Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend

Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites (# of views)   1 comment
OpEdNews Op Eds

How can voters deal with lazy media coverage on voting matters?

By       Message Bev Harris     Permalink
      (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

Author 2399
Become a Fan
  (5 fans)
One method of attacking inappropriate or lazy media coverage is to
write letters -- and also to request corrections or redress.

KPBS "Full Focus" aired an interview with an elections official (and
former Diebold salesperson), asked no meaningful followup questions,
and permitted no input from those with an opposing point of view. The
result? The public was misinformed by the media.

Psephos is a nonprofit organization founded by some of the best voting
rights minds in the nation.

Here is how Psephos has attempted to redress the misinformation spread
by KPBS:

quote:On Friday June 22 KPBS Full Focus listeners heard Deborah Seiler
respond to questions concerning the testing, certification and auditing of San Diego's electronic voting systems. Unfortunately Ms. Seiler is either misinformed or ignorant about the facts concerning recent San Diego elections. While we all realize Ms. Seiler is new to her job, she has yet to look into the facts. Until she has, she is simply misleading KPBS listeners. If she doesn't know the answer to a question she should just say so.

Instead, Ms. Seiler's practice of answering questions with well-practiced talking points is only making matters worse. She must be held accountable for her lack of candor with voters. KPBS listeners have yet to hear the truth, and the election integrity community thanks KPBS for the opportunity to set the record straight.

Case in point: When asked whether in the last election all machines had been federally-tested or certified by the state, Ms. Seiler said "absolutely yes, no machine can be use in California unless it's certified by the state."

That statement is at best a guess. Ms. Seiler does not know this for a fact. In fact, the registrar's office has been responding since mid-February to an active investigation being conducted by the Secretary of State concerning reports that the tests required for certification were not performed. She cannot claim ignorance due to short tenure because she was told by citizens about the reports in a meeting on June 15, 2007.

Ms. Seiler was also questioned about whether she thinks the People should be confident in the machines. She answered with confidence, saying that, "there is a verified paper trail. used as part of the recount. Following the election. we do a recount 1% of precincts which we select at random." What Ms. Seiler neglected to mention is that the audit was done before all the precincts were counted, which is illegal, and that there are still more that 400 audit discrepancies from the November 2006 elections that have yet to be explained. These discrepancies are also the subject of an active complaint to the Secretary of State.

What I find astonishing is that Ms. Seiler has no qualms about responding to questions as if there is no doubt whatsoever about the accuracy of what she is saying. For example, she states that the 2006 elections were 100% accurate. Nobody on earth can know whether a computer flips votes from one race to another or simply changes the count. What she really means is that there is no evidence of errors. Voters around the county reported numerous incidents of their votes being flipped in the Diebold TSx.

Ms. Seiler's performance during interviews, while smooth and polished from a PR standpoint, has little to do with the reality of the situation we face here in San Diego.

Fortunately San Diego citizens are gearing up to dismantle the broken system of checks and balances we have when it comes to our election systems. Citizens have formed a formal committee that is working with the Registrar of Voters to take back control of our elections, which is what a true democracy demands. In spite the creation of the committee and citizens' willingness to reach out to Ms. Seiler, we have little reason to think she will act differently than her predecessor Mikel Haas, particularly when you consider the added influence of our new assistant registrar Michael Vu on the integrity of our elections. You may recall that Mr. Vu defended the criminal conduct of two employees he supervised in Cuyahoga County after they were convicted of felons for rigging the 2004 Presidential recount. Between Seiler and Vu we have much to be concerned about, and we will continue to pressure the San Diego Board of Supervisors to do their job and clean up our elections.


- Advertisement -

View Ratings | Rate It
Bev Harris is executive director of Black Box Voting, Inc. an advocacy group committed to restoring citizen oversight to elections.

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting
/* The Petition Site */
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.

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Black Box Voting: WISCONSIN VOTE SPREAD 29,207? 7,500? Or 6,744?

Dear Maine GOP: 1+1+1 does not = 4. Official results are wrong

2008 election results to be routed to private middlemen in Illinois, Colorado & Kentucky

Racial Profiling on Tennessee Voter Reg Cards


Bev Harris: Actual Accenture Voter List Software Discovered and Downloadable to the Public