[Voterescue] Beware MoveOn.org Message about New Holt Bill

Karen Renick karen at voterescue.org
Wed Jan 9 22:56:09 CST 2008


*BEWARE the recent MoveOn.org message about signing a petition in 
support of the new Holt Bill!!  What follows is my reply to MoveOn.org 
about their deceptive and misleading message (which is also included 
below).  Please pass this on to your friends to caution them as well.  
Thank you!     ~Karen*


Dear Noah, Jennifer, Laura, Carrie, and the MoveOn.org Political Action 
Team,

Well, I'm certainly happy to see that MoveOn.org is /finally/ endorsing 
paper ballots - not paper trails or paper records - in the plea sent out 
yesterday, Jan. 8, 2008, to your members urging them to sign an 
emergency petition in support of the newest reincarnation of the Holt 
Bill /"...to stop the threat from electronic voting machines right 
away."/.  *
*

*BUT, wait!  You forgot to mention that (1) **the paper ballots in the 
bill will STILL BE COUNTED IN SECRET by // optical scanners that just so 
happen to be /electronic voting machines, /too,/ /and (2) that the bill 
does not even prohibit the use of the /other/ type of electronic voting 
machines, the DRE (Direct Recording Electronic), which display an 
electronic ballot on a screen and are paperless.
*

*How deceptive and misleading your message is!
*
In case you just simply aren't aware, ballot scanners are as vulnerable 
to fraudulent manipulation as the DRE screen-type voting machines which 
was clearly demonstrated in the 2006 HBO Emmy-nominated documentary film 
"Hacking Democracy" (www.hackingdemocracy.com).  Watch it and you'll see 
exactly how easy it was (and is) to manipulate the "official" vote count 
using a paper ballot optical scanner and do it right before the eyes of 
a very scrupulous election director.

And, if you still believe that "audits" - which are in essence only spot 
checks and are quite easy to rig - will serve as the magic bullet to 
always catch the miscounting and/or stealing of votes by scanners (or 
DREs, for that matter) and will prevent the wrong candidate from taking 
office, I suggest you check with a few folks like Christine Jennings or 
Francine Busby or Clint Curtis, for starters.  All three lost their bid 
for a Congressional seat in 2006 based on Election Night "official 
totals", but have yet been granted the opportunity to contest the highly 
questionable results in their races because their opponents were whisked 
off to Washington, D.C. before the elections were even certified and 
sworn into the House where they were instantly protected from any 
outside protests of their "victories".  *The message to candidates and 
voters?** * *Audits and recounts, be damned!*

I thought I'd share with you the alert sent out yesterday, January 8, 
2008, from Bev Harris of Black Box Voting about the Diebold/Premier 
ballot scanner (exactly the same as the one hacked in the HBO 
documentary) which was used to count 81% of all the votes cast in the 
New Hampshire Primaries held yesterday as well. The content in her 
e-mail alert entitled, /"The Cat That Controls New Hampshire Election 
Programming"/, can be read on Bev's website at 
http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/board-auth.cgi?file=/1954/71200.html 
<cid:part1.05040308.08080902 at voterescue.org> .  Today, as many had 
predicted because of the use of scanners, there are calls for a full 
recount in New Hampshire due to serious discrepancies and admitted 
"mistakes" in reporting and recording the election results.

The name of the game we all - including MoveOn.org - must demand NOW is 
*"Get it Right on Election Night"* which means we tell our local 
election officials, i.e., our public servants, we want our elections 
held using *only paper ballots that are HAND COUNTED at each precinct in 
public view with results publicly posted at each precinct immediately 
after the counting*.  Now, what's so hard about that?

Karen Renick
Director, VoteRescue.org
State Coordinator, Texans for REAL Elections
Austin, TX

karen.renick at grandecom.net


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Did you see The New York Times Magazine?
Date: 	Tue, 08 Jan 2008 10:03:12 -0800
From: 	Noah T. Winer, MoveOn.org Political Action 
<moveon-help at list.moveon.org>
To: 	Karen Renick <karen at voterescue.org>



Click here to add your name:
"We must act quickly to secure our elections with paper ballots and 
audits before November." 
<http://pol.moveon.org/paper2008/o.pl?id=11873-8600441-JAKnnR&t=1>

 

Sign the Petition 
<http://pol.moveon.org/paper2008/o.pl?id=11873-8600441-JAKnnR&t=2>


Dear MoveOn member,

This Sunday's cover story in The New York Times Magazine makes plain the 
threat: The winner of the 2008 presidential election could be decided by 
flawed, insecure, and hackable electronic voting machines.^1

This is the most prominent news coverage this issue has ever gotten, so 
it could be our one last chance to get this right before the election in 
November.

Congress is poised to consider a new emergency paper ballots bill next 
week---but we'll have to convince them to act right away.^2

Can you sign this urgent petition asking local, state, and federal 
officials to require paper ballots for our votes? Clicking here will add 
your name:

http://pol.moveon.org/paper2008/o.pl?id=11873-8600441-JAKnnR&t=3 
<http://pol.moveon.org/paper2008/o.pl?id=11873-8600441-JAKnnR&t=3>

The petition says: "We must act quickly to secure our elections with 
paper ballots and audits before November."

Elections are run at the state level, so we'll deliver your signature 
and comments to local election officials in addition to members of 
Congress.

Electronic voting machines are so unreliable and insecure, we might 
elect the wrong person president in 2008. As The New York Times Magazine 
reports:

[Voting machines] fail unpredictably, and in extremely strange ways; 
voters report that their choices "flip" from one candidate to another 
before their eyes; machines crash or begin to count backward; votes 
simply vanish. (In the 80-person town of Waldenburg, Ark., touch-screen 
machines tallied zero votes for one mayoral candidate in 2006---even 
though he's pretty sure he voted for himself.) Most famously, in the 
November 2006 Congressional election in Sarasota, Fla., touch-screen 
machines recorded an 18,000-person "undervote" for a race decided by 
fewer than 400 votes.^3

You can read more from this scary report at the end of this email---and 
forward it along to your friends and family. It's really compelling.

Congress hasn't been able to solve this problem yet, but there's one 
more chance next week. Rep. Rush Holt of New Jersey is expected to 
introduce an emergency bill to offer funding to states who switch from 
unreliable electronic voting machines to paper ballots and audits.^4 
We'll ultimately need a mandate for these things, but this bill would be 
a crucial first step to prevent some of the most dire threats to the 
2008 election.

But to pass the bill in time, we'll need to light a fire under Congress. 
At the same time, we'll have to urge local election officials to read 
The New York Times Magazine story---and replace electronic voting 
machines with paper ballots and audits before November.

Sign this emergency petition to stop the threat from electronic voting 
machines right away. Click here to add your name:

http://pol.moveon.org/paper2008/o.pl?id=11873-8600441-JAKnnR&t=4 
<http://pol.moveon.org/paper2008/o.pl?id=11873-8600441-JAKnnR&t=4>

Thank you for all you do.

--Noah, Jennifer, Laura, Carrie, and the MoveOn.org Political Action Team
  Tuesday, January 8th, 2008
  
P.S. Here's more from this week's disturbing New York Times Magazine 
story. Please forward this along to all your friends and family.
 


  Can You Count on Voting Machines?

By CLIVE THOMPSON, The New York Times Magazine, January 6, 2008

*J*ane Platten gestured, bleary-eyed, into the secure room filled with 
voting machines. It was 3 a.m. on Nov. 7, and she had been working for 
22 hours straight. "I guess we've seen how technology can affect an 
election," she said. The electronic voting machines in Cleveland were 
causing trouble again.

For a while, it had looked as if things would go smoothly for the Board 
of Elections office in Cuyahoga County, Ohio. About 200,000 voters had 
trooped out on the first Tuesday in November for the lightly attended 
local elections, tapping their choices onto the county's 5,729 
touch-screen voting machines. The elections staff had collected 
electronic copies of the votes on memory cards and taken them to the 
main office, where dozens of workers inside a secure, glass-encased room 
fed them into the "GEMS server," a gleaming silver Dell desktop computer 
that tallies the votes.

Then at 10 p.m., the server suddenly froze up and stopped counting 
votes. Cuyahoga County technicians clustered around the computer, 
debating what to do. A young, business-suited employee from 
Diebold---the company that makes the voting machines used in 
Cuyahoga---peered into the screen and pecked at the keyboard. No one 
could figure out what was wrong. So, like anyone faced with a 
misbehaving computer, they simply turned it off and on again. Voilà: It 
started working---until an hour later, when it crashed a second time. 
Again, they rebooted. By the wee hours, the server mystery still hadn't 
been solved.

Worse was yet to come. When the votes were finally tallied the next day, 
10 races were so close that they needed to be recounted. But when 
Platten went to retrieve paper copies of each vote---generated by the 
Diebold machines as they worked---she discovered that so many printers 
had jammed that 20 percent of the machines involved in the recounted 
races lacked paper copies of some of the votes. They weren't lost, 
technically speaking; Platten could hit "print" and a machine would 
generate a replacement copy. But she had no way of proving that these 
replacements were, indeed, what the voters had voted. She could only 
hope the machines had worked correctly.

Click here to keep reading:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/magazine/06Vote-t.html

Then sign our urgent petition for paper ballots before the November 
election. Just click here to add your name:

http://pol.moveon.org/paper2008/o.pl?id=11873-8600441-JAKnnR&t=5 
<http://pol.moveon.org/paper2008/o.pl?id=11873-8600441-JAKnnR&t=5>

Sources:
1. "Can You Count on Voting Machines?," The New York Times Magazine, 
January 6, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/magazine/

2. "Rep. Holt To Offer New Election Reform Proposal," National Journal 
Tech Daily, December 10, 2007
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3310&id=&id=11873-8600441-JAKnnR&t=6 
<http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3310&id=&id=11873-8600441-JAKnnR&t=6>

3. "Can You Count on Voting Machines?," The New York Times Magazine, 
January 6, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/magazine/

4. "Rep. Rush Holt to Push for Paper Ballots and Vote Count Audits for 
2008," AlterNet, December 27, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/democracy/71608/

*Support our member-driven organization:* MoveOn.org Political Action is 
entirely funded by our 3.2 million members. We have no corporate 
contributors, no foundation grants, no money from unions. Our tiny staff 
ensures that small contributions go a long way. If you'd like to support 
our work, you can give now at:

http://political.moveon.org/donate/email.html?id=11873-8600441-JAKnnR&t=7 
<http://political.moveon.org/donate/email.html?id=11873-8600441-JAKnnR&t=7>

PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://pol.moveon.org/
Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Subscription Management:*
This is a message from MoveOn.org Political Action. To change your email 
address or update your contact info, please visit:
http://moveon.org/subscrip/coa.html?id=11873-8600441-JAKnnR
To remove yourself (Karen Renick) from this list, please visit our 
subscription management page at:
http://moveon.org/s?i=11873-8600441-JAKnnR
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://voterescue.org/pipermail/voterescue_voterescue.org/attachments/20080109/d623457e/attachment-0002.html 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://voterescue.org/pipermail/voterescue_voterescue.org/attachments/20080109/d623457e/attachment-0003.html 
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: file:///C:/DOCUME~1/KAREN/LOCALS~1/TEMP/nsmail.txt
Url: http://voterescue.org/pipermail/voterescue_voterescue.org/attachments/20080109/d623457e/attachment-0001.txt 


More information about the Voterescue mailing list