Activist slams new voting machines (Palm Beach County, FL)

Activist slams new voting machines

By Thomas R. Collins

Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
Monday, March 27, 2006


BOYNTON BEACH — Your vote is not safe.

So warned author and political activist Tom Grayman III on Sunday night, armed with tales of disenfranchisement past and present as he spoke to a crowd of about 80 at St. John Missionary Baptist Church.
The answer to Florida's election chaos in 2000 — the electronic voting machine — does not reassure the author of Ghosts of Florida: Making Elections Fair for Blacks, an account of how he believes some groups are repeatedly stymied in their attempts to vote.

The electronic machines, he said, are the next vehicle for the "very creative, very devious and very serious" members of the establishment who want to keep certain groups, particularly blacks, from having their votes count.
"The way they record our vote, the method that they use, the process, is completely hidden," Grayman said of the machines. "It is completely unobservable by human beings.... That in and of itself makes them completely unacceptable for this role."

snip

Grayman — a New York City native who has appeared on Air America Radio, National Public Radio, BET Nightly News and many other media outlets — writes in his book that his life as an activist began after the shooting death of Amadou Diallo, an African immigrant killed with 41 gunshots fired by four white undercover police officers in New York, who said they mistook his wallet for a gun. Enraged by then-Mayor Rudy Giuliani's response, Grayman joined a protest and was among those arrested.

Change to social injustice begins with voting, he writes. So now his passion lies in trying to make sure votes count.
If electronic machines must be used in Florida, he said, they should produce something we can see.

"The ballots should come out, and then they should be counted by human beings, human hands, with human eyes and multiple observers," even if that takes days.

snip

Awareness, he said, is the only way to fight back. And today is a good day to start. "The seeds of those flaws are typically planted now — many, many months before Election Day."

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/pbcsouth/content/local_news/epaper/2006/03/27/m1b_grayman_0327.html


(Emphases added)

I totally agree with Mr. Grayman!

It's past time for us to demand paper and pen voting, hand-counted immediately after the polls close, under direct observation by members of all parties, and with all results phoned in to the Secretary of State's office.

This is, I am afraid, going to be our last opportunity for a long, long time to stop this tsunami of Republican theft and corruption of our voting rights.

The activist speaks in language that cuts to the chase...it's good to see.

though it's not my intellectual property. Or wait, maybe a little of it is??? : )

Even if it were, it's public domain.

The way to battle secret information is with free information.

:-)

so I can't really say anything except that a few things i thought of my self, but like they say, there's nothing new under the sun...

I've been running around Palm Beach the last couple of days, so I only just now noticed that you've posted the article up. Thanks for helping to spread the word.

Yes, I have been talking about this pretty much since 2000. I haven't had the kind of high profile that better-known activists have had, but I put all this and much more into my 2004 book Ghosts of Florida.

Though this is old news to us, you would be shocked at how few Americans have actully given any thought to this. Every time I mention it before a group of interested -- even activist -- voters, I always generate a mild gasp. It just never occurs to people that a paper "trail" for inscrutable electronic machines is still not the answer.

I met with the supervisor of elections down there, Dr. Arthur Anderson. My report is here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x419203

Keep fighting the good fight.

-Tom

From the major North Carolina paper on March 20, 2006:




This is precisely why I do not think optical scanning should be used to count paper ballots:

1. There is ample opportunity for inaccurate counting of the ballots.

2. In Florida, Jeb's new state law *modification* now outlaws all recounting of ballots that have already been counted by a machine. So that means that if optical scanners have already counted the ballots, it is illegal to conduct ANY hand-recounts, in the event of an election dispute. Chapter 102.166, subsection 1, I believe.


IMHO, the ONLY answer is paper and pen voting, hand-counted immediately after the polls close, under direct observation, and then telephoned in to the Sec. of State's office. No. Machines. Whatsoever.

Cannot Mr. Anderson declare pen and paper as his choice over these unreliable machines?

It would be gross and intentional negligence for any County Elections Supervisor to subject his/her voters to yet another tainted election by ignoring the serious problems with these flawed machines, and without mandating pen and paper (as set out above) as the most reliable alternative.



Also, please see this thread re: Ion Sancho

in Palm Beach were talking about the NC story.

Sancho and Anderson are the only two supervisors in the state to be actively pushing for paper trails. Paper ballots counted by hand are not allowed by the state legislature.

Paper ballots counted by hand are not allowed by the state legislature.

Are you referring to the new FL legislation barring any future recount of paper ballots that have already been counted the first time by a machine?


Or do you mean that there is a specific FL law barring the use of pen and paper ballots? If this is the case, can you point me toward the specific statute?

Thanks!

with the Palm Beach Elections Supervisor Dr. Anderson, I picked up 1)that NO METHOD of ballot counting -- be it mechanical or by hand -- may be used unless it has been certified by the state, and 2)hand counting of paper ballots has not been certified by the state. Use of paper ballots itself is not forbidden -- after all, that's what the optical scan process uses. But it is forbidden at this point to count them by any method other than the scanners. Until and unless, that is, the state legislature passes a revision in the law allowing it.

(3) "Ballot" or "official ballot" when used in reference to:
(a) "Marksense ballots" means that printed sheet of paper, used in conjunction with an electronic or electromechanical vote tabulation voting system, containing the names of candidates, or a statement of proposed constitutional amendments or other questions or propositions submitted to the electorate at any election, on which sheet of paper an elector casts his or her vote.
(b) "Electronic or electromechanical devices" means a ballot that is voted by the process of electronically designating, including by touchscreen, or marking with a marking device for tabulation by automatic tabulating equipment or data processing equipment

FS 97.021

to circumvent hand-counted paper ballots.

This is what they are mortally afraid of .... that the voters might begin to understand how these corrupted officials and their private electronic voting machine vendors are now stealing our voting rights.

the Bureau of Voting Systems Certification within the Department of Elections to certify hand-counted paper ballots as an original method of voting.

Politically, this would be a tremendous amount of pressure on the Secretary of State, Ms. Cobb, that she would find it very difficult to deny this demand publicly. And she would be required to respond to the request in writing, specifying the reasons for acceptance or denial within 45 days, according to 101.015 Standards for voting systems.




According to 101.015 Standards for voting systems, (1) The Department of State shall adopt rules which establish minimum standards for hardware and software for electronic and electromechanical voting systems. Such rules shall contain standards for:




We now know, thanks to Leon County Elections Supervisor Ion Sancho and other university-based and independent computer experts' analysis, that Diebold electronic voting machines are subject to widespread, undetectable tampering with vote totals, and, any subsequent hand recounts would not detect the tampering.

And for *good measure*, Jeb Bush and the former Secretary of State Glenda Hood made it illegal under Florida law for these machine-counted votes to be hand-recounted. This is quite ominous for all future elections in Florida unless we demand a change.

These privately-owned electronic machines provide neither "evaluation criteria" nor "minimum security standards", as stated above.

This, alone, should call for the complete ban of all electronic voting machines.


And according to 101.5606 Requirements for approval of systems,




We now know that these faulty memory cards are unreliable when charged to deliver an accurate vote count. Leon County Election Supervisor Ion Sancho speaks about this in gory detail in the audio clip in one of my posts above.


And according to 101.43 Substitute ballot,




Secretary of State Cobb has done absolutely nothing to investigate or ensure security standards with these electronic machines, and it follows that votes are subject to widespread theft. Therefore, it would be prudent for Elections Supervisors to demand the institution of a reliable and fair ballot substitute for their voters.



When 67 Florida County Elections Supervisors demand from the Secretary of State that she immediately certify on-the-spot hand-counted paper ballots as an original voting method, the political pressure would be devastating for her noncompliance.

It's time to force her hand.

yes you are right, there's always a gasp.

but someone it still doesn't deserve respectful reporting by all media sources. Isn't that odd. Your take?

I think they are firmly among the group of Americans that genuinely don't "get it." Since the standard practice of the MSM is to report the conventional wisdom on complex or controversial topics, I doubt few reporters, even ones assigned to this beat, have taken any time to independently think about the issue they are writing about.

On the other hand, I strongly fear that even if they were to come to the necessary realization, fear of running afoul of the corporate power structure that has put us in this predicament would cause many an editor to squash any real enterprising journalism in this area. That's why it's up to us to spread the message underground-style.