Good morning Christy.
Busy today?

Christy!

zed!

Funny about this issue~
1. Why wasn’t this the number one issue to Dems????? Helllo folks…

2. Local paper ran article about 8 weeks ago decring NYS lateness in dealing with issue and maybe losing funding etc etc, now of all of a sudden, they are looking good!

Busted at 1 — Yes, it is fairly busy today. Lots more that I haven’t been able to get to as yet…but, alas, it will likely be waiting for tomorrow.

As I learned from getting smacked down here last year from opening my uneducated yap, Here in WA state every damn county has it’s own different voting machines including Diebold. We also mandated every damn one of ‘em have a paper trail.

2?

AWWW Christy, yer a peach.
A little here, a little there.

from las t thread:
Sparkles the Iguana @ 125

WaPo’s Matthew Mosk has a little blurb today “GOP Searching For Internet Dollars.”

It’s not pretty.

One need only take a glance at the two websites designed to gather contributions for all of the major party candidates to see the gulf between them. Democratic candidates for federal office have seen more than $25 million come through the web site ActBlue — some of which will eventually flow to the Democratic National Committee for use during the general election. Republicans, meanwhile, have seen just a tiny ripple of activity on the ABC PAC web site — $385 raised for the presidential candidates to date — which is supposed to be ActBlue’s direct competition.

my little $5-$10 here & there sure helps!

Jeez, Christy.

Between work and travel lately, I find it hard to keep up with the reading, much less the writing! Thanks to all of you!

PayPal is our friend!

Democracy, democracy, bo-emocracy,

Banana-fanna-fo-femocracy,

Fee-fy-fo-nemocracy,

Democracy!

Is anyone going to live-blog the Rather report tonight for those of us who can’t watch it?? Hint, hint!!

ruffian at 9 — That’s hilarious. We raised way more than that over the weekend for a single Blue America candidate for a Senate seat. mwahahahahahaha…too funny. Wonder how much they could raise for “none of the above”? *g*

Thanks for highlighting this important issue, Christy. I remember back when I first stopped lurking at FDL about two years ago, that this issue hadn’t been covered much here. The combination of machine manipulation and minority voter suppression cannot be covered and investigated enough. Ever. Why are so many white people in the Democratic leadership afraid to attack these twin issues – which have disenfranchised millions – head on?

Diebold also has lowered itself to changing the wiki article on them.

This is a very critical issue. And, alas the Dems seem not to be as responsive as one would have hoped (Feinstein for example).

Christy Hardin Smith @ 5

Busted at 1 — Yes, it is fairly busy today. Lots more that I haven’t been able to get to as yet…but, alas, it will likely be waiting for tomorrow.

Don’t worry! We’ll be here, devouring every little snarky bite! ((((((((((((Christy)))))))))))

The question is whether John Q. Public considers Dan Rather as damaged goods. And will his bush fiasco get in the way of the story.

Very interesting. It’s been quite an issue here in CA after Debra Bowen (sp?) decertified all the e voting machines for this election. WOO. She’s doing her job, in spite of tremendous pressures. News stories like this, even via a crippled & corrupt media, should help on this issue…

OT and then back to read. Hillary’s first ad.

ET at 14 — You know, I don’t know the answer on that. Digby has done a lot of work on the disenfranchisement issue and on voter suppression. And I’ve tried to hit the legal/civil rights issue quite a bit, especially in the context of what has been done to the DOJ the last few years.

But the tech issues with the voting machines really do give me pause in the writing — because I try not to write articles about things that I don’t have a decent enough base of issue understanding to really dig into the details. Otherwise, you are just parroting someone else’s spin, and I really hate that. I saw Rather being interviewed about this show this morning on MSNBC, and was intrigued and then looked up more information on their website. I’d seen notes about it the last couple of days, but it seemed to me that this would be some interviews worth watching for background.

But, again, this is me linking up to folks who are much better versed in the tech issues than I am — because, honestly, I am never going to get the whole hacking/virus/integrity issue other than to know it is bad. You start to talk with me about tech issues and I glaze over — but legal minutae, I’m there for you, buddy. *g*

Bustednuckles @ 6

As I learned from getting smacked down here last year from opening my uneducated yap, Here in WA state every damn county has it’s own different voting machines including Diebold. We also mandated every damn one of ‘em have a paper trail.

Paper trail is good, Bustedknuckles, but unless there are random audits, that are open to the public, and that are randomly selected, again in a publicly transparent forum, then they really vulnerable to election rigging.

And selection process of audits? Any recounts etc. need to be done by a system different than whatever system is used to record votes. In other words, Diebold should not oversee Diebold.

Jacqrat @ 16

Christy Hardin Smith @ 5

Busted at 1 — Yes, it is fairly busy today. Lots more that I haven’t been able to get to as yet…but, alas, it will likely be waiting for tomorrow.

Don’t worry! We’ll be here, devouring every little snarky bite! ((((((((((((Christy)))))))))))

Sorry in advance for all the inappropriate affection; I just woke up today all cuddly and love-filled.

I’m so glad you’re looking at this issue, Christy, thank you.

The thing that really irritates me is local election officials still keep wasting tax dollars buying these shit machines. It’s a classic example of Svengali-like vendors whispering sweet nothings into the ears of naive civil servants and gaming the system to piss away money on expensive, complex and ultimately useless things. If punch cards were so awful the intelligent solution would have been to upgrade to optical scanning, which works reasonably effectively. But no, governments have to buy the shiny things regardless of their effectiveness.

Look, it’s simple. There are standards and regulations for slot machines in Las Vegas and elsewhere, they are strictly monitored as working properly. Same goes for ATMs. There is no way voting machinery is harder than those, so the only conclusion one can draw is their crappiness is intentional.

By the way, when do we hear all of the apologies from Kos and others who ridiculed those of us who said elections were being stolen since 2000? Does Dan Rather’s report count as good enough proof that we can’t trust the system?

(I’m also sure someday there will be vindication about how 9/11 was allowed to happen…)

Here are some more relevant links on the CA situation, very interesting:

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_vsr.htm
http://www.latimes.com/technol…..technology

I <3 Debra Bowen…

Ed*ard Teller @ 14

Why are so many white people in the Democratic leadership afraid to attack these twin issues – which have disenfranchised millions – head on?

I think they’re afraid the MSM would paint it as tinfoil-hat territory and so they would be crucified by the pundits.

BTW, ET, heard from your gal Diane Benson. Who’s the other Dem running against her (some state senator IIRC)?

PB @ 25 and others: Can you give a concise assessment of the Calif situation, and what if anything we can do about it? Thanks.

HR811 (the Holt bill) has a Senate corollary S.559.

We had a YWFU Summer Tour yesterday with our Senator. Will have more on that later. But we tried to set him straight on Feinstein (terrible) and to become a sponsor of S.559 instead.

this special from dan rather is a few years too late

this president did NOT win the election in EITHER term

there were more votes then voters, flipped votes and machines that didn’t work

and every “irregularity” happened to benefit bush.

oh suprise of surprises

PB (peanut butter) @ 18

Very interesting. It’s been quite an issue here in CA after Debra Bowen (sp?) decertified all the e voting machines for this election. WOO. She’s doing her job, in spite of tremendous pressures. News stories like this, even via a crippled & corrupt media, should help on this issue…

Yes, those of you in CA can help Debra Bowen give those Hate-Talk Radio hosts and special interest lobbyists a big ol’ SMACK DOWN:

I got this in the mail yesterday from DFA:

Dear Jacqrat,

Please call right now!
Find your County Official
and Phone Number

_____

“I support Secretary of State
Debra Bowen’s decision to
restore election integrity and
ban unsafe voting machines.
I’m counting on you
to support the ban
and protect our votes.”

California is leading the nation again. Last Friday, Secretary of State Debra Bowen took a major step forward in restoring election integrity by decertifying electronic voting machines with the “potential for serious security breaches.”¹ Our DFA-List endorsed candidate followed through on her campaign promise to require a top-to-bottom review of election procedures and take action on the results.

Now Sacramento lobbyists and media pundits are trying to stop reform and influence the county officials charged with implementing the changes. That’s why your county official in charge of elections needs to hear from you today.

Find your county official and phone number here:

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_d.htm

We can make hundreds of calls today and have an effective impact, but only if we stay on message and stick to one issue. Please tell them:

“I support Secretary of State Debra Bowen’s decision to restore election integrity and ban unsafe voting machines. I’m counting on you to support the ban and protect our votes.”

After you make the call, please report how it went here:

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/reportcall

Debra Bowen has come through for California. Now it is up to you to stand by her and make sure every vote counts. Thank you for calling today!

Ilya Sheyman
National Community Organizer

P.S. Here are a few tips for your call:

-It is okay to only speak with the receptionist
-Identify yourself as a constituent and a voter
-Be friendly and polite, but firm
-Thank them for their time

Nancy Pelosi (August 14) via Bloomberg:

This month, Pelosi’s travels included a stop in Stamford, Connecticut, for Representative Chris Murphy, a first-term Democrat. Today she’s slated to headline a fund-raiser at a private Phoenix residence for Representative Harry Mitchell, an Arizona Democrat who won with 50 percent of the vote in a three- way race.

Yeah but the cheese in a can was years in the making.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 20

But the tech issues with the voting machines really do give me pause in the writing — because I try not to write articles about things that I don’t have a decent enough base of issue understanding to really dig into the details. Otherwise, you are just parroting someone else’s spin, and I really hate that.

Debating the technical details of electronic voting machinery is actually the wrong thing to do, it’s missing the forest for the trees. The issue is really about whether or not we want an electoral system that’s controlled by corporations as “trade secrets” and there is no way to openly recount votes by hand.

The core principle of our democracy—one person, one vote—is being handed over to corporate interests who are putting in place a system where they tell us to trust them, they’re doing it right but they can’t tell us how exactly, because that will hurt profits. Voting is becoming privatized, with companies getting to chose every step of the process in secrecy. Do we really want our government chosen by a system no more reliable than American Idol?

Richmond @ 27

PB @ 25 and others: Can you give a concise assessment of the Calif situation, and what if anything we can do about it? Thanks.

Hey, Richmond! I dunno about CONCISE but check my (approximately) #30.

Looks like this isn’t on a channel I can watch, but I’m glad to see the voting machine issue gaining mainstream attention.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 13

ruffian at 9 — That’s hilarious. We raised way more than that over the weekend for a single Blue America candidate for a Senate seat. mwahahahahahaha…too funny. Wonder how much they could raise for “none of the above”? *g*

In all fairness, “none of the above” Republican candidates is my choice for President, too. And they say liberals and conservatives can’t agree on anything.

Jacqrat -Thanks. I was talking about the other Ca issue, however, the move by the Rethugs to divide the Ca. presidential vote results according to their actual breakdown in the state as opposed to majority take all. It is said that this move would require the Dems to win BOTH Ohio and Florida to win a presidential election.

puppethead @ 33

Christy Hardin Smith @ 20

But the tech issues with the voting machines really do give me pause in the writing — because I try not to write articles about things that I don’t have a decent enough base of issue understanding to really dig into the details. Otherwise, you are just parroting someone else’s spin, and I really hate that.

Debating the technical details of electronic voting machinery is actually the wrong thing to do, it’s missing the forest for the trees. The issue is really about whether or not we want an electoral system that’s controlled by corporations as “trade secrets” and there is no way to openly recount votes by hand.

The core principle of our democracy—one person, one vote—is being handed over to corporate interests who are putting in place a system where they tell us to trust them, they’re doing it right but they can’t tell us how exactly, because that will hurt profits. Voting is becoming privatized, with companies getting to chose every step of the process in secrecy. Do we really want our government chosen by a system no more reliable than American Idol?

The how’s of voting should not be subject to corporate propriatary information rules. The source code should be open to anybody who wants to look at it. This is the very fundation of our democracy.

I like TBOGG’s rationality he offers here. I of course would dump the fake moon landing element.

I usually offer this argument ‘ If Diebold can create ATM machines which provide real-time withdrawals, account checks, deposits, and a myriad of other activity day in and day out, why can’t they get the vote right?’

It’s rediculous. In my life, I have gone to ATM machines hundreds of times , and never got a wrong transmission. Never has my account mysteriously added thousands of dollars, or reduced my account by MILLIONS of dollars, but Diebold’s voting machines apparently do this.

Machine error gives Bush 3,893 extra votes in Ohio
Warren’s vote tally walled off

And voting fraud is just one element. How about voter suppression? You know the stories of all those people waiting in line over 10 hours to vote. Meanwhile, counties right next door apparently had no problem with long lines. This inconsistency is damning enough, even if you ignore the fact that the counties are blue or red.

And please check out this video on how easy it is to change a ROM chip in a voting machine. For those without EE backgrounds, let me say it’s pretty easy to change chips in and out.

Also, independent testing seems to show that Diebold voting machines need to be seriously tested and improved before our next election.

It really is very simple: They (politicians, Diebold, pundits) hate paper trails, therefore we should love and insist on paper trails.

I don’t want any more time or money spent on computer voting machines, even with a paper trail. There’s no such thing as a computer that can’t be hacked. It’s like the fence and the ever-taller ladder.

Tom Friedman is on public radio right now talking about Iraq.

*xyz @ 42

Tom Friedman is on public radio right now talking about Iraq.

On great another neo-con war champion on my public radio station. Spare me.

I am wondering if Ken Blackwell of Ohio voting fame is involved with the California machines and process.

On topic re: ‘08 race:

Filed at 1:22 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) — When Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama said in a recent debate that ”the center of gravity in this world is shifting to Asia,” he had one nation clearly in mind.

”China is rising and it’s not going away,” said the senator from Illinois. ”They’re neither our enemy nor our friend. They’re competitors.”

More than a year before the 2008 election, China — occasionally as partner, more often as adversary and potential vote-getter — is also rising as an issue among the candidates for president.

Iraq is, and will be, the top foreign policy issue among the people jockeying for the White House. But as detractors increasingly shine a critical spotlight on China in the buildup to the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing, the contenders will likely ratchet up their rhetoric on China’s ability to help and to hinder American interests around the world.

”It’s impossible to avoid China as a policy issue,” Doug Holtz-Eakin, a policy adviser to the campaign of Republican Sen. John McCain, said in an interview. ”Anybody who is interested in being the next president of the United States has to think consciously about how … to have China emerge as a responsible stakeholder.”

There’s the war on terror. And there’s another war: the economic and diplomatic one with China. We owe China almost a trillion dollars (the amount of reserves in US treasury bonds sitting in the vaults of the Bank of China). No, China will not go away.

Richmond at 43 — If I’m not mistaken, I think that was *xyz’s point. *g*

To my mind, all the technical stuff is beside the point.

The real point is, why is our public vote – the most precious safeguard of our democracy – privatized?

Why is proprietary software allowed to be used for the voice of the American people – proprietary software, may I add, owned by admittedly-partisan Republican advocates?

That’s just crazy. The technical stuff means nothing beside that question as far as I’m concerned.

Richmond @ 43

*xyz @ 42

Tom Friedman is on public radio right now talking about Iraq.

On great another neo-con war champion on my public radio station. Spare me.

He’s a dangerous man and I want to keep track of what he’s saying.

*xyz @ 48

Richmond @ 43

On great another neo-con war champion on my public radio station. Spare me.

He’s a dangerous man and I want to keep track of what he’s saying.

And the show is now taking phone calls from listeners…

Christy Hardin Smith @ 46

Richmond at 43 — If I’m not mistaken, I think that was *xyz’s point. *g*

My apologies XYZ – missed the snark label! Grrrr, back to purrrr.

Illinois Representative and former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert will not seek re-election, CQ.com reports. GOP sources tell CQ that a formal announcement will be made at a press conference scheduled this Friday.

LINK

Christy Hardin Smith @ 20

ET at 14 — You know, I don’t know the answer on that. Digby has done a lot of work on the disenfranchisement issue and on voter suppression. And I’ve tried to hit the legal/civil rights issue quite a bit, especially in the context of what has been done to the DOJ the last few years.

But the tech issues with the voting machines really do give me pause in the writing — because I try not to write articles about things that I don’t have a decent enough base of issue understanding to really dig into the details. Otherwise, you are just parroting someone else’s spin, and I really hate that. I saw Rather being interviewed about this show this morning on MSNBC, and was intrigued and then looked up more information on their website. I’d seen notes about it the last couple of days, but it seemed to me that this would be some interviews worth watching for background.

But, again, this is me linking up to folks who are much better versed in the tech issues than I am — because, honestly, I am never going to get the whole hacking/virus/integrity issue other than to know it is bad. You start to talk with me about tech issues and I glaze over — but legal minutae, I’m there for you, buddy. *g*

David Dill out of Stanford University has been notifying the public of this problem through the Internet long before the 2000 election. They took the machines apart, studied the software and concluded that any election could be “programmed” to win or lose. He is high profile at Stanford and could offer us some serious information about electronic voting. He’s appeared on panels before Congress. But they have done nothing to follow up. He urged that the voters and states determine how they want their voting machines to function and it was up to the companies to deliver it.

Everything used in electronic voting machines is off-the-shelf technology so their is no trade secrets they can hide behind. I could start a small voting machine business. You could start one. Everyone in Congress was well informed of its flaws before the 2000 election. They also knew they didn’t have to just put in an order and take what they got from some company. It’s their money. They determine how they want the product to function and what it can do for them. Neither party wanted to do this. Why?

David Dill is one very smart techie.

Thanks, Christy, for an important post!

There are several huge difficulties with this issue. First, by law, elections are administered by LOCAL authorities. (Aren’t we glad that they are not run by a Federal agency filled with minions of Karl Rove?) It is those local authorities who must implement any changes.

Second, there are a HUGE number of voting machines involved. If you think that we can solve this problem with a snap of the fingers, think again. Even if the Holt bill was signed, sealed and delivered today, it would be difficult or impossible to implement its mandate in time for next year’s elections.

Third, ALL of the current voting machines are flawed, because they are run with proprietary code (i.e., secret). We need a new voting machine industry based on open source software and hardware that is regulated.

There is a lot more, and Christy’s links are a great way to start.

Bob in HI

*xyz @ 49

*xyz @ 48

He’s a dangerous man and I want to keep track of what he’s saying.

And the show is now taking phone calls from listeners…

1-800-989-TALK

richmond @ 37

Apparently it has yet to qualify for next June’s ballot (the earliest it can come up).

*xyz @ 42

Tom Friedman is on public radio right now talking about Iraq.

I’m so glad to see that they are keeping fiction on the radio.

I know this is not the Giuliani thread, but I can’t help myself. That man has an affinity to the worst racist kind of people. From July 6 2007:

Rudy Giuliani will face tough questions today about whether or not he condones the racist comments of Arthur Ravenel, Jr., the new co-chair of his campaign in South Carolina.

AZ Matt @ 51

Illinois Representative and former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert will not seek re-election, CQ.com reports. GOP sources tell CQ that a formal announcement will be made at a press conference scheduled this Friday.

LINK

John Leasch. Everybody think John Leasch real hard.

*xyz @ 42

Tom Friedman is on public radio right now talking about Iraq.

Is he talking with a squeaky wheel soundtrack?

AZ Matt @ 51

Illinois Representative and former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert will not seek re-election, CQ.com reports. GOP sources tell CQ that a formal announcement will be made at a press conference scheduled this Friday.

LINK

This makes no sense. He’s so young and vivacious.

Sparkles the Iguana @ 60

AZ Matt @ 51

LINK

This makes no sense. He’s so young and vivacious.

707 !

Ed*ard Teller @ 14

Thanks for highlighting this important issue, Christy. I remember back when I first stopped lurking at FDL about two years ago, that this issue hadn’t been covered much here. The combination of machine manipulation and minority voter suppression cannot be covered and investigated enough. Ever. Why are so many white people in the Democratic leadership afraid to attack these twin issues – which have disenfranchised millions – head on?

Amen! (bold mine)

JF @ 38

puppethead @ 33

Debating the technical details of electronic voting machinery is actually the wrong thing to do, it’s missing the forest for the trees. The issue is really about whether or not we want an electoral system that’s controlled by corporations as “trade secrets” and there is no way to openly recount votes by hand.

The core principle of our democracy—one person, one vote—is being handed over to corporate interests who are putting in place a system where they tell us to trust them, they’re doing it right but they can’t tell us how exactly, because that will hurt profits. Voting is becoming privatized, with companies getting to chose every step of the process in secrecy. Do we really want our government chosen by a system no more reliable than American Idol?

The how’s of voting should not be subject to corporate propriatary information rules. The source code should be open to anybody who wants to look at it. This is the very fundation of our democracy.

And again a reminder this is off-the-shelf technology and not propriatary information. FDL can easily start a voting machine company. Everything is there for us to use. No secret technology that no one else has. If you can run a slot machine you can run a voting machine with all the same fixes.

The best proposed legislation on this is H.R. 811, proposed by Representative Rush Holt (D-NJ-12) [voters in the 12th have bumper stickers that say My Congressman Is a Rocket Scientist].

It’s a great bill, with a underlying principles about how technology can be a help, but there must be vote integrity at every step of the process of voting and counting those votes. See here for more information. Then call/write/fax/email your representative, and ask them to be a cosponsor of this legislation.

Yay for the American Bar:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…..133121/288

Jacqrat, thank you for that link to support Debra Bowen. I emailed the county.

For anyone who hasn’t weighed in on the FISA issue, here’s an ACLU petition to Harry and Nancy.

Diebold and ESS and other voter machine companies need to open their source code AND hardware schematics to the public.

It’s kinda like an undergraduate handing a paper to be peer-reviewed. Guess what? Your weak arguments will be torn to shreds. You might not like it. But you will learn from your mistakes, and if you make the necessary improvements, your arguments will be much better.

There are many other software applications much more complex than a simple vote tally system. For gods sake, we have robots walking around on Mars right now. We have flight simulation programs. We have missiles which alter their trajectory in order to seek moving targets. All it takes is a few dudes who know code to look over the Diebold process and advise on how to make it error proof. It’s not that hard of a process to understand, and Americans need to realize how easy it could be fixed.

MayDaze @ 26

Ed*ard Teller @ 14

Why are so many white people in the Democratic leadership afraid to attack these twin issues – which have disenfranchised millions – head on?

I think they’re afraid the MSM would paint it as tinfoil-hat territory and so they would be crucified by the pundits.

BTW, ET, heard from your gal Diane Benson. Who’s the other Dem running against her (some state senator IIRC)?

The other declared candidate for the Democratic primary about 360 days from now – is Jake Metcalfe, most recently the chairman of the Alaska Democratic Party. Monday, in Juneau, both Benson and Metcalfe spoke at the annual Juneau Democrats picnic, and at a meeting of Veterans for Peace. Juneau is Metcalfe’s hometown, though he hasn’t lived there in a while. Both candidates were well received, with a lot of women and Native Alaskans showing up to support Benson. She beat Don Young in Juneau in 2006. There’s an interview with Diane Benson in today’s Juneau Empire.

Back on topic, the Alaska Democratic Party is STILL trying to get data from the state regarding positive verification of information from the tabulators in the 2004 election, which sorta show Tony Knowles beating Lisa Murkowski for the U.S. Senate at the precinct level, but changing midstream on the way to the division of elections….

Here is a thought – there are more regulations on gambling machines than on voting machines.

Is anyone else having trouble with their FDL spell check?

njprogressive @ 64

It’s a great bill, with a underlying principles about how technology can be a help, but there must be vote integrity at every step of the process of voting and counting those votes. .

sorry I don’t agree when it comes to voting machines

technology is bad, we need mechanical machines and that’s it

ya, they need to be devised with state of the art technology so there are no “hanging chads” but there can be no electronic voting at all

and forget that “paper trail” crap

most people don’t check or won’t complaign thinking they don’t want to look foolish

mechanical machines is the only solution

Bob Schacht @ 53

Thanks, Christy, for an important post!

There are several huge difficulties with this issue. First, by law, elections are administered by LOCAL authorities. (Aren’t we glad that they are not run by a Federal agency filled with minions of Karl Rove?) It is those local authorities who must implement any changes.

Second, there are a HUGE number of voting machines involved. If you think that we can solve this problem with a snap of the fingers, think again. Even if the Holt bill was signed, sealed and delivered today, it would be difficult or impossible to implement its mandate in time for next year’s elections.

Third, ALL of the current voting machines are flawed, because they are run with proprietary code (i.e., secret). We need a new voting machine industry based on open source software and hardware that is regulated.

There is a lot more, and Christy’s links are a great way to start.

Bob in HI

Why can’t we simply use paper ballots and count them by precinct?

QuakerGirl @ 69

Is anyone else having trouble with their FDL spell check?

Yes, in Safari.

OT:Newspaper kills ad seeking info on U.S. Attorneys scandal

DailyKos Diary:A government reform group reports that an Ohio newspaper refused to publish its paid ad asking whistleblowers to come forward with information related to the U.S. Attorneys scandal. In a press release issued yesterday, VelvetRevolution said Akron’s West Side Leader provided “no legitimate reason” for killing the ad, which sought information on three area companies implicated in the scandal. One of the three is GovTech Solutions, the firm that set up an “off-grid email system” used by Karl Rove and other White House officials.

newtonusr @ 72

QuakerGirl @ 69

Is anyone else having trouble with their FDL spell check?

Yes, in Safari.

So is Firefox.

puppethead @ 33

Christy Hardin Smith @ 20

But the tech issues with the voting machines really do give me pause in the writing — because I try not to write articles about things that I don’t have a decent enough base of issue understanding to really dig into the details. Otherwise, you are just parroting someone else’s spin, and I really hate that.

Debating the technical details of electronic voting machinery is actually the wrong thing to do, it’s missing the forest for the trees. The issue is really about whether or not we want an electoral system that’s controlled by corporations as “trade secrets” and there is no way to openly recount votes by hand.

Absolutely. I’ve got the technical chops to understand what’s going on (and going wrong) with these machines, but that’s absolutely besides the point. The point is that democracy and voting (and so much else resting on that) require transparency and accountability. Hence, you must have paper trails, and verifiable voting ballots. Full and immediate stop.

LS @ 65

Yay for the American Bar:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/20
07/8/14/133121/288

Hallelujah!

LS @ 65

Yay for the American Bar:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…..133121/288

good news!

cancer_cures @ 67

Diebold and ESS and other voter machine companies need to open their source code AND hardware schematics to the public.

It’s kinda like an undergraduate handing a paper to be peer-reviewed. Guess what? Your weak arguments will be torn to shreds. You might not like it. But you will learn from your mistakes, and if you make the necessary improvements, your arguments will be much better.

There are many other software applications much more complex than a simple vote tally system. For gods sake, we have robots walking around on Mars right now. We have flight simulation programs. We have missiles which alter their trajectory in order to seek moving targets. All it takes is a few dudes who know code to look over the Diebold process and advise on how to make it error proof. It’s not that hard of a process to understand, and Americans need to realize how easy it could be fixed.

Exactly. The errors may not be intentional. I remember one specific problem with the machines in 2004. The vote count, once it recorded 32000 votes, would begin to subtract a vote for each vote cast. This looks like a symptom of a common quirk in many programming languages, and is easily fixed.

perris @ 70

njprogressive @ 64

It’s a great bill, with a underlying principles about how technology can be a help, but there must be vote integrity at every step of the process of voting and counting those votes. .

sorry I don’t agree when it comes to voting machines

technology is bad, we need mechanical machines and that’s it

ya, they need to be devised with state of the art technology so there are no “hanging chads” but there can be no electronic voting at all

and forget that “paper trail” crap

most people don’t check or won’t complaign thinking they don’t want to look foolish

mechanical machines is the only solution

Did you read what the bill requires? Tell me it’s a bad bill after you’ve read the requirements.

From the GovTech website:
GovTech Solutions was awarded a Marketing, Media & Public Information GSA Schedule (GS-23F-0134M), allowing us to contract directly with government agencies in a less cumbersome procurement process.
website here.

Hey T- my only disagreement with your statement is that you seem to be implying that there is a desire to create better voting machines. I DO NOT accept that position.
These bastards do not want to make a better machine. They realize that these machines that are being used can be screwed with – thus guaranteeing a desired result!
They even showed us all what is coming in 08 when they screwed with the Iowa Straw poll!

QuakerGirl @ 69

Here is a thought – there are more regulations on gambling machines than on voting machines.

Is anyone else having trouble with their FDL spell check?

Take note of the spelling while in preview, then change it in the submit comment box.

ET @ 68 – Thanks for the info.

From the last thread, Marilyn In Texas @ 113 asked about how the Senate manages its calendar. I am no expert on this subject but I did find this.

The Senate accords its majority leader prime responsibility for scheduling. He may carry out this responsibility by moving that the Senate proceed to consider a particular matter. By precedent, he and the minority leader are recognized preferentially, and by custom only he (or his designee) makes motions or requests affecting when the Senate will meet and what it will consider.

For executive business, this motion to proceed may be offered in a nondebatable form, but for legislative business it usually is debatable. Whenever possible, therefore, the majority leader instead calls up bills and resolutions by unanimous consent. If Senators object to unanimous consent to take up a measure, they are implicitly threatening to filibuster a motion to consider it. They may do so because they oppose that measure, or in the hope of influencing action on some other matter.

Senators can even place a “hold” on a measure or nomination, although this practice is not recognized in Senate rules. “Holds” are requests by Senators to their party’s floor leader to object on their behalf to any request to consider a matter, at least until they have been consulted. The majority leader will usually not even request consent to consider a measure if there is a hold on it.

http://www.senate.gov/legislat…..cess.htm#3

Richmond @ 37

Jacqrat -Thanks. I was talking about the other Ca issue, however, the move by the Rethugs to divide the Ca. presidential vote results according to their actual breakdown in the state as opposed to majority take all. It is said that this move would require the Dems to win BOTH Ohio and Florida to win a presidential election.

Let me clarify this. The republicans are NOT lobbying for an actual proportional distribution of California’s electoral votes, althoug that is the language they frame it in.

What they are proposing is dropping the winner-take-all model down from state level to congressional district level. And those congressional districts were last drawn by…TADAAAA…the republicans.

It’s a nasty piece of work, and we need to hit the ground running NOW to counter it, because it sounds so fair…

Jon Stokes – guru of Ars Technica and great netroots guy – did an amazing piece of research on evoting last year – definitely worth reading:

How to Steal an Election

Since Jon has superb contacts in the technology world, he was able to pull together info we don’t normally know. And Ars Technica has continued to cover these issues:

e voting archives

njprogressive @ 79

perris @ 70

sorry I don’t agree when it comes to voting machines

technology is bad, we need mechanical machines and that’s it

ya, they need to be devised with state of the art technology so there are no “hanging chads” but there can be no electronic voting at all

and forget that “paper trail” crap

most people don’t check or won’t complaign thinking they don’t want to look foolish

mechanical machines is the only solution

Did you read what the bill requires? Tell me it’s a bad bill after you’ve read the requirements.

I didn’t read the bill so tell me if my assumptions are wrong;

does it accept electronic recoding of votes in any fasion?

if so I don’t like it no matter what the safeguards

there is nothing wrong with paper votes, nothing, and I see no reason what so ever to change to electronic recording of votes

I have to go back to work but earlier I was reading a diary on a new feature on WIKI featuring a scanner. It allows others to see who have been making changes on the wiki pages. It seems the CIA and Diebold keep making changes when information wrt Diebold are posted. Later!

Loo Hoo. @ 71

Bob Schacht @ 53

Thanks, Christy, for an important post!

There are several huge difficulties with this issue. First, by law, elections are administered by LOCAL authorities. (Aren’t we glad that they are not run by a Federal agency filled with minions of Karl Rove?) It is those local authorities who must implement any changes.

Second, there are a HUGE number of voting machines involved. If you think that we can solve this problem with a snap of the fingers, think again. Even if the Holt bill was signed, sealed and delivered today, it would be difficult or impossible to implement its mandate in time for next year’s elections.

Third, ALL of the current voting machines are flawed, because they are run with proprietary code (i.e., secret). We need a new voting machine industry based on open source software and hardware that is regulated.

There is a lot more, and Christy’s links are a great way to start.

Bob in HI

Why can’t we simply use paper ballots and count them by precinct?

The people who run elections, regardless of party, HATE paper ballots. They cost more to count, per ballot, than almost any other method, and there is a lot that can go wrong. How much experience do you have counting paper ballots? People do strange things with ballots, and their intent is not always easy to understand. Worse than hanging chads.

It ought to be possible to use something like an ATM machine, with open source coding and a paper trail.

Bob in HI

Wow Christy. One blockbuster post filled with links right after another!

ccmask @ 88

I have to go back to work but earlier I was reading a diary on a new feature on WIKI featuring a scanner. It allows others to see who have been making changes on the wiki pages. It seems the CIA and Diebold keep making changes when information wrt Diebold are posted. Later!

boy, would love to see what those changes are made as well who makes them

intriguing information 2 b sure
boy, would love to see the changes they made too

Loo Hoo. @ 71

Bob Schacht @ 53

Thanks, Christy, for an important post!

There are several huge difficulties with this issue. First, by law, elections are administered by LOCAL authorities. (Aren’t we glad that they are not run by a Federal agency filled with minions of Karl Rove?) It is those local authorities who must implement any changes.

Second, there are a HUGE number of voting machines involved. If you think that we can solve this problem with a snap of the fingers, think again. Even if the Holt bill was signed, sealed and delivered today, it would be difficult or impossible to implement its mandate in time for next year’s elections.

Third, ALL of the current voting machines are flawed, because they are run with proprietary code (i.e., secret). We need a new voting machine industry based on open source software and hardware that is regulated.

There is a lot more, and Christy’s links are a great way to start.

Bob in HI

Why can’t we simply use paper ballots and count them by precinct?

Yes. You can put in any code and call it propriatary while the technology is off-the-shelf. I agree with open source and strict regulations which include frequent checking of both hardware and software.

There was a town in Louisiana, near New Orleans, that had a ballot up for election that nearly the whole town approved. It had a good 80% support. They did the democratic things and had voters cast their vote. When the returns came in the ballot lost by a huge margin. Hit the front papers of the town. City Council met and got in touch with the electronic voting machine company. The company said their machines could not malfunction. Well, it turns out the particular ballot was coded to lose. The company corrected it and the good folks revoted. The point is it was coded to ensure a certain result.

bill @ 81

Hey T- my only disagreement with your statement is that you seem to be implying that there is a desire to create better voting machines. I DO NOT accept that position.
These bastards do not want to make a better machine. They realize that these machines that are being used can be screwed with – thus guaranteeing a desired result!
They even showed us all what is coming in 08 when they screwed with the Iowa Straw poll!

These machines will NEVER be safe! They need to be outlawed. The American pre-occupation with electronic vote technology is too dangerous. If necessary, expand voting hours or days, but go back to verifiable mechanical voting. It is too easy to cheat when voting is digitized. Voting should never have left the dead tree era.

OT: Christy, looks like the NSA spying program is right in your backyard. VIDEO

perris @ 91

ccmask @ 88

I have to go back to work but earlier I was reading a diary on a new feature on WIKI featuring a scanner. It allows others to see who have been making changes on the wiki pages. It seems the CIA and Diebold keep making changes when information wrt Diebold are posted. Later!

boy, would love to see what those changes are made as well who makes them

intriguing information 2 b sure
boy, would love to see the changes they made too

Why is the CIA editing Diebold entries?

Bob Schacht @ 89

Loo Hoo. @ 71

Why can’t we simply use paper ballots and count them by precinct?

The people who run elections, regardless of party, HATE paper ballots. They cost more to count, per ballot, than almost any other method, and there is a lot that can go wrong. How much experience do you have counting paper ballots? People do strange things with ballots, and their intent is not always easy to understand. Worse than hanging chads.

It ought to be possible to use something like an ATM machine, with open source coding and a paper trail.

Bob in HI

paper trails are not worth the paper they are printed on when it comes to e voting

and it does NOT cost less to count e voting when you consider the flipped elections

and I don’t care if they hate paper ballots, that’s the only secure vote

perris @ 91

ccmask @ 88

I have to go back to work but earlier I was reading a diary on a new feature on WIKI featuring a scanner. It allows others to see who have been making changes on the wiki pages. It seems the CIA and Diebold keep making changes when information wrt Diebold are posted. Later!

boy, would love to see what those changes are made as well who makes them

intriguing information 2 b sure
boy, would love to see the changes they made too

Doesn’t WIKI already have that ability? Or is this for WIKI end-users?

perris @ 91

ccmask @ 88

I have to go back to work but earlier I was reading a diary on a new feature on WIKI featuring a scanner. It allows others to see who have been making changes on the wiki pages. It seems the CIA and Diebold keep making changes when information wrt Diebold are posted. Later!

boy, would love to see what those changes are made as well who makes them

intriguing information 2 b sure
boy, would love to see the changes they made too

This sounded interesting so I googled it. Here is a link to an article I found:

Wired Article

For those who won’t click on a link:

Fundamental Provisions of H.R. 811
The Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007
• A voter-verified paper ballot must be produced for every vote cast beginning with the November 2008 elections.
• Paper-based voting systems (including thermal reel-to-reel systems and systems accessible to voters with disabilities that also used or produced a paper ballot) used in 2006 can be used until 2012; only systems that used no paper ballots at all must be replaced or upgraded by November 2008. Durable, scannable, accessible paper ballots must be used by 2012.
• The paper ballot is the vote of record in all recounts and audits, as a check on electronic tallies.
• In 2008, all voters are entitled to vote by paper ballot if the voting machine in their jurisdiction is broken, and in 2010 and after, for any reason.
• Routine random audits must be conducted by hand count in 3% of the precincts in all Federal elections, and 5% or 10% in very close races (but races decided by 80% or more need not be audited).
• Wireless devices, Internet connections, uncertified software and undisclosed software are banned in voting and tabulating machines.
• $1 billion in funding is authorized for system replacement and upgrading in FY 2008, with additional upgrades authorized in FY 2009.
• $100 million each fiscal year is authorized to fund the audits.
• An arms-length relationship is established between test labs and voting machine vendors.
• The bill is silent on re-authorizing the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) and does not address military and overseas balloting.

Germany uses paper ballots which take a week to count according to RFK, Jr, irrc. Wouldn’t be wonderful to not have our msm call the elections before all votes are in? If we can spend the $ for the machines, we can spend the $ to compensate & train the number of counters needed.
I thought Canada also has paper ballots.

Loo Hoo. @ 82

QuakerGirl @ 69

Here is a thought – there are more regulations on gambling machines than on voting machines.

Is anyone else having trouble with their FDL spell check?

Take note of the spelling while in preview, then change it in the submit comment box.

Hi LooHoo – Is this just a temporary problem of the day? My typing is worse than my spelling. Spell check slaps my typing down. I fumble on light switches, too.

OT..Re-post?..if so still to good not to post again..

But do you want to see how Collins’ Director of Internet Strategy combats voter cynicism, and raises standards on “substantive issues-oriented campaigns?”

Markos Moulitsas’s hate-site The Daily Kos, the foul-mouthed fem-blog FiredogLake, and other ‘netroots’ extremists like MoveOn.org, have become the dominant fundraisers for Tom Allen’s senate campaign. This may be good news for Allen financially, but allowing these fringe fanatics to take over his campaign is creating a political atmosphere that will undoubtedly be rejected by Maine voters come next November.

Tom Allen’s involvement with these groups, particularly his participation in the website The Daily Kos, came onto the radar screen of Maine voters recently, as national media exposed a pattern of hateful, vulgar, and anti-semitic postings on the site. Now Allen’s extremist friends have landed on the ground in Maine, and are engaging in the same childish bullying campaign tactics that made Connecticut voters reject their attempts to unseat Senator Joe Lieberman in 2006.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/14/142036/785

I love being part of the the “foul-mouthed fem-blog FiredogLake”

That post made my day!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges

wiki recent changes on diebold

Loo Hoo #66, I signed the ACLU petition. Thanks.

ironranger @ 100

Germany uses paper ballots which take a week to count according to RFK, Jr, irrc. Wouldn’t be wonderful to not have our msm call the elections before all votes are in? If we can spend the $ for the machines, we can spend the $ to compensate & train the number of counters needed.
I thought Canada also has paper ballots.

Do you mean that we DON’T need to know the results within seconds? But we’re AMERicans!

I worked the polls a couple of elections back. I took a 3 hour course on Diebold, and then loaded up two of the machines in the trunk of my car at noon on Sunday. They stayed in the trunk of my car until the election on Tuesday. There was a hotline to call in case of problems with the machine, but I never could get through. It was busy all day long. There was also a gal who showed up twice to ask if there were problems, but by the time she got there, the voters had already left. It was a nightmare.

The other thing I learned while working the poll, is that the two gals I worked with had been partners in this precinct for years. They were clearly republicans. When an independent voter came in, they would pick up an independent republican ballot and point to the independent democrat ballot. It took me a while to realize what they were doing and to ask them to stop.

If you’ve never worked the polls, do it if you can. I’m taking it to negotiations to get polling days allowed in the same way that jury duty is allowed in our contract. The district pays for my sub, and I turn over the $125 to the district. We’ll see. We need to be there.

TexBetsy@105: Very unamerican, I know! Probably unpatriotic & treasonous as well.

Seamus @97,

yes, they follow the changes to the IP address. At this point, they know that someone on the CIA network or someone on the Diebold network made the change.

Companies and organizations which communicate over the internet usually have 1 IP address for all outgoing traffic. That’s as far as WIKI investigators can go. The other half of the investigation is up to the CIA or Diebold, should they choose to investigate.

yellowsnapdragon @ 95

perris @ 91

boy, would love to see what those changes are made as well who makes them

intriguing information 2 b sure
boy, would love to see the changes they made too

Why is the CIA editing Diebold entries?

Is this just suspicion and rumor? Where is there information on this? It could happen but is there evidence this is happening? I’d really like to know.

Steve-AR at 102 — My favorite part of that “fem-blog” nonsense is that it was written for a blog for Susan Collins of Maine. How’s that sticking up for women working for you now, Suz? Jeebus, stupid on so many levels at once…and taking lessons from Dangerstein in “how not to blog” all at the same time. Pathetic, shrill, and awfully sad, isn’t it?

Steve-AR @ 102

OT..Re-post?..if so still to good not to post again..

But do you want to see how Collins’ Director of Internet Strategy combats voter cynicism, and raises standards on “substantive issues-oriented campaigns?”

Markos Moulitsas’s hate-site The Daily Kos, the foul-mouthed fem-blog FiredogLake, and other ‘netroots’ extremists like MoveOn.org, have become the dominant fundraisers for Tom Allen’s senate campaign. This may be good news for Allen financially, but allowing these fringe fanatics to take over his campaign is creating a political atmosphere that will undoubtedly be rejected by Maine voters come next November.

Tom Allen’s involvement with these groups, particularly his participation in the website The Daily Kos, came onto the radar screen of Maine voters recently, as national media exposed a pattern of hateful, vulgar, and anti-semitic postings on the site. Now Allen’s extremist friends have landed on the ground in Maine, and are engaging in the same childish bullying campaign tactics that made Connecticut voters reject their attempts to unseat Senator Joe Lieberman in 2006.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/14/142036/785

I love being part of the the “foul-mouthed fem-blog FiredogLake”

That post made my day!!

It’s nice to see a middle of the road Republican like Susan Collins running such an upright campaign. No mudslinging there, nope, not a bit.

Speaking of Dangerstein, I haven’t seen him running off at the mouth lately. Did he finally get tired of getting the smackdown put on him all the time?

perris @ 103

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges

wiki recent changes on diebold

oops, that’s overall recent changes not topic specific

my bad

Can I just say that no matter how many times I have watched “October Sky,” I bawl like a baby every single time Homer wins the grand prize medal at the National Science Fair. I am such a sap for hard work and “kid from the sticks makes good” stories…

I don’t understand the problem with paper ballots. The last three election districts that I have lived in have had paper ballots like a standardized test. Fill in the circle, put in a scanner. There is also a “receipt” that goes in a separate, locked box. Simple, fast..can it be manipulated, probably but there is a paper ballot trail.

I have some questions regardig the “paper trail” issue:

(1) Is the idea that there is supposed to be a(n) internal paper record of votes cast? Wouldn’t this be just as easy to rig as any electronic record?

(2) Surely the idea is not that each elector receive a “receipt” verifying their vote, so that in the case of a discrepancy, everyone who voted could show up with their “official” copy of their vote. That would be unwieldy to say the least, and how do you know that everyone, or, more to the point, those whose votes are “suspect” would show up at some (say) town hall meting to officiate the tallies?

What is the issue with the “paper trail?”

OT, but I’ve been out of action for the last 10 days or so with a broken ankle (2 breaks, actually) so I’ve probably missed lots on this issue. Hope to catch up… Anyhow, hi to all!

-MS

QuakerGirl @ 109

Is this just suspicion and rumor? Where is there information on this? It could happen but is there evidence this is happening? I’d really like to know.

According to the Wired article (and the DKos post) the CIA is editing entries, but not specifically Diebold entries. False alarm.

At my voting site, we use the lever machines. No one doubts their accuracy. And to my knowledge they’ve never failed. Why change?
Computer voting needs to be banned…period.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 114

Can I just say that no matter how many times I have watched “October Sky,” I bawl like a baby every single time Homer wins the grand prize medal at the National Science Fair. I am such a sap for hard work and “kid from the sticks makes good” stories…

I use it along with the Companion Book in my Humanities courses.(Was it “Rocket Boy?”)

Steve-AR @ 115

I don’t understand the problem with paper ballots. The last three election districts that I have lived in have had paper ballots like a standardized test. Fill in the circle, put in a scanner. There is also a “receipt” that goes in a separate, locked box. Simple, fast..can it be manipulated, probably but there is a paper ballot trail.

The other problem is that you can just throw away bag fulls of them and there may be no accountability. (Wasn’t there something like this in Fla?). Correct me if I am wrong, but one of the main difference between now and say 15 years ago is that the League of WOmen Voters used to play a key role in the elections. They were non-partisan. Both the Dems and Rethugs wanted them out of the debate and vote business, and it has been bad for all of us.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 110

Steve-AR at 102 — My favorite part of that “fem-blog” nonsense is that it was written for a blog for Susan Collins of Maine. How’s that sticking up for women working for you now, Suz? Jeebus, stupid on so many levels at once…and taking lessons from Dangerstein in “how not to blog” all at the same time. Pathetic, shrill, and awfully sad, isn’t it?

Collins is going down and she knows it. I have never understood why the people of Maine elect her..she is a light weight and a nasty piece of work..

Jim at 119 — Yes, that’s it. I’ve actually met Roy Lee in person a few times — he’s a hoot, as you might expect. I love this movie.

Michael in Park Slope @ 116

I have some questions regardig the “paper trail” issue:

(1) Is the idea that there is supposed to be a(n) internal paper record of votes cast? Wouldn’t this be just as easy to rig as any electronic record?

(2) Surely the idea is not that each elector receive a “receipt” verifying their vote, so that in the case of a discrepancy, everyone who voted could show up with their “official” copy of their vote. That would be unwieldy to say the least, and how do you know that everyone, or, more to the point, those whose votes are “suspect” would show up at some (say) town hall meting to officiate the tallies?

What is the issue with the “paper trail?”

OT, but I’ve been out of action for the last 10 days or so with a broken ankle (2 breaks, actually) so I’ve probably missed lots on this issue. Hope to catch up… Anyhow, hi to all!

-MS

The way I understand it to work is that a paper reciept would be printed out and could be reviewed by the voter, but not taken. The reciept would be behind glass, so it could not be taken or tampered with.

JF @ 78

Exactly. The errors may not be intentional. I remember one specific problem with the machines in 2004. The vote count, once it recorded 32000 votes, would begin to subtract a vote for each vote cast. This looks like a symptom of a common quirk in many programming languages, and is easily fixed.

One thing to keep in mind is that a lot of the resistance to change comes from voting officials and volunteers, who are mostly well-intentioned (and where I live, mostly Democrats), and are just looking for systems that they see as letting them do their jobs well without adding extra work for their hard-to-recruit volunteers. So I always try to make the point that problems don’t require malfeasance or security incompetence on the part of those officials (even though that may happen in some parts of the country.) This also lets me keep it at a technical level anyone can understand.

First point: Voting machines are custom programmed for every election. This is done on a short time schedule by contract programmers. I wouldn’t trust any software written under those conditions for anything critical.

(As an aside, there is no reason these machines should require custom programming, other than greed, incompetence, or ill intent. I could write a system in a week that would allow end-users to lay out a ballot and specify tabulation categories. Your average spreadsheet is more complex “programming” than is required to tabulate election results.)

Second point: The reason for paper ballots is that anyone can understand intuitively, without specialized training, how to verify the count. (Training in procedure, sure, but not the basic concept.) Verifying a voting-machine results requires specialized training from the one company with a vested interest in not finding problems. (Again, not even considering ill intent; publicity about machine failures would be bad for business.)

Another mildly techie point that makes arguing this difficult is that people actually trust software too much in general — they have a very difficult time grasping the concept that there could be a difference between they see on the screen and what is recorded. A major part of software in general is to convince people that there is no difference, and most non-technical people have thoroughly internalized that concept.

Solai – we use lever machines in our area also and I have to say there was a really controversial vote (school budget) where the machine somehow got set for a certain number of votes and when the number of voters got above that, the machine started subtracting. They only figured it out because the ladies monitoring the site were giving each voter a number on a pad and at the end of the day, the number on the pad was supposed to match the number on the machine and it was off by 1500. The machine had “eaten” 1500 votes. They had to take in the machines and get us other ones to restage the budget vote with.

yellowsnapdragon @ 117

QuakerGirl @ 109

Is this just suspicion and rumor? Where is there information on this? It could happen but is there evidence this is happening? I’d really like to know.

According to the Wired article (and the DKos post) the CIA is editing entries, but not specifically Diebold entries. False alarm.

if this doesn’t raise an alarm, what does;

On November 17th, 2005, an anonymous Wikipedia user deleted 15 paragraphs from an article on e-voting machine-vendor Diebold, excising an entire section critical of the company’s machines. While anonymous, such changes typically leave behind digital fingerprints offering hints about the contributor, such as the location of the computer used to make the edits.

Steve-AR @ 115

I don’t understand the problem with paper ballots. The last three election districts that I have lived in have had paper ballots like a standardized test. Fill in the circle, put in a scanner. There is also a “receipt” that goes in a separate, locked box. Simple, fast..can it be manipulated, probably but there is a paper ballot trail.

ND uses this ballot also. Easy, straightforward, accountable. [see my comments earlier this morning re Dan Rather on Morning Joe–MSNBC may have clips up.]

Mandated paper ballots for all federal elections should be the first order of business when Congress reconvenes. Send a postcard–restore Democracy now.

Steve-AR @ 121

Christy Hardin Smith @ 110

Steve-AR at 102 — My favorite part of that “fem-blog” nonsense is that it was written for a blog for Susan Collins of Maine. How’s that sticking up for women working for you now, Suz? Jeebus, stupid on so many levels at once…and taking lessons from Dangerstein in “how not to blog” all at the same time. Pathetic, shrill, and awfully sad, isn’t it?

Collins is going down and she knows it. I have never understood why the people of Maine elect her..she is a light weight and a nasty piece of work..

Hopefully they will find somebody who talks faster. Wake me when she’s done talking….

Richmond @ 120

Steve-AR @ 115

I don’t understand the problem with paper ballots. The last three election districts that I have lived in have had paper ballots like a standardized test. Fill in the circle, put in a scanner. There is also a “receipt” that goes in a separate, locked box. Simple, fast..can it be manipulated, probably but there is a paper ballot trail.

The other problem is that you can just throw away bag fulls of them and there may be no accountability. (Wasn’t there something like this in Fla?). Correct me if I am wrong, but one of the main difference between now and say 15 years ago is that the League of WOmen Voters used to play a key role in the elections. They were non-partisan. Both the Dems and Rethugs wanted them out of the debate and vote business, and it has been bad for all of us.

I know nothing about vote counting, but with the above system, the voter hands the paper ballot to an election official, who then tears off the bottom part of the ballot and gives you the receipt. The ballot then goes into the scanner that does the tally; the ballot goes into a locked box and you put the receipt into another locked box as you leave the polling place. There are three records of the vote being cast, so tossing the paper or hacking the scanner won’t work.

I have voted by absentee ballot for years and believe it is the perfect way to go. In California we have so many things on the ballot that it gives you time to read and really understand and it’s so easy. I believe that more people would vote if we did this.

I am paraphrasing and I don’t know who to attribute this too, my memory wants to say hitler, but something along the lines;

“I don’t care who votes, I care who counts the votes”

Posted like a true “foul mouthed fem-blog.”

Steve-AR @ 121

Christy Hardin Smith @ 110

Steve-AR at 102 — My favorite part of that “fem-blog” nonsense is that it was written for a blog for Susan Collins of Maine. How’s that sticking up for women working for you now, Suz? Jeebus, stupid on so many levels at once…and taking lessons from Dangerstein in “how not to blog” all at the same time. Pathetic, shrill, and awfully sad, isn’t it?

Collins is going down and she knows it. I have never understood why the people of Maine elect her..she is a light weight and a nasty piece of work..

Actually what was written here was very similar to what Ford espoused in the MTP interview with Markos, which is why it pissed me off so much. Part of the Rethug strategy is to split the Dem votes, and to denigrate the anti-war pro-progress advocates, thus to marginalize. In this the DLC and Rethug are marching in lock-step.

Hi back at you Quaker Girl!
Hi LooHoo – Is this just a temporary problem of the day? My typing is worse than my spelling. Spell check slaps my typing down. I fumble on light switches, too.

It seems to work intermittently for me. I’m on firefox as well. Sorry, can’t help…

Loo Hoo. @ 106

I worked the polls a couple of elections back. I took a 3 hour course on Diebold, and then loaded up two of the machines in the trunk of my car at noon on Sunday. They stayed in the trunk of my car until the election on Tuesday. There was a hotline to call in case of problems with the machine, but I never could get through. It was busy all day long. There was also a gal who showed up twice to ask if there were problems, but by the time she got there, the voters had already left. It was a nightmare.

The other thing I learned while working the poll, is that the two gals I worked with had been partners in this precinct for years. They were clearly republicans. When an independent voter came in, they would pick up an independent republican ballot and point to the independent democrat ballot. It took me a while to realize what they were doing and to ask them to stop.

If you’ve never worked the polls, do it if you can. I’m taking it to negotiations to get polling days allowed in the same way that jury duty is allowed in our contract. The district pays for my sub, and I turn over the $125 to the district. We’ll see. We need to be there.

Loo Hoo – I do the same and some of the petty things that go on are unimaginable. I couldn’t outwit these die-hards if I tried. I have a major problem, I respect all voters equally. That’s not reality. Most people see voting as a team sport and the one with the most points, no matter how they get there, wins. Sometimes I actually feel sorry for Harry Reid. He has some nasties to deal with in Nevada. The guy is hanging on by a thread. Voting there can be mean-spirited. But nothing was like Louisiana. My Mom worked the polls election day. She could not even have something to drink unless she brought it and kept it close to her otherwise she would be poisoned. Seriously. It was enough so it made the person very sick and they had to leave. Only the opposition was left.

I did read Jane’s Invisible Woman posts -
but I still don’t understand if others call FDL a Fem blog due to the posters, or those commenting. And how would they know a person’s sex based on a handle?

Toby Wollin @ 125

Solai – we use lever machines in our area also and I have to say there was a really controversial vote (school budget) where the machine somehow got set for a certain number of votes and when the number of voters got above that, the machine started subtracting. They only figured it out because the ladies monitoring the site were giving each voter a number on a pad and at the end of the day, the number on the pad was supposed to match the number on the machine and it was off by 1500. The machine had “eaten” 1500 votes. They had to take in the machines and get us other ones to restage the budget vote with.

That’s not good.
Can I ask where you are in Upstate? If too personal, just ignore the question.

perris @ 131

I am paraphrasing and I don’t know who to attribute this too, my memory wants to say hitler, but something along the lines;

“I don’t care who votes, I care who counts the votes”

Lenin or Stalin??

Redshift @ 124

JF @ 78

Exactly. The errors may not be intentional. I remember one specific problem with the machines in 2004. The vote count, once it recorded 32000 votes, would begin to subtract a vote for each vote cast. This looks like a symptom of a common quirk in many programming languages, and is easily fixed.

One thing to keep in mind is that a lot of the resistance to change comes from voting officials and volunteers, who are mostly well-intentioned (and where I live, mostly Democrats), and are just looking for systems that they see as letting them do their jobs well without adding extra work for their hard-to-recruit volunteers. So I always try to make the point that problems don’t require malfeasance or security incompetence on the part of those officials (even though that may happen in some parts of the country.) This also lets me keep it at a technical level anyone can understand.

First point: Voting machines are custom programmed for every election. This is done on a short time schedule by contract programmers. I wouldn’t trust any software written under those conditions for anything critical.

(As an aside, there is no reason these machines should require custom programming, other than greed, incompetence, or ill intent. I could write a system in a week that would allow end-users to lay out a ballot and specify tabulation categories. Your average spreadsheet is more complex “programming” than is required to tabulate election results.)

Second point: The reason for paper ballots is that anyone can understand intuitively, without specialized training, how to verify the count. (Training in procedure, sure, but not the basic concept.) Verifying a voting-machine results requires specialized training from the one company with a vested interest in not finding problems. (Again, not even considering ill intent; publicity about machine failures would be bad for business.)

Another mildly techie point that makes arguing this difficult is that people actually trust software too much in general — they have a very difficult time grasping the concept that there could be a difference between they see on the screen and what is recorded. A major part of software in general is to convince people that there is no difference, and most non-technical people have thoroughly internalized that concept.

Redshift – one reason, IMO, for the custom programming requirement is so that the manufacturers can say “We do not have time for the code to be analyzed by outsiders.”

The drumbeat of the day seems to be what a failure Rove turned out to be. I would disagree. He’s leaving town towards the end of Bush’s second term, both achieved probably more than we know through Rove’s efforts at vote rigging and voter disenfranchisement.

He’s just puffing the smoke from the barrel of his gun and sayin’, “Folks, my job here is done.”

Look at the politicized train wreck of a government that he leaves behind: by his lights, he has been a total success.

(And I would imagine that all these Republicans who are at the moment turning on him know that very, very well.)

Jim Clausen @ 119

Christy Hardin Smith @ 114

Can I just say that no matter how many times I have watched “October Sky,” I bawl like a baby every single time Homer wins the grand prize medal at the National Science Fair. I am such a sap for hard work and “kid from the sticks makes good” stories…

I use it along with the Companion Book in my Humanities courses.(Was it “Rocket Boy?”)

Close — “October Sky” is an anagram of the book title, “Rocket Boys”.

Toby Wollin @ 125

Solai – we use lever machines in our area also and I have to say there was a really controversial vote (school budget) where the machine somehow got set for a certain number of votes and when the number of voters got above that, the machine started subtracting. They only figured it out because the ladies monitoring the site were giving each voter a number on a pad and at the end of the day, the number on the pad was supposed to match the number on the machine and it was off by 1500. The machine had “eaten” 1500 votes. They had to take in the machines and get us other ones to restage the budget vote with.

We switched from lever machines with no receipt to touch-screen machines with no receipt last year. While I do believe there are multiple ways to manipulate a touch screen machines, the lever machines weren’t all that accurate either. Who knows how many votes were lost or mis-recorded on those dinosaurs.

All this drama over voting machines would be really funny if it were not so serious.. :-)

First off you don’t need a computer to RECORD a vote.. maybe to tabulate.. but that’s a different story.

I wrote my first program on an IBM mainframe in 1971 and have been doing IT development ever since..

I can not believe that these election officials have allowed anything more complicated than a simple calculator inside the voting booths.. You have races, candidates and votes.. that’s it people. Why do Diebold machines contain ANY source code ??? Recording a vote is as simple as adding ONE to a number. The fact they contain all this secret code AND TWO “books” reflecting the actual vote AND a simulated or expected vote result is criminal..

WE the People are supposed to be voting, not the corporations..

perris @ 126

yellowsnapdragon @ 117

According to the Wired article (and the DKos post) the CIA is editing entries, but not specifically Diebold entries. False alarm.

if this doesn’t raise an alarm, what does;

On November 17th, 2005, an anonymous Wikipedia user deleted 15 paragraphs from an article on e-voting machine-vendor Diebold, excising an entire section critical of the company’s machines. While anonymous, such changes typically leave behind digital fingerprints offering hints about the contributor, such as the location of the computer used to make the edits.

but the CIA is not altering Diebold articles, Diebold is.

I vote in a small rural township. 2006 was the first time a voting machine was provided. I chose to vote as I always have, marking with pencil the boxes, folding up the ballot & putting it in the box. I’ve never pulled a lever in my life. Not very common anymore. I don’t know how many chose the novelty of voting on the machine. I do know that in a neighboring township the election workers were extremely critical of their machine, did not work as it should.

Solai – Broome county.

Michael in Park Slope @ 116

I have some questions regardig the “paper trail” issue:

(1) Is the idea that there is supposed to be a(n) internal paper record of votes cast? Wouldn’t this be just as easy to rig as any electronic record?

(2) Surely the idea is not that each elector receive a “receipt” verifying their vote, so that in the case of a discrepancy, everyone who voted could show up with their “official” copy of their vote. That would be unwieldy to say the least, and how do you know that everyone, or, more to the point, those whose votes are “suspect” would show up at some (say) town hall meting to officiate the tallies?

What is the issue with the “paper trail?”

OT, but I’ve been out of action for the last 10 days or so with a broken ankle (2 breaks, actually) so I’ve probably missed lots on this issue. Hope to catch up… Anyhow, hi to all!

-MS

On the Diebold machines I used, the paper trail is inside the machine like a cash register receipt. If the voter made a mistake, there was no way to fix it.

It’s not who votes that counts. It’s who counts the votes.

Joseph Stalin

Loo Hoo. @ 106

I worked the polls a couple of elections back. I took a 3 hour course on Diebold, and then loaded up two of the machines in the trunk of my car at noon on Sunday. They stayed in the trunk of my car until the election on Tuesday. There was a hotline to call in case of problems with the machine, but I never could get through. It was busy all day long. There was also a gal who showed up twice to ask if there were problems, but by the time she got there, the voters had already left. It was a nightmare.

The other thing I learned while working the poll, is that the two gals I worked with had been partners in this precinct for years. They were clearly republicans. When an independent voter came in, they would pick up an independent republican ballot and point to the independent democrat ballot. It took me a while to realize what they were doing and to ask them to stop.

If you’ve never worked the polls, do it if you can. I’m taking it to negotiations to get polling days allowed in the same way that jury duty is allowed in our contract. The district pays for my sub, and I turn over the $125 to the district. We’ll see. We need to be there.

I’m a poll worker too, Loo Hoo. I think that’s the best way we can get directly involved in the voting process.

Solai @ 118 -

At my voting site, we use the lever machines. No one doubts their accuracy. And to my knowledge they’ve never failed. Why change?

We used the old lever machines in Ohio for years. IIRC, the problem was maintenance – machines were very old and no one made the parts, they just weren’t sustainable anymore.

In OK we use the optical scanners – one of the few areas where OK is ahead of the game.

I just received an email from Barbara Boxer’s office- an invitation to attend a meeting in San Francisco next week..

Internet freedom is still under attack by the nation’s largest phone and cable companies. Now you can help us beat them back in California.

Corporations like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast spent more than $175 million last year to strong-arm Congress and try to kill Net Neutrality. But now you can have the ear of Sen. Barbara Boxer.

We have scheduled a meeting with Sen. Boxer’s Senior Field Representative Jennifer Tang for Tuesday, Aug. 21, in San Francisco. We’d like you to join us.

Here are the details:

WHAT: In-District Meeting with Sen. Boxer’s Senior Field Representative Jennifer Tang
WHEN: Tuesday, Aug. 21
WHERE: 1700 Montgomery Street, San Francisco

Tell us if you’re interested in attending link

I can’t make it. Anyone else interested in asking about her non-vote on FISA, and about NetRoots…

JF @ 139

Redshift – one reason, IMO, for the custom programming requirement is so that the manufacturers can say “We do not have time for the code to be analyzed by outsiders.”

Yeah, I meant no legitimate reason. *g*

Seriously, though, setting up a tabulation shouldn’t require “programming” or any knowledge of the underlying code. The only information required is the categories to be tabulated, the text describing them, and how it should be laid out on the screen. Your average corporate database has tools that let you do that without any knowledge of the database code. It’s yet more evidence of what crappy products these machines are.

And honestly, I think the main motivation is not to hide their code, it’s to be able to offer a seemingly low bid up front knowing they’ll be making the real money off the election programming for years.

Aha! The coast is clear (new thread upstairs)…

Here’s an older link that shows the scope of the problem in 2004.

Jim’s DIEBOLD PAGE

They wrote a program to run elections, and didn’t bother to tell anybody it can be hacked six ways from Sunday, via security that appears to be deliberately flawed. And then they left copies (plus a pile of various election data files) up on a website and didn’t bother to put a password on it.

New post upstairs

Twain @ 130

I have voted by absentee ballot for years and believe it is the perfect way to go. In California we have so many things on the ballot that it gives you time to read and really understand and it’s so easy. I believe that more people would vote if we did this.

But Twain, are these votes counted at the same time as the others? Do they count them only if there is a close vote? I use the mail in vote too, and for the same reasons, but I don’t know when/if they are counted.

Loo Hoo. @ 147

Michael in Park Slope @ 116

I have some questions regardig the “paper trail” issue:

(1) Is the idea that there is supposed to be a(n) internal paper record of votes cast? Wouldn’t this be just as easy to rig as any electronic record?

(2) Surely the idea is not that each elector receive a “receipt” verifying their vote, so that in the case of a discrepancy, everyone who voted could show up with their “official” copy of their vote. That would be unwieldy to say the least, and how do you know that everyone, or, more to the point, those whose votes are “suspect” would show up at some (say) town hall meting to officiate the tallies?

What is the issue with the “paper trail?”

OT, but I’ve been out of action for the last 10 days or so with a broken ankle (2 breaks, actually) so I’ve probably missed lots on this issue. Hope to catch up… Anyhow, hi to all!

-MS

On the Diebold machines I used, the paper trail is inside the machine like a cash register receipt. If the voter made a mistake, there was no way to fix it.

Yeah, that’s not a paper trail, that’s just an implementation detail. Believe me, I know; I participated in a “recount” that consisted solely of comparing the register-tape totals to the numbers the poll workers had written on the form for each machine, to see if they copied them accuratel.

Steve-AR @ 121

Christy Hardin Smith @ 110

Steve-AR at 102 — My favorite part of that “fem-blog” nonsense is that it was written for a blog for Susan Collins of Maine. How’s that sticking up for women working for you now, Suz? Jeebus, stupid on so many levels at once…and taking lessons from Dangerstein in “how not to blog” all at the same time. Pathetic, shrill, and awfully sad, isn’t it?

Collins is going down and she knows it. I have never understood why the people of Maine elect her..she is a light weight and a nasty piece of work..

Yeah, but this guy claims to have been one of the Media Bloggers who coordinated coverage of the Scooter trial. Maybe you know him? http://www.mainewebreport.com/about-lance-dutson/ Doughy face from too much fun in the basement with his Stratomatic baseball and a TRS-80? Lance Dutson, anyone?
Why is it I can never get a link right here?

Loo Hoo. @ 155

Twain @ 130

I have voted by absentee ballot for years and believe it is the perfect way to go. In California we have so many things on the ballot that it gives you time to read and really understand and it’s so easy. I believe that more people would vote if we did this.

But Twain, are these votes counted at the same time as the others? Do they count them only if there is a close vote? I use the mail in vote too, and for the same reasons, but I don’t know when/if they are counted.

That used to be the case (and is still used to scare people off absentee voting), but I’m pretty sure that absentee votes are required to be counted everywhere now. Provisional ballots are often not counted unless they might make a difference (because they require extra work to verify voter eligibility), but that’s different.

OT..I’m very upset right now. Susan Collins’ campaign manager doesn’t like this site. Feelings deeply hurt. Christy, will you be able to go on knowing there are people who think of you as a foul-mouthed fem-blogger.
Per DKos:

Markos Moulitsas’s hate-site The Daily Kos, the foul-mouthed fem-blog FiredogLake,……

The proprietary code issue hinged on the Windows CE operating system. (Now retooled as Windows Mobile) Users aren’t permitted to see that code thanks to Mr. Bill.

Anyway, the systems are just PC’s in republican clothing. PC’s fail too, but the data paylooad is the real problem. That is the whole problem.

Would you trust a teleporter to verifiably recreate your personna even if the machine could regenerate the physical body?

OK that’s farfetched, but the malfeasance meme is a distinct possibility/certainty with the ReBushLickens running things.

Michael at Park Slope:

About the paper ballots -
The Brennan Center For Justice
http://www.brennancenter.org/s…..it_key=105Brennan Center

released a report last fall called “Machinery of Democracy” highlighting the vulnerabilties of electronic voting systems – with or without paper trail.

One issue is that states need to have in place a protocol for verifying optical scan votes – a paper trail is of no use unless it is randomly audited – must be public, transparent,and truly random. None of these shenanigans like those in Ohio in 2004 – notifying precincts in advance that they were chosen for audit; and special “technicians” coming to “service” the harddrives of voting machines, before the votes were recounted.

Personally, I like absentee ballots, but they don’t solve all the problems either. What if they are stolen or forged? That is low risk relative to an entire election though.

Hacking is just the opposite — It can be done remotely with no paper trail — just ask KKKarl!

I wouldn’t care about the schematics unless someone paid me. Then I’d find a bug in the memory write cycle timing and laugh at the client.

No wonder I’m out of a job.

Folks, I added a PS above — and put the direct link into TBogg’s hilarious faux moon landing bit. Some moronic wingnut welfare recipient actually thought TBogg was serious because he was too damned lazy to click through the link. Jeebus, where do they find these incurious asshats, anyway? Anyway, I thought I’d make it easier for the trolls who will come pouring through…oh, wait, this guy has next to no traffic…never mind.

Folks need to have confidence in the integrity and continuity of their ballot. Without the physical ballot, there will always be gross uncertainty. It reminds me of the digital vs. analog quarrel. Both have advantages and disadvantages. Heck, I design digital chips but I prefer the ballsy sound of vacuum tubes.

We depend on deterministic functionality in our tools. Our Enron Administration has gamed the system once again (Diebold is here for you Mr. Bush) and we are all the victims. Paperless office anyone?

The ability of the American people to speak loudly and with one voice overwhelmed the RNC’s vicious plan to co-opt the election. BusChen might have gotten away with the “new math” using a few nips and tucks where it counted if it weren’t for this blog and the outrage shared by Greater America.

Long Live Bloggers!

It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything. – Joseph Stalin

njprogressive @ 64

The best proposed legislation on this is H.R. 811, proposed by Representative Rush Holt (D-NJ-12) [voters in the 12th have bumper stickers that say My Congressman Is a Rocket Scientist].

It’s a great bill, with a underlying principles about how technology can be a help, but there must be vote integrity at every step of the process of voting and counting those votes. See here for more information. Then call/write/fax/email your representative, and ask them to be a cosponsor of this legislation.

Sorry, HR 811 SUCKS. It puts the EAC, a commission appointed by the President in charge of your local elections recounts (and this president shouldn’t be allowed to appoint dog-catchers). They have ‘paper trails’ instead of paper ballots, and the trails aren’t the gold standard vote, and frankly people don’t check the paper trails, either. Check out forum threads about HR 811 on Black Box Voting.org or the Bradblog for in-depth information.

Bob Schacht @ 53

…
ALL of the current voting machines are flawed, because they are run with proprietary code (i.e., secret). We need a new voting machine industry based on open source software and hardware that is regulated.

http://www.BradBlog.com is all over this issue.

Think on this: regardless of what the software says the chips manufactured abroad could be programmed to produce other results and what is recorded on the computer’s DRE storage isn’t necessarily the same as what would be printed on the tissue paper trail which isn’t even legally a ballot which has ANY meaning, even for a recount.

I can see what a pencil or printer marks on a ballot and it can be reviewed by everyone and recounted. You can’t do that with a computer and black box vote storage.

There were also a lot of precincts where more votes were recorded than there were registered voters. Clearly a computer can record as many votes as is needed to change the outcome.

Paper ballots all the way!

Of course, you could use a touchscreen computer to help people select their candidates, but you still need a printed paper ballot to see what the vote was. Thus, computer-aided vote casting and printing with hand counting is one way of going. Another is just old-fashioned fill-in-the-circle voting with a pencil on paper.

California’s SoS Bowen is our hero on this. She’s gonna turn the whole country against those machines.

Interview with Rush Holt in Bradblog archives…Bill Gates won out in the debate over serving the America people or continuing non transparent voting. Holt says WE aren’t interested in this issue.Guess because it wasn’t on MSM. A corporation in his district would make money on non transparent voting. Feinstein ’s bill was even worse. So election fraud is bi partisan.

It is easy, and requires minimal oversight, to provide a manual tally of how many people have voted per poll. If there is a discrepancy between the number of people who voted, and the number of votes counted, then there is evidence of either error or fraud or malfunction. Surely this is easily documented.