Many If Not Most of these Organizations are VENDOR-FUNDED.

Small wonder that the are against this much-needed bill that would cut the profits of their DRE vendor friends.

by Merlene Topolovsky (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Wednesday, September 19, 2007 at 7:55:30 AM
 

The vendor community stands to profit hugely

There may be alliances between these groups and vendors. However, strangely enough the industry stands to make HUGE profits (see my article on the costs of the new mandated technology: http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_nancy_to_070719_crippling_cost_of_hr.htm

But in an inexplicable moment of honesty the industry is telling Congress it will be at least 6 years before the Holt mandated products are even near ready for market.

The groups represented here are mostly public servant organizations. Those who will have to be struggling with the unrealistic and unmanageable costs and mandates of the bill. See the same article above for more information about this, plus this one:

click here

This is a BAD bill. If we the voting integrity community finds common cause (pun intended) with others in our unity AGAINST it, so be it. We may have different reasons to oppose, but we also have an opportunity to join hands with our public officials and begin a real dialog on democracy and what matters to us.

You do not make peace with your friends, but with your enemies. I do not consider the election official community our enemies, but many activists do. And the election official community has behaved very BADLY over the past many years. Some because they are really criminals, others with good intentions.

Let's leave this crappy bill behind but use it as a stepping stone to begin dialog with the election official, to sever the ties between them and the for-profit, corrupt, and often criminal and ethically bankrupt vendor community.

by Nancy Tobi (71 articles, 4 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 53 comments) on Wednesday, September 19, 2007 at 8:20:57 AM
 

Guess what Nancy -- they aren't going to "dialog" with you .

These vendors and officials are on a first-name basis and I find it very unlikely they will give up those ties to "dialog" with you for hand-counted paper ballots.

And given the past history of most of these vendors I don't know HOW you can EVER believe they would have any moment of honesty, inexplicable or otherwise.

What is inexplicable to me is why you appear to really want MY vote to remain at risk.

My state is one of the worst with over 50 large counties like Philly and Allegheny (Pittsburgh) on paperless DRE. And our state legislature says there is NO money in the state to change machines without federal help. Without HR 811 THERE WILL BE NO CHANGE, especially not in time to save the 2008 election.

YOUR vote is safely on paper in New Hampshire, you claim, but without HR 811 my vote and 34,999,999 others nationally will have to be tossed down a paperless DRE in November 2008. IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT, Nancy? I'm very sorry to have to say this but it sure looks like it.

HR 811 has a lot of good in it especially for states who desperately need some form of paper and some form of audit -- and it is a floor not a ceiling.

PS -- There is NO "uninvented" equipment required by this bill, only a small modification to existing ballot markers that AutoMARK has already said they can do easily. Please stop spreading that misinformation. Please stop trying to help the vendors, and the organizations THEY fund, because that is exactly what it looks like you are doing. I am sorry.

by Merlene Topolovsky (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Thursday, September 20, 2007 at 7:03:59 PM
 

Voter Con Act

I am fully aware of the propaganda against me that I am "on the take" with the e-voting industry and supporting corrupt election officials. This is such a tired old song by now that I would think most Holt supporters would have figured out we "get" the whole swiftboat strategy by now. We got it when Rove did it. We get it when it is done in this way too. BORING. YAWN.

Cautious, careful people, always casting about to preserve their reputation and social standing, never can bring about a reform. Those who are really in earnest must be willing to be anything or nothing in the world's estimation, and publicly and privately, in season and out, avow their sympathy with despised and persecuted ideas and their advocates, and bear the consequences.

~Susan B. Anthony

I am and have always been opposed to the Voter Con Act because I believe in the U.S. Constitution. It separates powers and guarantees us a Republic. Holt wants federal control of elections. He stated this flat out in his July 2006 town meeting with constituents.

http://www.democracyfornewhampshire.com/node/view/4613

Maybe he needs a history lesson.

Like this nice quote from one of the Founders:

"Suppose an article had been introduced into the Constitution, empowering the United States to regulate the elections for the particular States, would any man have hesitated to condemn it, both as an unwarrantable transposition of power, and as a premeditated engine for the destruction of the State governments?"

~Hamilton, Alexander, Federalist No. 59, 1788

The fact is that the Voter Con Act is just like the Patriot Act. Get your "paper trail" (with its bogus computerized tabulation) and give up your constitutional separation of powers and all kinds of other rights.

The so-called ballot text read back device, now more complicated in the latest version of the bill, DOES NOT exist. The phony sell of a souped up Automark is what they are saying now. Have YOU read the EAC's voting system design specifications? The Automark doesn't meet them. It's all one big Ponzi Scheme. Just keep pouring your taxpayer money into the e-voting industry coffers. And nice people like Rush Holt will make sure to pass legislation mandating more and more of that undemocratic computerized voting system crap.

Now perhaps you are like me, who was unaware of the shenanigans when they passed HAVA. But now my eyes are open. And I ain't gonna fall for it again. Holt is just HAVA II. State by state the nation is already saying no to paperless systems. One by one the paperless charade is falling. We don't need to give up the REPUBLIC for the promise of something we are already enacting on our own.

I understand you all in PA are frantic and concerned. With good reason. But we've got to think more broadly.

Do you think Susan B Anthony would have sold out her dream for women's voting rights if some congressman came along and told her that just she and her friends would be allowed to vote in the next election?

No. She was thinking of the Republic. She would never have fallen for that false promise just because she was told she could get her vote RIGHT AWAY even though it was all a con job. No. She understood that you have to sometimes fight for the long term and not the instant gratification of a false bribe.

We have to do the same thing now. We will not get what we want for 2008. Things are too screwed up in too many places - including NEW HAMPSHIRE, where 80% of the votes are controlled by Diebold. So we will not have democracy in 2008. That is a given. Once you wrap your head around that fact, you can stop longing for the false Holt promises and start thinking more strategically for the long term and for the good of the REPUBLIC.

by Nancy Tobi (71 articles, 4 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 53 comments) on Thursday, September 20, 2007 at 8:09:40 PM
 

More Name Calling. Oh joy.

Voter Con Act. Microsoft 811. Patriot Act of Elections. HAVA II. Holt Hit Squad. Ponzi Scheme. Trojan Horse. False Holt Promises. And my favorite "Traitorous bill" (I guess you would have Rush Holt drawn and quartered then?) Hey, it's just politics. Wouldn't want to make it personal or anything, would you?

The difference between what you are doing, Nancy, and what Susan B. Anthony did is that she had a lot more strategy in play than just calling her "opponents" nasty names. We have been subjected ad nauseum to your colorful screed for months and I have yet to see one concrete suggestion you or others in your movement as to how to actually, realistically get something passed and changed.

So by all means go ahead, find your "Common Cause (pun intended)" with the Microsoft/Diebold/NACo juggernaut. I, and many many others will find our common cause with, well, Common Cause and the many other organizations who have REALISTIC goals and some semblance of a plan to get there. 

And that said, I need to work on more productive goals now and must end this little exchange.

Peace out. 

PS -- Most of us who have realistic goals for change call this movement "election integrity" rather than "voting integrity". The voters in general HAVE integrity; it's those in charge of the elections (officials and their vendor friends) that leave me in doubt.

by Merlene Topolovsky (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Friday, September 21, 2007 at 12:50:35 AM
 

wethepatriots.org

you can find our initial proposed legislative changes that were sent to Holt, etc. back in December 2006 at the website above. Other proposed language has been hammered out among many 811 opponents and a working bipartisan group in order to ensure REAL meaningful and implementable change for 2008, unlike 811 which is now pushing to 2012.

My writings have been fully documented and supported with facts.

by Nancy Tobi (71 articles, 4 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 53 comments) on Friday, September 21, 2007 at 7:37:21 AM
 

We need to focus on 2008 ... 811 won't help

I am a Pennsylvanian and I fear the 2008 election results based on present systems ....especially for PA which may be the critical swing state.
 I am against the DREs and am working hard to have them banned or at least paper ballots used for national races ... that's just 2 in PA (President & Congress) in 2008

 Everyone should be concerned.  We have a Crisis.  Though I will differ (and I'd rather have discussion on differences so accept those who have other views as concerned) on 811 ,,,strongly! I was once a supporter, our coalition lobbied hard for earlier versions but 811 is NOT the Holt bill anymore.  It has been devastated by lobbyists.  Even  Holt said lobbyists voices were heard and brought changes

 Because PA has paperless DREs, on the surface 811 SEEMS like it would help.  Unfortunately this is not factual as noted by many experts

First of all, it is very unlikely 811 will even be effective for 2008.  Second it has so many "poison" provisions regarding corporate rights, EAC etc.  Worse is the "trust" in the "toilet paper"

On our radio show Dr.Matt Blaze (a leader in VA top to bottom study) noted "in these voting machines (DRE), the printer itself-many of the characteristics of the printer-are under the control of the software running on the voting machine and so the corrupted voting machine that has bad software loaded into it by someone might be able to print out the paper trail in a very misleading way that might look acceptable to the voter but in fact actually reflects a vote for someone else.  For example, it could print out the correct candidates, but then print "cancelled" below them, and then print the candidates that the machine wants to vote for. " ...that these machines are ":fatally flawed" see  in these voting machines, the printer itself-many of the characteristics of the printer-are under the control of the software running on the voting machine and so the corrupted voting machine that has bad software loaded into it by someone might be able to print out the paper trail in a very misleading way that might look acceptable to the voter but in fact actually reflects a vote for someone else.  For example, it could print out the correct candidates, but then print "cancelled" below them, and then print the candidates that the machine wants to vote for. "

that these machines are "fatally flawed"  far more check out podcast or transcript http://mysite.verizon.net/resq4lzq/cvi/id348.html

Check out interview with leading Constitutional lawyer John Bonifaz who is working on Sarasota case and says printer would NOT have helped and would likely have worsened

The printers on DREs are a disaster ... gives false confidence.  See other top experts like Hursti, Mercuri etc on our site stating same position

811 is standing in the way of REAL & CRITICAL reform ... a stripped down bill to help secure 2008

Our focus & Congress attention should be on what will most improve verifiability to original source vote for 2008... and it is not a DRE with or w/o printer 

by Mary Ann Gould (67 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 18 comments) on Wednesday, September 26, 2007 at 10:07:45 AM