[ale] OT: Georgia's Invisible Ballots (was Re: Free Showing of "Invisible Ballots" [...])

[Rob Fauls]

dude...my eyes and head hurt and i had to skip through half of it 
because too much is going on here right now, but you have my 
attention...any website that closely expresses your views? I am one of 
those people that supports the ids because i have heard people talk 
about going from voting booth to voting booth recasting ballots in those 
rural areas.  I also understand where purdue was coming from when he 
closed those places down.  For example, in newnan, there used to be 2 
polling booths out in the country that were within 5 miles of each 
other.  They closed both and relocated to a more central position (if i 
remember correctly) they are at the newnan fairgrounds now.  Thats my 
1/2 cent, but im not trying to say you are wrong by any means.  Im just 
saying id like to know more about where/how you get your info so i can 
read the texts and feel it out.  You know...the Fox news thing...we 
report, you decide...
-Rob

aaron wrote:
> On Thursday 16 March 2006 16:58, Jim Popovitch wrote:
>   
>> While no one can say that electronic voting is 100% secure and valid,
>>     
>
> :-) ...and anyone can say that paperless electronic voting systems are 0% 
> secure and valid, since there is no evidence to support any form of audit 
> that might show otherwise...
>
>   
>> it has also been shown (for decades) that manual voting is full of fraud, 
>> much fraud.  There have been cases of paying people to vote, dead people 
>> voting, etc.
>>     
>
> No one in the patriot movement for legitimate, transparent election systems is 
> denying that there have been instances of vote fraud with the elections and 
> systems of the past, even with voting systems which provided paper evidence. 
> Paper evidence is only one component in the process of conducting secure and 
> transparent elections. The historic cases of fraud and failures, including 
> Florida 2000, are founded in faulty internal processes or in gross external 
> manipulations of counts or procedures. Having physical evidence in the system 
> has never been the source of difficulties, though it has always been the key 
> to the solutions. To raise conspiracy nut indictments of paper ballot systems 
> requires that we overlook at least three key points:
>
> -- The only reason we know about instances of fraud in the past, the only
> reason we were able to correct errors and prosecute the perpetrators of
> fraud is because the voting systems provided the physical evidence
> needed to do so.
>     Electronic Invisible Ballot systems, like those of the Diebold monopoly in 
> Georgia, provide absolutely no valid audit trail or tangible evidence by 
> which we can detect system errors or vote fraud.  I can claim that Georgia's 
> 2002 election was the most corrupt election in the history of the State and 
> no one on the planet has ever had any tangible evidence to refute that claim. 
> This is true even if you ignore the fact that, in 2002, every vote in Georgia 
> was processed and tabulated by entirely untested, unapproved and uncertified 
> software because Diebold installed at least 3 illegal system wide software 
> patches prior to delivering their black box touch screen units to the 
> precincts.
>
> -- To alter or forge enough physical paper evidence to significantly affect 
> the outcome of an election requires a conspiracy in numbers proportionate to 
> the totals of legitimate voters or ballots cast.
>    Suggesting that the multiple party conspiracies needed to corrupt election 
> systems with voter verified paper evidence might be a greater concern than 
> the fraud opportunities inherent to invisible ballot computer systems is a 
> very long stretch. As anyone with an understanding of basic computer 
> technology knows, invisible ballot voting systems, by their nature, 
> facilitate undetectable, single point election tampering at _every_ scale of 
> election, from a small town mayoral race to a national contest for president. 
> Electronic election fraud removes the need for a conspiracy, since any 
> election can be controlled by a single unethical programmer or a single 
> corrupt voting machine employee or a single foreign terrorist.
>
> -- Since the introduction of the secret ballot, every case of vote fraud has 
> been dependent on either breaking the chain of custody between the casting
> of the ballots and counting of the ballots, or on direct manipulation of the 
> vote counting.
>     The example with paper evidence is that ballot boxes must be removed from 
> public view to be have their physical contents corrupted or forged. Such 
> actions require the collusion of multiple parties, whose deeds are subject to 
> discovery by examining the paper evidence.
>     With paperless electronic systems, the chain of custody is broken and the 
> ballot box is removed from public view the moment the ballot image vanishes 
> from the touch screen.  Every subsequent storage, collection and tabulation 
> process is under the total control of programmers whose ballot manipulation 
> software, as well as all software testing and certification procedures, are 
> also hidden from public view. Opportunities to corrupt or forge ballots and 
> defraud elections conducted with these systems are nearly infinite and, due 
> to the total absence of voter verified transaction evidence, electronic 
> ballot tampering can be performed with complete autonomy.
>    Providing the guarantees of a secure, transparent chain of custody is the 
> reason that all legislation being supported by myself and the Defenders of 
> Democracy here in Georgia (specifically SB591 & HB790) requires that all vote 
> and audit counting be conducted in the precinct, immediately at the close of 
> polls, in full public view.  Producing the election evidence is just the 
> first step in transparent elections; insuring that the evidence is properly 
> guarded and counted in public is just as critical.    
>
>   
>> [There have been cases of paying people to vote, dead people 
>> voting, etc]  (btw, mostly for liberal leaning candidates).
>>     
>
> I'm afraid the parenthetical comment, besides lacking justification in 
> reality, belies the motives of your comments. Why would you try to spin this 
> issue into partisan hate mongering? Why do you hate freedom and democracy?  
> ;-)
>
> Transparent election processes, like the public counting of the ballots at the 
> precinct, encourage active citizen involvement in the process and provide the 
> most ideal, reliable form of election security. Citizen involvement in the 
> process of democracy also fosters civil dialog and constructive resolution of 
> political differences. It is little wonder that the forces which have been 
> actively demonizing our government institutions and the fourth estate for so 
> many decades would promote and excuse unverifiable election systems which 
> instill distrust in our elected officials and generate divisiveness and 
> conflict in the electorate.
>
>   
>> The technological solution at least offers means for improvement.
>>     
>
> ...except in the areas of validating results or enhancing ballot security, 
> unless the technology includes audit capability in the form of physical, 
> voter verified source documents at the point of the voting transaction.
>
> The challenge is that the constitutional requirements of the secret ballot 
> (both Georgia and U.S.) make any of the popular comparisons between voting 
> systems and various financial transactions completely invalid and irrelevant.  
> Every component of a bank's accounting, security and auditing measures are
> entirely dependent upon knowing the identity of the party initiating the 
> transaction, which is the one item of information that is unavailable under 
> the secret ballot requirement of voting. This is why election auditing 
> requires physical documentation verified at the time of the ballot 
> transaction.
>
> The requirement of anonymous balloting is a cornerstone of the "Australian 
> ballot" system and is a globally accepted, common sense, gold standard 
> provision of legitimate elections. Secret balloting provides the two vital 
> functions of protecting the voter from intimidation and extortion, while 
> simultaneously preventing the voter from selling or otherwise profiting from 
> the ballot selections they make.
>
> None of these arguments deny that there are areas where technology can
> enhance our election systems, areas like improving accessiblity for the 
> disabled, which is perhaps the only constructive argument to justify the 
> layers of added logistical complexity and taxpayer costs inherent to touch 
> screen voting systems. Computer interfaces can also provide a reliable system 
> for instant runoff voting or for reducing common voter errors like overvoting 
> and, when a "none of the above" choice is provided, undervoting. It is just 
> as undeniable that having these computer aided voting systems produce a
> voter verified paper ballot does nothing to interfere with their ability to 
> provide these benefits.
>
> The technologies of paperless electronic voting technology have also been 
> lauded for providing certain"conveniences" as well, but convenience is not 
> the priority or concern of our democracy or of legitimate election processes. 
> Yet we find that the installation of these Zero Evidence systems has allowed 
> the convenience of the vendors, the convenience of the election officials, 
> the convenience of the pollworkers to take precedence over the primary 
> concerns of system costs and legitimate, verifiable election results.
>
> [ ======...
>   
>> As we have seen recently in Georgia there is a large number of
>> people against showing proper ID to vote (even though they have
>> to show ID to cash a check at the bank).
>>     
>
> Georgia's recent voter ID legislation is an entirely separate issue, but one 
> worthy of discussion. I've studied this issue as well and have included some 
> facts and thoughts on that sidebar at the end of this conversation.
> ...====== ] 
>
> (...back on the point, here:)
>
>   
>>  So I say enable technology
>> to solve the problems that people themselves can't.  Should we trust
>> everyone, No.  But you  have to trust someone, else your life is
>> shallow and difficult. ;-)
>>     
>
> I agree that the top priority of the voting system is that it be trustworthy, 
> but a trustworthy system must first and foremost trust the voter. They, in 
> turn, must be able to trust their own senses in knowing that their physical 
> ballot not only exists, but that it will be protected and counted with the 
> secure oversight of the greater community.
>
> Trust, after all, must be earned, and trust requires a free choice of whom you 
> trust. Trust cannot be mandated or forced on people against their will, as 
> has happened with the installation of these flawed, proprietary, Zero 
> Evidence Diebold election systems in Georgia.  The electronic voting machine 
> companies, the professional clubs and system testing organizations they fund 
> and the government proponents of paperless election systems, by their obvious 
> incompetence in observing the most basic considerations of legitimate 
> election processes and failure to follow their own certification rules, have 
> clearly failed to earn or deserve anyone's trust.  The conflicts of interest 
> introduced by the inordinate complexity and proprietary secrecy surrounding 
> Zero Evidence voting systems could not be more antithetical to legitimate 
> democracy nor more destructive to the public trust in our election results.
>
> peace
> aaron
>
>
> ===== PS: OFF TOPIC -- VOTER ID ====
>   
>> As we have seen recently in Georgia there is a large number of
>> people against showing proper ID to vote (even though they have
>> to show ID to cash a check at the bank).
>>     
>
> Georgia's recent voter ID legislation is an entirely separate issue of voter 
> disenfranchisement from the systemic problems and disenfranchisement
> surrounding Zero Evidence voting.
>
> Georgia's original voter ID law was introduced in 2005 as HB244. After narrow 
> passage along partisan lines, the ID provisions of this legislation were 
> challenged in Federal court found to be unconstitutional and a violation of 
> the Voting Rights Act. A slightly revised version, SB84, was then rushed 
> through the 2006 Georgia Assembly in the first few days of the session (in 
> order to circumvent opportunities for debate). The updated legislation is 
> designed to side step the constitutional conflicts, but attorneys who won the 
> case against HB244 point out that the basic "poll tax" issues of cost which 
> made HB244 unconstitutional are still present in SB84. Georgia voters can 
> expect to pay _another_ $200,000 in legal fees defending this latest 
> unconstitutional law before it is thrown out. (A great example of wasteful, 
> irresponsible government at work.)
>
> The Georgia bills are part of a nationally coordinated partisan slate of State 
> election legislation being introduced around the country, laws that play on 
> party preference percentages to selectively harass and disenfranchise voters 
> based on their financial resources, ethnic history, seniority, college 
> affiliation and disabilities. Various schemes to disenfranchise targeted 
> voters along ethnic and class lines were the most common and documented forms 
> of vote fraud in the 2000, 2002 and 2004 elections, with the most blatant 
> cases being the phony felon rosters manufactured by Georgia Choice Point, 
> Inc. for Florida 2000 and the glaring innequities in voting equipment 
> distribution in Ohio, 2004.
>
> The real effects of Georgia's voter ID legislation are clearly illustrated by 
> the story of Mayor Shirley Franklin's mother, an 84 year old black woman who 
> was born in a time when black people were barred by state sanctioned racism 
> from access to mainstream medical establishments or hospitals and thus were 
> never issued birth certificates.  The only way this tax paying, retired 
> teacher of 55 years was able to get a qualifying voter ID, in this case a 
> Passport, was through the intervention of her daughter, who luckily happend 
> to be the Mayor of Atlanta. State authorities would not recognize Mrs. 
> Franklin's life long Georgia residency and career and refused to issue her a 
> State ID. The nationally authorized Passport ID cost her $250 and weeks of 
> red tape delays.
>
> The insidious intentions of Georgia's voter ID legislation are fully revealed 
> by a few simple facts:
> -- Cases of falsified voter ID, already a felony offense, are a rare anomaly 
> which not only requires significant manipulation of Georgia's comprehensive 
> voter registration systems & records, but needs a conspiracy involving 
> hundreds or thousands of corrupt individuals to affect a State election. 
> There are no documented cases in Georgia's recent history where a person 
> voted under false identity.  (Claiming that HB244/SB84 would address vote 
> fraud is a vote fraud in and of itself.)
> -- The bill accepts Student ID's issued by STATE sanctioned security 
> operations on STATE college campuses as acceptable identification, but 
> Student ID's issued by STATE sanctioned security operations on other 
> campuses, like Moorehouse or Emory or Agnes Scott, are NOT considered 
> acceptable voter ID. (? huh ?)
> -- Shortly after the passage of HB244, Governor Sonny Perdue closed down many 
> of the already sparse count of 56 locations in Georgia where Drivers licenses 
> and State ID's could be applied for and obtained. Almost of the closings were 
> in rural areas.
>
> As members of the privileged classes in American society that most of us are, 
> it is difficult for us to imagine living without cars and drivers licenses 
> and checking accounts and credit cards.  From the perspective of our 
> fortunate circumstances, we assume that access to this lifestyle is 
> accessable to everyone in our nation. But the fact is that there is a large 
> portion of our population that continues to suffer, though no fault of their 
> own, from the crippling effects of generational poverty, class exploitation 
> and state sanctioned racism. Segregated from mainstream institutions, the 
> less privileged tend to rely on cash based economies, and if you want ever 
> want to see proof of it just walk into a rural Georgia Power office at the 
> end of any month and observe the lines of folk paying their electric bill in 
> cash, few if any of whom drove a car to get there.
>
> If you favor a national ID for U.S. citizens , then establish and FUND an 
> equitable system for issuing or obtaining them instead of threatening the 
> constitutionally guaranteed voting rights of all the American citizens who 
> have been systematically denied an identity throughout their lives.
>
> The huge corpse of Jim Crow is still rotting down here in Georgia, and these 
> fraudulent and unethical voter ID laws are just one more fat, white maggot 
> feeding on the remains.
>
> ======================
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>