I have been actively involved in the effort to ensure honest elections in New York. I have attended just about every hearing and demonstration of new machines in the city. My mother, as an official of the League of Women Voters of the City Of New York (LWVNYC) is involved with the Election Reform Coalition. Therefore, we speak with authority on this issue.
I am also a Election District Chair of Inspectors in Manhattan. In that position, I believe that Opti-Scan, while not 100% perfect, is the best option. It provides for an OFFICIAL paper trail, as the ballot is used to be scanned and is then securely saved for canvass and inspection at a later date. It is not accessable to the inspectors on Election Day, thus reducing the ability of dishonest inspectors or poll watchers to defraud the voter and alter the ballot.
Paper ballot is no answer. First, the very real problem of stuffing would rear its ugly head, as it did in the 19th Century. Second, we do not hold one election for each office we contest. There is one General Election Day per year and all offices which are up for election are voted on at that time. Last year (2006), that meant ten separate offices, some with more than one vacancy (judgeships). The count would have taken many hours and would have been done by exhausted inspectors who had already worked 15 and a half hours, a half hour set up time and fifteen hours for the actual voting. Each office would have to be tallied, then the tally added up and entered on to the return form three times (there is no carbon for a General Election Report of Return, all entries must be made in hard ink). I can easily see that in 2006 the evening would have ended at 3:00am the next moring as we had over 300 ballots cast on our two lever machines. Most of the rest of the democratic world, especially those who use the parliamentary system, vote for one or maybe two (national and municipal) offices in a General. Counting that takes far less time. Even then, there are intractable problems associate with paper ballot and manual count voting, especially when it comes to suspected spoiled or improperly marked ballots.
I personally favor new mechanical lever machines. They don't require electricity to run and they represent a tried and true system. Unfortunately, no one makes them anymore, at least none that are available to the states.
HAVA is a deeply flawed law in urgent need of revamping. Hopefully, a Democratic Congress, especially if they have the support of a Democratic President from 20 January 2009, will be able to re-write this troubled law and address all the flaws that presently exist.
by
Kenneth Barr (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 77 comments)
on Sunday, July 8, 2007 at 10:20:57 PM
if you can help make calls, please contact Mary Ann at gouldco@attg.net immediately. we have many calls to make and the more people on board the better it is. extra credit for bringing friends/colleagues/relatives, etc to help.
JoanB
by
Joan Brunwasser (133 articles, 3335 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 589 comments)
on Monday, July 9, 2007 at 6:49:31 AM
1. Send Reps an mp3 of my song "If You Want to Be a Voter" (The Ballad of Sarasota). It's a free download at www.voiceofthevoters.org.
It gives a 3 minutes synopsis of the voting disaster in CD-13 (Sarasota's Jennings/Buchanan race in Nov 06) including the plea to ban DREs. It's a novel and informative way to reach our Reps.
2. remind Reps that blind people do not necessarily favor DREs despite supposed intention of bill to give them more accessibility. Blind people want verifiable votes just like the rest of us. The Vote Pad provides a workable alternative--Suzanne Erb can give much more info on that.
3. The Holt bill's proposal to use the paper record in case of discrepancies is troubling, since auditing will not be 100%. So, DREs will have supremacy and experience shows how hard it is to challenge the outcome of the first counts.
4. Query: if a voter chose Candidate A and the paper ballot printed receipt (that the voter may or may not carefully review--studies show voters don't) shows Candidate A, are there studeis whether the internal workings of the DREs could still register a vote for Candidate B without anyone's knowledge?
by
Lori Rosolowsky (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments)
on Monday, July 9, 2007 at 6:36:12 AM
Electronic voting gadgets, DREs, must go, and we the people need to be the ones to take our vote.....and our democracy ....back. We have been following Joan's work on OpEdNews for some time and it is principled and admirable. We are grateful when someone comes up with a project we can work with other Americans to make a difference. Please join us in volunteering to make this happen....congress will know something is up, and the survey can produce valuable results. We will begin making the calls as soon as the congressional offices open this morning
Thanks, Jack and Kathie
by
Joan Brunwasser (133 articles, 3335 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 589 comments)
on Monday, July 9, 2007 at 7:42:36 AM
Congresspeople aren't stupid- they know they're being given an "out", that if they agree to banning DREs, they can still support Optical scanners, every bit as hackable as DREs, and the kind of paper used is not, and never has been, the issue. And so they can continue receiving "campaign contributions" from the Republican owned computerized voting machines. So, if you're expecting an honest answer to this basically dishonest question, you probably believe that every Republican in congress today was elected by trustworthy voting equipment. Let's not be self-delusional, okay? Go all-out for what you truly believe, and accept no half-measures.
by
Chuck Garner (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 118 comments)
on Monday, July 9, 2007 at 1:47:46 PM
Our democracy is worth a lot more of my time, and I have been giving lots of my time in various ways ever since the 2000 election was stolen. The single most important thing that a citizen can do right now is to help insure our elections are trustworthy. The shift towards DRE's should alarm every citizen of this nation because they are so unreliable and tamperable. For years, we in Maryland had honest, uncontested elections using opti-scanned and mechanical systems. The DRE manufacturers have scammed our citizens and politicians with the razzle - dazzle of touch screen technology. And God knows they are slanted towards the reTurdian agenda. Even Karl Rove bragged of someday having total Republican rule in this country (which is the minority, BTW).
