Election Reform, Fraud and Related News. Sunday 03/16/08

[EFerrari]

County's voting machines examined

Brunner triggers state probe by reporting that fall ballot apparently masked a name
Sunday, March 16, 2008 3:22 AM
By Barbara Carmen
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

When Jennifer Brunner cast her vote last fall, she is certain she saw something so odd on her touch-screen voting machine that it prompted a state criminal investigation into the Franklin County Board of Elections.

At least 15 of the county's electronic machines are under double-lock at an Alum Creek warehouse. It is being treated as a crime scene.

County elections officials asked the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation to seize the machines during the investigation by Attorney General Marc Dann and forensics consultants.

In all, the state is expected to spend as much as $48,000 to divine what Brunner saw -- or didn't see. Investigators already have found that many of the county's voting machines weren't tested before the November election. And a function that tracked changes to the machines was purposely turned off.

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2008/03/16/BOEPROBE.ART_ART_03-16-08_B1_9F9LIV3.html?type=rss&cat=&sid=101



Please post Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News on this thread. If you can:


1. Post stories and announcements you find on the web. Here's the link to the News Directory:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x407240

2. Re-post stories and announcements you find on DU, providing a link to the original thread with thanks to the Original Poster, too.

3. Start a discussion thread by re-posting a story you see on this thread.


Recommendations are much appreciated.

[EFerrari]

1. National.

[EFerrari]

14. PR: National Hip-Hop Team Vote 2008 Campaign to Be Launched

National Hip-Hop Team Vote 2008 Campaign to Be Launched in Pennsylvania

16/03/2008 19:23:00 Business Wire The Hip-Hop Research and Education Fund, PowerPAC and the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network announced today the launch of an unprecedented, focused national campaign to mobilize the hip-hop generation of youth voters to ensure the largest youth voter turnout in American history on November 4, 2008.

The press conference to launch the national "Hip-Hop Team Vote: Turn Up The Vote" campaign will be held in the city of Philadelphia on March 19 at 11am EDT on the campus of the University of Pennsylvania, Houston Hall (Bodek Lounge) at 3417 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104.

In addition, the press conference will announce a statewide youth voter registration effort between March 18 - March 24, the deadline to register voters for the April 22 Pennsylvania primary.

Dr. Benjamin Chavis, President/CEO of the Hip-Hop Research and Education Fund, Steve Phillips, Founder and Chairman of PowerPAC and Valeisha Butterfield, Executive Director of the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, have joined together to issue a call to millions of 18-35 year olds to participate in the campaign.

http://www.infobolsa.es/v2002/Noticias/noticias_titulares2.asp?srv=&FechaNot=20080316&Fuente=IBNW&clasif=C&numnot=103550

[EFerrari]

20. 'Voter Fraud' Phantom Returns to Haunt

March 15, 2008

'Voter Fraud' Phantom Returns to Haunt Policy Makers and Voters Themselves

By Project Vote
Weekly Voting Rights News Update

A year has passed since the U.S. Attorneys scandal first gathered steam for the firings of nine federal prosecutors - at least two of whom claim being "pressured by Republicans to bring charges of voter fraud against people who intended to for Democrats." But the issue is far from settled. This week, the phantom issue of "voter fraud" emerged in the guise of news stories, editorials, memos, blogs, legislation, and even a Senate hearing either extinguishing or inflaming the alleged election integrity problem, particularly regarding voter identification requirements. Ultimately, what has become most evident in the last year is how far partisans are willing to go in order to legalize voter suppression tactics through the smoke-screen of "voter fraud."

As we progress deeper into the election season, we expect accusations of voter fraud to increase in number, become more aggressive in tone, and continue to precede strident calls for a range of voter suppression tactics, including draconian voter ID requirements. In this climate we feel it is vital to reiterate the definition of voter fraud. Voter fraud is "'the intentional corruption of the electoral process by the voter'...All other forms of corruption of the electoral process and corruption committed by elected or election officials, candidates, party organizations, advocacy groups or campa This definition is especially helpful to keep in mind in evaluating voter ID proposals, almost all of which are designed to prevent only the very rare polling-place fraud and never target absentee voter fraud, where the bulk of the (very small number of) convictions for fraud have occurred.

Stories in advance of Mississippi's primary election highlight this dichotomy. An Associated Press headline announcing the indictment of 16 Benton County individuals for voter fraud in a 2007 county election greeted voters in the state on Tuesday. Some of the "voter fraud" activity appears to actually be an election fraud scheme, as outlined in this January article on the same defendants. This "voter fraud" news arrived just in time to back Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann's aggressive calls for voter ID laws.

Although they "don't have voter ID just yet," Hinds County, Miss. voters who registered to vote by mail or through a voter registration drives were alerted to bring proof of identification to the polls Tuesday. The county circuit court's office made this announcement on Election Day through Jackson, Miss. broadcast news channel, WLBT 3.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_project__080313__voter_fraud__phanto.htm

[EFerrari]

2. States.

[EFerrari]

6. CO: Lawmakers: More $$$ Available For Paper Elections

Lawmakers: More $$$ Available For Paper Elections
By Colleen Slevin, AP Writer

DENVER (AP) ― State lawmakers are considering spending nearly $11 million to switch to a mostly paper ballot election this year, responding to protests from the clerks that they were being forced to conduct an important presidential election on the cheap.

The figure is about double the amount Gov. Bill Ritter had originally proposed spending on the switch from using mostly electronic voting machines to mostly paper ballots, but most clerks still oppose the measure (Senate Bill 189).

With the primary election five months away, Rio Blanco County Clerk Nancy Amick said Friday that there may not be enough time to order enough paper ballots or more optical scanners to count them.

"We're running into an election crisis in being able to change our election model at this late date," said Amick, president of the Colorado County Clerks Association.

http://cbs4denver.com/local/colorado.election.paper.2.677193.html

[mod mom]

7. OH: Cinci Enq-The Story Behind the 2004 Lockdown

*DON'T MISS LOOKING TO THE DOCUMENTS!

Story behind the 2004 lockdown
Even amid terror warnings, secret count was 'wrong move'


BY JON CRAIG | [e-mail]
It’s one of the lingering mysteries of the 2004 presidential election.

In a key county in Southwest Ohio – amid vague references to “homeland security” – officials locked everyone else out of the board of elections as they counted punch-card ballots. President Bush emerged with more than 72 percent of the votes in Warren County, helping him narrowly win Ohio – and a second term.

Secrecy surrounding the count galvanized bloggers, anti-Bush activists and conspiracy theorists from around the globe. To this day, the lockdown is cited as evidence of an election stolen from Sen. John Kerry and the Democrats.
?
?

Now with another presidential election coming, The Enquirer, through public-records requests and interviews, can unravel the story of what happened on the night of Nov. 2, 2004 – and how officials tried to spin the event afterwards.

• Read more documents


http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080316/NEWS01/303020039

[Wilms]

22. Discussion:

Thanks to Rosebud57

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x499148

[EFerrari]

9. KS: Crawford County Clerk's office eyeing election software purchase

Crawford County Clerk's office eyeing election software purchase
By Matthew Clark | THE MORNING SUN

GIRARD — With the prospect of saving over $202,000 through 2016, the Crawford County Clerk's office is eyeing a purchase of software that will bring the programming of election ballots in-house.

Crawford County Clerk Don Pyle brought the prospect of the purchase to the Crawford County Commission on Friday.

The purchase price of the software is set be $36,509.98 but Pyle said that there could be help.

The Kansas Secretary of State's office has set aside $165,000 to help counties offset the cost of the software from Election Systems & Software (ES&S).

http://morningsun.net/stories/031508/loc_258026527.shtml

[EFerrari]

10. IA: Senate Approves Paper-backed Voting System

Iowa Senate Approves Paper-backed Voting System

Mar 14, 2008

UWIRE.com) This story was written by Dylan Boyle, Iowa State DailyThe Iowa Senate voted overwhelmingly Tuesday to appropriate $4.9 million to be spent on replacing touch-screen direct-recording electronic voting systems, or DREs, to new optical-scan voting machines.

With the new optical-scan voting machines, voters will fill in bubbles for the candidates they want, then feed their ballot into the machine, which reads the ballot using "dark-mark logic."

"With touch-screen DREs, the vote is counted electronically and never touches paper," said Sen. Jeff Danielson, D-Cedar Falls, who floor-managed the bill.

He said the benefit of having a paper trail is, if the state ever needed to conduct a recount, it could do so because the votes are backed up on paper.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/14/politics/uwire/main3940683.shtml

[EFerrari]

12. TX: Obama camp disputes tampering claims

Obama camp disputes tampering claims

By Marty Schladen
The Daily News

Published March 16, 2008
The Obama camp hotly disputed a claim this week by Galveston County Democratic Chairman Lloyd Criss that on election night, Obama supporters took caucus sign-in sheets to their campaign headquarters and added names to them.

Criss, a Clinton supporter, made the claim earlier this week. But he said that since it didn’t change how many delegates the candidates got, he wasn’t that concerned about it.

But Aaron Schiller, who ran the Obama campaign in Galveston, insisted it didn’t happen.

“He was taking a free shot at us,” Schiller said.

http://texascitysun.com/story.lasso?ewcd=015e81f1dfca2a08&-session=TheDailyNews:4593569707b782530BGOS1029DA2

[EFerrari]

15. TN: Knox, Anderson and Loudon counties test convenience voting

Knox, Anderson and Loudon counties test convenience voting

Associated Press - March 16, 2008 2:25 PM ET

KNOXVILLE, Tenn. (AP) - Knox, Anderson and Loudon counties have received a national grant to test "convenience voting centers."

The centers would allow voters to cast their ballots anywhere in their county and are being considered to replace precinct-based voting.

According to The Knoxville News Sentinel, the three counties received a grant of nearly $100,000 from the Pew Charitable Trusts for the pilot project that is expected to increase voter turnout.

The Howard H. Baker Jr. Center for Public Policy at the University of Tennessee is working with the counties to offer voters a continuous, 20-day window to vote that would culminate on Election Day.

http://www.wmctv.com/global/story.asp?s=8023854

[EFerrari]

17. PA: Beaver may eliminate voting wards.

Beaver may eliminate voting wards

By Jessica Bruni, Times Staff
Published: Thursday, March 13, 2008 9:39 PM EDT
BEAVER — Call it the process of elimination, literally.

After a lengthy discussion Tuesday, Beaver Council will consider eliminating its three voting wards and going to an at-large system at its next meeting on April 8.

Currently, Beaver consists of three wards with three representatives from each. Under an at-large system, voters would be free to elect a representative from any part of the borough.

While Councilman Dave Edelstein came out in favor of eliminating the ward system, newly elected Councilman John Wolbert wanted to keep things as they are.

Wolbert said having wards gives equal representation by preventing one area of town from being over- or underrepresented. He also believes wards provide better accessibility and accountability from council members.

http://timesonline.com/articles/2008/03/16/news/doc47d9cf6bd4f92983246964.txt

[EFerrari]

19. MO: Do Dogs Vote in St. Louis?

March 15, 2008

Do Dogs Vote in St. Louis? Senators Spar over the Need for Voters to Show Photo ID

By Project Vote, Rebecca Wakefield

At the third hearing on voter suppression in as many weeks, members of Congress again sparred over the prevalence of fraudulent voting. This time, it was members of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration at hearing on In Person Voter Fraud: Myth and Trigger for Disenfranchisement?, called at the insistence of Senator Chuck Schumer.

The starkly partisan contrast between those who believe voter fraud is the worst affliction on the country's electoral system and those who believe the greater threat is voter disenfranchisement could not have been clearer. The Democrats on the committee called several witnesses to debunk the myth, while Republicans brought in friendly testimony from true believers.

The Department of Justice, arguably the arbiter of the actual extent of any fraud, stayed out of the fray altogether by refusing to send a witness to testify.

Committee chairwoman Sen. Diane Feinstein of California opened the hearing with a pertinent question aimed at the heart of the seemingly endless debate. Are people showing up at the polls to impersonate registered voters? This persistent idea is part of the rational for laws requiring photo IDs at the polls.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_project__080314_do_dogs_vote_in_st__.htm

[EFerrari]

21. Open letter to NY citizens, election workers and election commissioners

March 15, 2008
Open letter to NY citizens, election workers and election commissioners
By andi novick

Dear Election Commissioners, election workers, citizens of New York,


We in New York have a rich history of safeguarded, reliable elections. Yes, there's been manipulation; in fact the propensity towards fraud when elections are concerned is so pervasive that the super majority of electoral reforms over our 150 year history of addressing these issues has been directed at eliminating the opportunities for fraud. But thoughtful legislatures and courts over the years have created an electoral system that had certainly minimized that manipulation. The current state legislature however has cast 150 years of legislative wisdom out the window in passing statutes that undermine the very foundational cornerstones of our electoral laws.

Those foundational principles, which were first implemented more than one hundred years ago based on the experiences that had preceded a monumental piece of electoral reform in 1896, involved protecting both the citizen's ability to freely cast his/her vote and ensuring against what was considered the greatest threat to the integrity of the ballot – fraud perpetrated by insiders (prior to 1896 election inspectors were free to create the official returns with very little public scrutiny, and then destroy the evidence of what actually happened on election day). In 1896 the legislature responded by requiring the creation of evidence of what occurred on election day as well as requiring a massive number of safeguards be implemented to safeguard the count. (They actually required a lot more but you can read about that later).

As a result of the reforms the following became fundamental aspects of our electoral system in New York: All counting was done publicly and observably by election officials which included inspectors, poll clerks, ballot clerks, representatives of the various parties. Each and every step of the process was checked by all of these "watchers" in a publicly observable manner. In order to address the temptation for fraud which arose after it was known just how much manipulation was required to alter the election outcome, all counting was to be done immediately after the polls closed, simultaneously in every election district in the state and a contemporaneous, self-proving tally sheet was to be created as the tally progressed. In this way no one counting knew the outcome; the numbers as they were publicly recorded became part of a public record in advance of the final tally within the polling site as well as the full state. Each ballot was publicly announced as it was tallied and publicly written down on the tally sheet. At the end all numbers had to be reconciled and if the total number of votes cast did not match the total number counted an immediate recount was had. A final tally was not announced until the numbers checked out - a self-audited process resulting in a reliable first count on election night.

To further deter the temptation towards fraud during the counting process and in order to provide evidence, should fraud occur notwithstanding the myriad of safeguards thrown around the election, the contemporaneous tally sheets which recorded the details of the count made at the time each vote was announced, were required to be preserved along with the ballots. The evidence of how the count was arrived at on election night, as well as the ballots, were sealed and preserved -- not for the purpose of recounting the ballots -- but solely to retain the evidence. Evidence was needed both to discourage those who might commit fraud (knowing the evidence could later nail them), and also as proof, should the people's will be undermined by manipulation.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_andi_nov_080315_open_letter_to_ny_ci.htm

[EFerrari]

3. International.

[EFerrari]

13. Socialists poised for big win in French local elections

Socialists poised for big win in French local elections - 3rd Update
Posted : Sun, 16 Mar 2008 20:13:03 GMT
Author : DPA

Paris - Early estimates based on exit polls in a number of French cities suggest that the opposition Socialists handed President Nicolas Sarkozy a stinging defeat in Sunday's local run-off elections. According to estimates by the TNS-Sofres, Socialist challengers defeated conservative mayors in the politically important cities of Toulouse and Strasbourg.

Socialists also ousted right-wing incumbents in the cities of Reims, Amiens, Saint-Etienne, Caen, Blois and Quimper.

In addition, Education Minister Xavier Darcos conceded that he lost his mayor's post in Perigeux, despite the fact that Prime Minister Francois Fillon made a special stop to boost his candidacy.

Socialist former Labour Minister Martine Aubry was re-elected mayor of Lille with some 66 per cent of the vote, while former centrist presidential candidate Francois Bayrou was narrowly defeated by his Socialist opponent in the south-western city of Pau.

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/192704,socialists-poised-for-big-win-in-french-local-elections-.html

[EFerrari]

16. U.N. believes Bangladesh will hold fair election

U.N. believes Bangladesh will hold fair election
16 Mar 2008 17:35:02 GMT
Source: Reuters
By Nizam Ahmed

BOYRA, Bangladesh, March 16 (Reuters) - Bangladesh is set to have a fair election this year with a new voters' list replacing one critics said had millions of fake names, an official of the U.N. agency funding voter registration said on Sunday.

Bangladesh is to hold elections by the end of 2008 under a "road map" set out by the army-backed interim government, which has ruled under a state of emergency since taking charge in January, 2007 following months of political violence.

"We have trust in Bangladesh that a credible democratic election will be held by the end of the year," Kemal Dervis, administrator of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), told reporters.

Dervis, who arrived in Dhaka on Saturday on a three-day visit, was speaking after observing the registration process at a centre in Boyra, a remote village 320 km (200 miles) south of the capital Dhaka.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L16232882.htm

[EFerrari]

18. EU slams Iran vote as "neither free nor fair"

EU slams Iran vote as "neither free nor fair"

Iran's state-controlled media says conservatives have won a majority in Iran's parliamentary vote, as was widely expected. But many of the conservative winners are critical of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's hardline policies, and analysts say they could be a challenge to him in next year's presidential election. Initial vote results also show reformist candidates with a slight increase in their parliamentary representation, despite many of their top candidates being barred from running by Iran's conservative establishment. The European Union has criticised the Iranian general election as "neither fair nor free." Final election results are expected on Monday.

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/function/0,,12215_cid_3195840,00.html?maca=en-rss-en-all-1573-rdf

[EFerrari]

4. Opinion.

[EFerrari]

5. Ballot backup can help avoid a nightmare

EDITORIAL: Ballot backup can help avoid a nightmare
Tuesday, March 11, 2008 1:41 AM EDT



Eight years removed from the disputed 2000 presidential election, you would think good old American know-how would have come up with a foolproof way of ensuring that the votes people cast are counted accurately.

You would be wrong.

Here in New Jersey, several counties reported discrepancies in the vote totals tallied in last month’s presidential primary election. As many as 60 of Mercer County’s 300 electronic voting machines reportedly recorded inaccurate vote totals, as did machines in Middlesex, Union, Bergen and several other counties.

Vote Trust USA, Voter Action and other election watchdog groups have joined a number of computer scientists in calling for an investigation into why so many machines in New Jersey reported incorrect ballot counts. New Jersey Attorney General Anne Milgram, whose department oversees elections, is said to be considering the request.

http://www.pacpub.com/articles/2008/03/16/the_princeton_packet/opinions/doc47d5c078306f0239123555.txt

[EFerrari]

8. People need confidence in election results (NH)

Published: March 14, 2008 06:26 am



Our view: People need confidence in election results

Ballot counting glitches in two Southern New Hampshire communities ought to raise red flags for election officials across the region. Citizens will lose confidence in the electoral process if mistakes cloud every election day.

In Salem Tuesday night, Moderator Chuck Morse reported that the $53.5 million school budget had failed by a vote of 2,212 to 2,093. It turns out those numbers were incorrect. The budget had actually passed by a vote of 2,665 to 2,212. A problem with a computer used to tally votes resulted in some votes from one polling place not being counted. There, at the North Salem School, 572 votes in favor of the school budget were not counted initially.

In Windham, it was Wednesday morning before the results of any of Tuesday's votes were known. A malfunctioning voting machine forced officials to count all ballots by hand.

It's fortunate that there are paper ballots to back up the electronic counting and processing of election returns. That gives officials a way to cross-check and confirm results. And the fact that they so often prove necessary is a strong argument against any conversion to all-electronic voting methods.

http://www.eagletribune.com/puopinion/local_story_074062658.html

[EFerrari]

11. Does your vote really count?

Does your vote really count?
A look at the capabilities of electronic voting machines

COMMENTARY
By Karen de Soto
MSNBC
updated 11:12 a.m. PT, Fri., March. 14, 2008

After the contentious presidential election of 2000, public concern over the voting process gave rise to the creation and adoption of the 2002 Help America Vote Act. That bill resulted in the push for replacing old voting machines with electronic voting machines, and the nation now casts its votes on the updated electronic machines. However, these voting machines have been berated by critics as unreliable, inaccurate, easily hacked and unable to be audited.

The machines manufactured by companies such as the Sequoia Voting Systems, which was bought in March 2005 by the Smartmatic Corporation, votes electronically on a computer chip that is removed from the voting machine at the end of the election. A paper tape in the machine records the number of votes but does not have the capability of storing an individual record of each vote cast, and so there is no audit trail through which votes can be later verified.

Sometimes, the security of the machines’ software has been determined to be inadequate and unreliable by public advocates and numerous legislative representatives. The main complaints are that the machines are easily hacked and have not been tested for accuracy.
Story continues below ↓advertisement

New Jersey was among the first of more than a dozen states that filed litigation over the voting machine security flaws. The plaintiffs are asking the court to review the constitutionality of the machines and require the state to cease the use of the untrustworthy voting machines.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23633837/

[Kurovski]

23. Lucky #5.

Thanks, Beth! :hug:

[EFerrari]

24. Thank you!

:hi:

[AmazedAmazed]

25. Computerized voting needs more than a paper trail.

I never cease to be amazed by what passes for news. The words that come out of people's mouths deserve to be examined, not just blindly repeated. Reading Barbara Carmen's article "County's voting machines examined" (The Columbus Dispatch, March 16, 2008 http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2008/03/16/BOEPROBE.ART_ART_03-16-08_B1_9F9LIV3.html?type=rss&cat=&sid=101) I couldn't believe that, once again, this issue that affects every single voter in our country was not even seriously examined.

"Investigators also discovered that a board programmer turned off "audit logs" in the voting machines in April 2007, hindering investigators from reconstructing software changes. White found that the vendor had instructed a board employee on how to disable audits to speed programming."

This is no surprise to anyone who has ever worked with a programmer.

"Brunner said other vendors she consulted were appalled: "One I spoke with said, 'You're never supposed to tell a (client) how to do that.' "

Oh come on! It is no secret that when techies talk, information flows. It's not the first time one tech has tried to help out another tech. It won't be the last. The real story is the intent. This wasn't even mentioned. The other real story is that Brunner could be so naive to think that this kind of thing never happens.

"White said it would be awkward for Brunner to investigate her own claim, and he doesn't believe it's valid."

True American justice - decide before investigating. What has happened to us?!

"I don't know of any way that could happen. It would take the great-grandson of Al Capone and the great-grandson of Albert Einstein working in collusion to pull this off," White said.

Wasn't Albert Einstein the one who said something about the tax code being too complicated to figure out? So if Einstein could do it, anybody could, right? Seriously though...

If you are going to have a computerized voting system, the director of the Board of Elections should be required to be a professional in IT - whether as a programmer, systems engineer, network engineer, or otherwise. The only thing Mr. White has proven here is that he has no idea what he is talking about. I have never worked on an election system, but there are some basic fundamentals that can be applied:

1. When computers are operated offline (as these voting computers are), the program code is locally stored. That means that each computer being used for voting can have different code - and different results.

2. It's trivial to write code that resets the program to look the way it did before you manipulated it - triggered by any event that can be expected to occur. Let's see - what always happens after everyone has gone through the line? Oh yeah - they run that program that tells them how many people voted for each candidate. So it wouldn't be hard to say - when this program is run, put back the original program, and delete the bogus program so no one knows it was there to begin with.

3. It's only slightly more complicated to modify the program to change the voting screen for every nth voter. So let's say you don't want too many people to notice. Maybe only every 7th voter gets a modified screen.

4. Programs are usually loaded from some central source. So let's say that you have to put in the list of candidates in 1000 machines. You power each machine up, connect it to the authorized program source, download the authorized program, and move on to the next one. (Here I'm going to show that I've never worked on a voting machine - so if I'm way off I'm sure someone will correct me...) So let's say that the "authorized program source" is the local technician's workstation. This is pretty common in corporate environments. Maybe it's actually a CD in the tech's workstation. I would be surprised if it was a mainframe with real RACF security. Long story short, who's to know if the program that's loaded was the authorized program or a slightly modified version? What if it was the test version instead of the real version? What if there was version 1 and version 2 - maybe there was a typo in one name that needed to be corrected? How do you know the correct version got loaded on every single machine?

5. We all assume that what we see on the screen is what the choices should be. This just goes to prove we should be worried not only about the paper trail for the vote itself. We also need to remember that what is displayed on the screen is just that - a display. There is nothing to prove to us that what we see on the screen matches what is recorded on the computer. Or that the computer is showing us everything we should see on the machine. The truth is, you can write a program to display one thing on the screen, and do something totally different with whatever input it receives.

The first Presidential Election I remember voting for was the first time I'd heard of Geraldine Ferraro. They didn't call it computerized back then. I remember the feeling of being in a sleazy seance where someone behind this black curtain was going to conjure up my vote, and having a queasy feeling, but I didn't say anything at the time. I'll never forget how angry I was when I found out that I had pulled the lever to vote for all Democratic candidates - except that the Presidential candidate had to be manually selected separately. After that I resolved to always triple check my vote - to make sure it was abundantly clear who I voted for. I remember being very happy to move to a district with punch card ballots. Now here I am again, voting somewhere with no paper ballot and no paper trail of who I even had a choice to vote for.

I've resolved that any candidate I'm going to support must be willing to take a firm stand on paper trails for elections. It's one reason I'm supporting Matt Famiglietti (http://www.MattTheDemocrat.org) for Congress. I'm not so concerned about what the website looks like as I am what the candidate stands for. I'm convinced this is one candidate who means business.

I never cease to be Amazed...

[EFerrari]

26. The function of the daily news threads is to aggregate what is out there,

not to endorse what is out there.