Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait. The Illusion of Democracy: An Urgent Call to Action for National Election Reform An Urgent Call to Action for National Election Reform.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: " The Illusion of Democracy: An Urgent Call to Action for National Election Reform An Urgent Call to Action for National Election Reform."— Presentation transcript:

1 The Illusion of Democracy: An Urgent Call to Action for National Election Reform An Urgent Call to Action for National Election Reform

2 Prepared by Oregon Voter Rights Coalition June 2006

3 Shaken Voter Confidence In 2000, a post-election Harris Poll estimated that 20-30 million Americans did not trust the validity of the Presidential election results Before the 2004 election, a poll by the legal website found that 42% of voters already did not trust the new electronic touchscreen voting machines

4 A Jan. 2005 National Annenberg Election Survey interviewed 100,000 voters and found that 30% of American voters representing over 36 million voters were not confident that their vote had been counted accurately in 2004 Shaken Voter Confidence

5 The initial results of a May 2006 Zogby Peoples poll of Pennsylvania voters, commissioned by OpEdNews, found that the majority of people who do not use Fox News as their primary news source believe that the 2004 presidential election was stolen Shaken Voter Confidence

6 The analysis found that except for viewers of right wing news show, Fox News, poll respondents believe that the 2004 presidential election was stolen Shaken Voter Confidence

7 with the right election commissioners, he could get the machines to sing Home Sweet Home. He also wanted to be buried in Louisiana so he could remain active in politics after his death. After the invention of lever voting machines, Dem. Gov. Earl Long of Louisiana once boasted that, Governor Earl Long May His Voice Live On! This Is NOT a Partisan Issue

8 Other Election Rigging Examples 1948: Democrat Lyndon Johnsons U.S. Senate victory in Texas over Republican Coke Stevenson, earning him the name Landslide Lyndon 2000: Floridas Republican Gov. Jeb Bush and Secretary of State Katherine Harris disenfranchising felon database 2003: Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Delays gerrymandering in Texas

9 The Founders Intent When the American founders developed our democratic framework, one of the things they understood with absolute clarity was that there are some things that We the People do for ourselves where We the People hold the rights These things are known as The Commons

10 The Commons All of these things are currently under attack by privatization public schools public lands public roads police/fire dept. the water we drink the air we breath the internet public airwaves Examples include:

11 The most precious of all The Commons is The Commons The vote is the beating heart of democracy! In a healthy democracy, every citizens vote is sacred

12 In a democratic republican form of government such as ours, where people place the political power in the hands of their representatives, voting is the only legitimate way to transfer power from the people to the government * * Ex parte Yarbrough, 110 U.S. 651, 667 (U.S., 1884) Legitimate Transfer of Power

13 Having an honest and transparent election system for all American citizens is therefore the cornerstone of our government and our society Legitimate Transfer of Power

14 Purpose The purpose of this presentation is to sound an alarm that our elections and the electorate are no longer under the control of the American people Partisan politicians are privatizing our local and national election systems through the 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA)

15 Brief Review of the 2000 Presidential Election

16 At 2:16 a.m. on Nov. 8, 2000, Fox News declared that the pivotal state of Florida had gone for George W. Bush Election Night, Nov. 7-8, 2000

17 Minutes later, other news organizations joined Fox News in calling Florida for Bush Election Night Nov. 7-8, 2000

18 At Fox News Network, the person at the helm of the election decision team was John Ellis The election numbers he was working from were not official, but the viewers did not know that. Nor did they know that Ellis was G.W. Bushs first cousin Election Night Nov. 7-8, 2000 John Ellis Ellis was in phone contact with cousin G.W. Bush throughout election night

19 the networks were forced to retract the Florida call for Bush Two hours later, Election Night Nov. 7-8, 2000

20 The strategy was a complete success creating a lasting impression that Bush had already won the election Election Strategy a Success

21 Overview of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002

22 On Oct. 29, 2002, President Bush signed the Help America Vote Act The stated intent of HAVA was to correct many of the problems that occurred in the 2000 election HAVA Signed by President Bush

23 HAVA established the Election Assistance Commission, in part, to establish a program to provide funds to States to replace punch card voting systems As of Dec. 1, 2005, over $2.3 billion in payments had been distributed to states, including $27.8 million to Oregon EAC U.S. Election Assistance Commission

24 dont appear on the official list of eligible voters have their eligibility challenged by an election official HAVA introduced Provisional Ballots, a.k.a. Placebo Ballots Individuals shall be permitted to cast a provisional ballot if they present themselves to vote at a polling place in an election for Federal office and either: Provisional Ballots

25 Diebold paid some $275,000 to [Jack] Abramoffs firm, Greenberg Traurig, with the apparent aim of keeping legislation requiring paper trails in the voting process from getting into HAVA. Conveniently, Abramoff pal [Rep.] Bob Ney According to an April 2006 article in Rolling Stone Magazine: No Paper Trails in HAVA [R-OH], one of the HAVA architects, blocked every attempt to put paper trails into law. Jack Abramoff

26 Election Systems

27 Registered voter records / database Ballots Ballot definition files (BDFs) for electronic systems Voting systems Vote counting systems Components of Election Systems

28 Voting Systems Lever machines Electronic voting (e-voting/DRE) 1 Paper ballot system Hand-marked paper ballots 1,2 Punch cards 1 2 Includes optical scan systems

29 Vote Counting Systems Electronic tabulators* (centrally located, such as at the county elections office) – includes optical scan systems * Electronic election system Hand-counting

30 Source: Verified Voting, Electronic tabulators (centrally located) are used for optical scan, electronic voting, punch card, and lever machine systems Voting Technologies Used in the 2004 Election 32% 29% 19%13% <1% Technology Expected use in Nov. 2004 Optical Scan Electronic Voting Punch Card Lever Machine Paper Ballot

31 ALL electronic election systems, including e-voting (touchscreen/DRE) and optical scan systems, currently use proprietary, undisclosed software, i.e., secret vote counting There is NO government or public examination of the software for inaccurate or malicious code Voting Technologies

32 Paper ballots with fill in the oval or similar type of voter- marked paper ballot system Tabulated data is compiled on computer; the potential may exist for undetectable hacking and tampering with election results in database Data transferred via disk or electronically John Johnson Pete Peterson Lars Larson Contest 1 Your County Sven Svenson John Johnson Pete Peterson Lars Larson Contest 1 Your County Sven Svenson Optical Scan Voting Systems Optical Scan Machine reads the paper ballots using an electronic Ballot Definition File (BDF) and votes are tabulated using proprietary, trade secret software

33 Numerous studies and test demonstrations have shown that current electronic election systems, including paper ballot/optical scan systems, can have serious security flaws and potential for error Electronic Election Systems So whats the big controversy about these systems?

34 Computer scientists have been some of the primary activists leading the fight against electronic voting machines and tabulators that use proprietary (trade secret) software Dr. Avi Rubin Technical Director of the Information Security Institute at Johns Hopkins University Dr. Rebecca Mercuri Research Fellow at Harvard Universitys Kennedy School of Government Dr. David Dill Professor of Computer Science at Stanford University Who Opposes These Systems?

35 Test Demo. Discovers Flaws Recent News – Spring 2006: Harri Hursti, a computer programming expert from Finland, working with Bev Harris of Black Box Voting, discov- ered a major security flaw in the Popular Diebold AccuVote TSx e-voting system See Hurstis reports at Harri Hursti Finnish computer programming expert

36 The machines can be contaminated through: network connections (wireless or otherwise) PCMCIA cards other peripheral devices Hurstis Findings

37 Hurstis Findings There are several backdoors that pose security risks each backdoor exists in 3 layers and allows the system to be modified in extremely flexible ways without even basic levels of security involved

38 The design allows someone to take over the computer motherboard and turn it into a zombie Anyone with a screwdriver and a $20 electronic gadget bought at Frys can take control of the machines Hurstis Findings

39 [T]hese attacks are permanent in nature, surviving through the election cycles. Therefore, the contamination can happen at any point of the device's life cycle and remain active and undetected from the point of contamination on through multiple election cycles and even soft- ware upgrade cycles. ~ Harri Hursti Hurstis Findings Source: Hursti, Harri. 2006. Diebold TSx Evaluation – SECURITY ALERT: May 11, 2006 Critical Security Issues with Diebold TSx; Black Box Voting, Inc. (

40 What Mr. Hursti discovered in Utah is the most serious vulnerability that we've ever seen in a voting system. This particular vulnerability is serious enough that you can affect multiple machines from a single attack. That's what makes it so dangerous. ~ David Jefferson, the Computer Scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory who independently reviewed Hursti's work for California's Secretary of State, Bruce McPherson Comments on Hurstis Findings

41 It is like the nuclear bomb for e- voting systems. It's the deal breaker. It really makes the security flaws that we found (in prior years) look trivial. ~ Avi Rubin, computer science professor, Johns Hopkins University Comments on Hurstis Findings Dr. Avi Rubin Technical Director of the Information Security Institute at Johns Hopkins University

42 Optical Scan Security Flaws June 3, 2005, Leon County, Florida: In a test demonstration done in conjunction with Black Box Voting and with the consent of Leon County Elections Supervisor Ion Sancho, Harri Hursti was able to hack into a Diebold optical scan system undetectably and change the results of a test election -- known as the Hursti Hack Harri Hursti Finnish computer programming expert

43 The Diebold optical scan system uses a dangerous programming methodology, with an executable program living inside the [memory card of the] electronic ballot box. This method is the equivalent of having a little man living in the ballot box, holding an eraser and a pencil. Hursti Hack Findings Source: (

44 The Black Box Voting team proved that the Diebold optical scan program, housed on a chip inside the voting machine, places a call to a program living in the removable memory card during the election. (contd.) Hursti Hack Findings Source: (

45 (contd.) The demonstration also showed that the executable program on the memory card (ballot box) can easily be changed, and that checks and balances, required by FEC standards to catch unauthorized changes, were not implemented by Dieboldyet the system was certified anyway. Hursti Hack Findings Source: (

46 Routine logic & accuracy tests touted by election officials across the nation as being the gold standard for discovering problems will not catch this type of manipulation Hursti Hack Findings -- See Hurstis reports at Harri Hursti Finnish computer programming expert Source: (

47 Brennan Center Study Latest News – June 27, 2006: The Brennan Center for Justice, a non- partisan think tank at NY University School of Law, released a report on its year-long study of vulnerabilities in electronic election systems Task force participants: internationally renowned government, academic, and private-sector scientists, voting machine experts and security professionals

48 The task force examined the 3 primary types of electronic election systems: e-voting without a paper trail e-voting with a voter-verified paper trail precinct count optical scan systems These systems account for 80% of the voting machines that will be used in Nov.'s election Brennan Center Study

49 ALL of these electronic election systems have significant security and reliability vulnerabilities There are more than 120 security threats to these systems Brennan Center Study Findings Source: Brennan Center (

50 ALL of these systems are equally vulnerable to an attack involving the insertion of corrupt software or other software attack programs designed to take over a voting machine Such attacks could threaten the integrity of a state or national election Brennan Center Study Findings Source: Brennan Center (

51 Random, transparent audits of the paper records or ballots are necessary to enhance security Brennan Center Study Findings Source: Brennan Center (

52 Electronic election systems are also prone to mechanical problems and error Many, many such problems have been documented, some that have actually changed the election outcome and were corrected only with a hand count (For an extensive list of documented errors and problems, see Voters Unites website at Other Documented Problems

53 Basic errors or outright manipulation with electronic election systems can affect tens of thousands of votes or more, rather than just the hundreds that might be impacted by paper errors or manipulation Whats the Impact?

54 Nationwide, according to the federal commission charged with implementing election reforms, as many as 1 million ballots were spoiled [in the 2004 election] by faulty voting equipment – roughly one for every 100 cast. ~ Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Other Documented Problems Source: Kennedy, Robert F., Jr. 2006. Was the 2004 Election Stolen? Rolling Stone Magazine, 6/1/06 ( Article also found at (

55 Who would YOU rather believe about the security and accuracy of current electronic election systems private, for-profit vendors with close ties to a political party and/or a foreign government, or computer scientists and computer security experts? Who Would You Believe?

56 Criticism of electronic election systems is NOT a criticism of our election officials and workers, whose jobs are to ensure elections are conducted properly The problems with the current e-election systems and processes are beyond their control Criticism Where Due

57 Electronic Election System Company Ownerships

58 According to Spokesmen: there is NO federal agency with regulatory authority over the elections industry there are NO government standards or restrictions on who can sell or service voting machines and systems there is NO agency or organization that even has a complete list of voting machine companies in the U.S. In other words, the vendors are policing themselves Jorge Martinez United States Election Justice Department Brian Hancock United States Election Assistance Commission

59 Top 3 Companies in the U.S. ES & S and Diebold together tabulate 80% of the votes in the U.S. Sequoia has 1/3 of the electronic voting machines on the market 1. 2. 3.

60 1980: American Information Systems (AIS) was founded by brothers Bob and Ted Urosevich 1999: AIS became ES & S Bob Urosevich Ted Urosevich ES & S

61 Half of the company startup money for AIS came from millionaires William & Howard Ahmanson, Jr. Howard F. Ahmanson, Jr. Background of AIS / ES & S

62 A Christian Reconstructionist / Dominionist, he stated in the Orange County Register his goal of replacing constitutional law in the U.S. with Biblical law Openly advocated a radical plan for the theocratic takeover of America Whos Howard Ahmanson, Jr. ?

63 Currently a member of the ultra- right wing Council for National Policy Provides millions of dollars to causes that are designed to discredit and defeat the teaching of Darwins theory of evolution and the promotion of teaching Intelligent Design Whos Howard Ahmanson, Jr.?

64 During the 2004 elections, the companies run by the Urosevich brothers counted an alarming 80% of the votes Urosevich Brothers Influence Diebold President: Bob Urosevich ES & S Vice Pres.: Ted Urosevich

65 When Bob Urosevich left ES & S for Diebold, he was replaced at ES & S by new CEO Chuck Hagel Chuck Hagel, New CEO at ES & S Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE)

66 In 1995, Hagel was running the voting machine company that would count the votes in his 1996 bid for the U.S. Senate He was trailing in the polls to his opponent, former Gov. Ben Nelson, 65% to 18%, yet Hagel amazingly came from behind to win with 56% of the vote He was the first Republican Senate winner in the state in 24 years In both the 1996 and 2002 elections, ES & S counted 85% of the votes in Nebraska Chuck Hagel, New CEO at ES&S

67 Senator Hagel retains a $1 - $5 million ownership in ES & S s parent company, McCarthy Group, as he contemplates a run for the Presidency in 2008 Chuck Hagel, New CEO at ES&S

68 In the 2004 election, Diebold counted 50% of the votes in 30 states Diebolds Influence

69 I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year. In August 2003, Wally ODell, the CEO of Diebold and a major donor to the Bush campaign, invited 100 wealthy fellow partisans to a fundraiser at his mansion in suburban Canton, Ohio. His invitation stated: Diebolds CEO, Wally ODell Wally ODell

70 Wally ODell Diebolds CEO, Wally ODell ODell resigned his position in Dec. 2005 after whistleblower allegations that Diebold may have mishandled elections in Georgia and Ohio in 2004

71 Prior to the 2004 election, Diebold employed 5 convicted felons as senior managers and software developers to help write central compiler computer code that counted the votes Diebolds Employees

72 Prior to being hired by Diebold, Dean had been convicted on 23 counts of felony theft in the 1st degree He had been convicted of planting back doors in his software using a high degree of sophistication to evade detection while stealing a half million dollars over a period of 2 years One of those convicted felons was Jeff Dean, Senior Vice-President and senior programmer on Diebold s central compiler code Diebolds Employees Jeff Dean

73 Turns out that Dean and Elder met in prison while Elder was serving a 5-year sentence for cocaine trafficking Cedar Creek Correctional Facility Elder went on to manage a Diebold division respon- sible for printing election ballots and punch cards When word of Deans past began to surface, Diebold demoted him to a consultant status, replacing him with John Elder Diebolds Employees

74 Sequoia began as American Voting Machine under the control of stockholders in Rockwell, a major defense contractor in the 1960s Sequoia Voting Systems

75 Resigned in 1973 and later went to prison, after being indicted by NY Federal Grand Jury for bribing Buffalo, NY election officials Lloyd Dixon Founder & CEO Convicted of bribing Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas Louis Wolfson Next Owner Convicted on charges related to bribing the Louisiana Commissioner of Elections, paying $8-10 million over a 10-year period Phil Foster Regional Mgr. Rocco Ricci Southeast Rep. Sequoias Employees

76 Sequoias parent company is now Smartmatic International Company Sequoias Foreign Ties

77 Discovering the ownership of Sequoia was difficult. According to Illinois officials in April 2006, it took them tracing it through four countries, two hemispheres and three shell corporations. Sequoias Foreign Ties

78 What they found was that Smartmatic International Company is owned by Venezuelans with close ties to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez Sequoias Foreign Ties Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez

79 Triad is a smaller company but played a key role in the 2000 and 2004 elections in Florida and Ohio Owner Tod Rapp is a generous donor to the Republican Party as well as to President George W. Bushs campaign Triad

80 Rapp is also President of the Psephos Corp., a Triad affiliate, which supplied the notorious butterfly ballot used in Palm Beach County, Florida in the 2000 presidential election You can still order a commemorative butterfly ballot set from the Psephos website for just $59.95 Palm Beach Butterfly Ballot Set Triad

81 In the summer of 2003, Rep. Peter King (R-NY), while at a function on the White House lawn, was interviewed on film by Alexandra Pelosi for her documentary, Diary of a Political Tourist. King exalted, Its already over. The elections over. We won. When asked by Pelosi how he knew that Bush would win, King answered, Its all over but the counting. And well take care of the counting. Rep. King and President Bush on Air Force One Prophetic Statement

82 So why has Karl Rove so boldly predicted a Republican dynasty for the next 40 years? Republican Prediction Karl Rove (Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff in the Bush Administration)

83 The entire state of Oregon now uses optical scan election systems In 2004, 98% of Oregons votes were tabulated (counted) on machines manufactured by AIS, BRC, ES & S, and Sequoia Election Systems in Oregon

84 Problems With the 2004 Federal Election

85 Ohio Secretary of State during the 2004 elections Co-Chair of Ohios 2004 Bush re-election campaign Problems in Ohio

86 Blackwells actions resulted in the suppression and disenfranchisement of well over 100,000 voters in Ohio Ohio – Sec. of State Blackwell

87 Ohio – Sec. of State Blackwell On Sept. 7 th, 2004, all county boards of elections were ordered to reject all voter registration forms not printed on white, uncoated paper of not less than 80 lb. text weight Limited the use of provisional ballots, effectively disenfranchising over 100,000 citizens (according to Ohios Republican Gov. Bob Taft) by using a narrow interpretation of HAVA requirements

88 Provided insufficient voting machines in more minority, less affluent, and Democratic areas, causing tens of thousands of voters to wait in lines for up to 10 hours (How many voters couldnt afford to wait for several hours and gave up?) Mark Duncan / Associated Press Ohio – Sec. of State Blackwell

89 On Nov 2 nd (Election Day), he banned all press and exit pollsters from Ohios voting places Arranged Ohios post-election recount schedule so as to leave no time for adequate recounts Has yet to file a compliance report with the Government Services Administration, which had given him $41 million to enforce the Help America Vote Act in Ohio Now a candidate for Ohio Governor Ohio – Sec. of State Blackwell

90 July 2, 2004 – consulting firm employed by the Ohio Democratic Party Oct. 11, 2004 – Lucas County Democratic headquarters in Toledo Ohio – Other Dirty Tricks The only items taken were computers containing highly sensitive campaign- related information and Democratic voter lists/strong Kerry supporters Break-ins at Democratic campaign offices:

91 Bob Bennett, Republican Chair of the Cuyahoga Board of Elections (BOE) and Chair of the Ohio Republican Party, has confirmed that prior to the 2004 elections, his BOE eliminated without public notice a staggering 175,414 voters from the Cleveland-area voter registration rolls Ohio – Other Dirty Tricks Massive Voter Suppression:

92 The Republican Party used a technique called caging, where they sent registered letters to newly registered voters in minority and urban areas, and then challenged the voting eligibility of 35,000 individuals who refused to sign for the letter or if the mail came back undeliverable Massive Voter Suppression: Ohio – Other Dirty Tricks

93 The available data shows that in Ohio alone, at least 357,000 voters, the over- whelming majority of them Democratic, were prevented from casting ballots or did not have their votes counted in 2004 Source: Kennedy, Robert F., Jr. 2006. Was the 2004 Election Stolen? Rolling Stone Magazine, 6/1/06 ( Article also found at ( Ohio – Summary of Problems

94 In Ohio, the final machine tallies showed George W. Bush had 118,000 more votes than John Kerry an average winning margin of less than 6 votes per precinct Ohio – 2004 Election Results

95 Over 7 million Americans live and work abroad a global bloc some call the 51 st state In addition to active and retired military, these citizens include a large number of professionals who are young, college-educated, multi-lingual, and progressive Overseas Votes

96 The Dept. of Defense is responsible for administering the overseas votes, military and civilian, through the Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP) and its website ( Overseas Votes – D.o.D. Tactics Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld

97 The FVAPs website makes ballots more accessible abroad and serves as a clearinghouse for electoral requirements for all 50 states Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld Overseas Votes – D.o.D. Tactics

98 A Zogby poll of active passport holders, released in August 2004, found Kerry was favored over Bush 58% to 35% Overseas Votes – D.o.D. Tactics

99 On August 23, 2004, at the height of overseas voter registration requests, the FVAP website suddenly shut down, becoming inaccessible to civilians using several foreign internet service providers from 25 countries. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld Overseas Votes – D.o.D. Tactics

100 According to the FVAPs web manager, Susan Leader, access was blocked due to users constantly attempting to hack these sites. We do not expect the block to be lifted. An Army officer involved in the admin- istration of the U.S. vote in Germany called this claim patently ridiculous Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld Overseas Votes – D.o.D. Tactics

101 The website stayed down until Sept. 22 nd, 6 weeks before Election Day, making it much more likely that absentee ballots mailed from oversees would arrive too late to be counted in the election Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld Overseas Votes – D.o.D. Tactics

102 Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld Overseas Votes – D.o.D. Tactics Result of the website shutdown: Thousands of overseas voters were disenfranchised

103 Summary of Problems in 2004 These examples are just the tip of the iceberg of documented voter suppression and disenfranchisement dirty tricks used in Ohio and several other states in the 2004 election

104 Summary of Problems in 2004 Nationwide, millions of legitimate voters were prevented from casting ballots and approximately 3,600,380 ballots were cast but never counted Source: Palast, Greg. 2006. Armed Madhouse. Penguin Group, New York; pp. 189-190.

105 Summary of Problems in 2004 One estimate is that Kerry won the popular vote by 8 million votes or more* *According to Mark Crispin Miller, author of the book, Fooled Again, an in-depth study of the 2004 election, as stated in speeches and interviews

106 Exit Polls

107 The official national election exit poll was conducted by Mitofsky International an internationally known exit polling firm and assisted by Edison Media Research Mitofsky was hired by the National Election Pool (NEP), a consortium of the major news organizations the Associated Press, ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox, and NBC 2004 Election Exit Poll Warren J. Mitofsky

108 Exit Poll Results In late afternoon of Election Day, exit polls in the presiden- tial election showed that Democratic candidate John Kerry was winning by a landslide in electoral votes and was ahead by 3% in the popular votes nationwide John F. Kerry

109 During the late evening/ early morning hours, the final machine tallies showed George Bush the victor in both the popular and electoral votes a stunning last-minute turn- around Final Machine Tally Results George W. Bush on Election Night 2004

110 Machine Tallies Exit Polls Kerry Bush Server Down 5.5% Flip in Results + -

111 Machine Tally Results Exit Polls

112 Correlating Red Shift with Electoral College Votes in the Top 10 Critical States All Critical States All Non-Critical States Average Percent of Red Shift 5 Critical States with the Greatest Red Shift (NH, OH, PA, MN, FL) 5 Critical States with the Least Red Shift (NV, NM, CO, IA, MI) Total Electoral College Votes Source: Webb Mealy, Ph.D. The 5 critical states with the greatest discrepancy between exit poll results and tabulated results also commanded nearly twice as many Electoral Votes as the other 5 critical states

113 Explanation for Discrepancy by the media and political pundits was that the presidential exit polls were flawed and exit polls in general are not accurate The predominant explanation promoted

114 Historically, exit polls have proven to be very accurate, often to within ½ of 1% (0.005) Discrepancies between exit polls and the final vote counts is solid evidence that something in the election results is wrong Proven Reliability of Exit Polls

115 Even the Bush administration considers exit polls to be such a reliable way to expose large-scale fraud that it has helped pay for election exit polls in other countries Example: Ukraine 2004 Proven Reliability of Exit Polls

116 Proven Reliability of Exit Polls In Nov. 2004, John Tefft, deputy assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, pointed to such a discrepancy to argue that the presidential election in Ukraine had been stolen Election protesters in Ukraine, Nov. 2004

117 The Ukrainians, after protesting en masse in sub-freezing temperatures, got a new presidential election which resulted in a different winner Viktor Yushchenko, Ukraine Proven Reliability of Exit Polls

118 In the 2004 U.S. presidential election, the official explanation for the discrepancy between the exit polls and the final machine tallies, as stated in the Edison/Mitofsky report, was that more Kerry supporters participated in the exit poll Official Explanation

119 However, the technical section in the E/M report contradicted the conclusion that more Kerry supporters participated in the exit poll the analysis made the assumption that the machine tallies were correct it did not consider the possibility that the machine tallies were incorrect and the exit polls correct Official Explanation

120 To date, the official, final exit poll data has not been released to the public Official Exit Poll Data

121 According to computer security expert Chuck Herrin, Additional Note the sudden unreliability of exit polls in the U.S. coincides with the use of paperless electronic voting machines

122 Discrepancies with substantial swings also occurred in as many as 7 U.S. Senate races all in favor of the Republican candidates Mel Martinez (R-FL) Tom Coburn (R-OK) John Thune (R-SD) Arlen Specter (R-PA) Jim Bunning (R-KY) +13% swing Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) +9% swing U.S. Senate Races - 2004 Richard Burr (R-NC) +9% swing

123 Note: Paperless electronic voting machines were used in the state U.S. Senate Race - 2002 Georgia +12% swing for Chambliss over Cleland Max Cleland (D) Saxby Chambliss (R)

124 In 2003 in California, Republican Arnold Schwarzenneger defeated a popular Latino Democrat who substantially led in polls a week before the election in strongly Democratic California Georgia 2002: Republican Sonny Perdue defeated incumbent Democratic Governor Roy Barnes after a suspicious 16% election- day swing in the vote Gubernatorial Races – 2002, 2003 Note: Paperless electronic voting machines were used in both states

125 There is no known information available on U.S. House races regarding anomalies or discrepancies in the 2002 or 2004 elections U.S. House Races

126 Conclusion There is no basis for confidence in election results that were based on machine counts tallied with secret software

127 Is It Voter Fraud or Election Fraud?

128 Voter Fraud vs. Election Fraud Voter Fraud: fraud perpetrated by the individual voter(s) Voter Fraud: fraud perpetrated by the individual voter(s) Examples: voting more than once, voting when not legally allowed to vote (both felonies) Examples: voting more than once, voting when not legally allowed to vote (both felonies) Small-scale fraud Small-scale fraud Touted remedy: Voter I.D. laws Touted remedy: Voter I.D. laws

129 Election Fraud – fraud perpetrated by others (i.e., candidates or political parties) to rig an election, sometimes with help from corrupt election officials Election Fraud – fraud perpetrated by others (i.e., candidates or political parties) to rig an election, sometimes with help from corrupt election officials Examples: voter suppression and disenfranchisement, stuffing of ballot box Examples: voter suppression and disenfranchisement, stuffing of ballot box Often large-scale fraud Often large-scale fraud Remedies: (Varies) Remedies: (Varies) Voter Fraud vs. Election Fraud

130 Which type of fraud do YOU think has been occurring? HINT: Claims of widespread voter fraud are totally false Voter Fraud vs. Election Fraud

131 What About the 2006 Mid-Term Elections?

132 A Solution or a Ruse? In the 2004 election, people felt calmed by the illusion that the problems of the 2000 election were being corrected while in fact the opposite was happening Voter Lines in Florida, 2004

133 A Sept. 2005 Report to Congress by the Government Accountability Office on electronic voting system security and reliability identified a long list of vulnerabilities and problems 2005 GAO Report to Congress

134 Identified problems included: Weak security controls System design flaws Inadequate security testing Poor security mgmt. Incorrect system configuration Inadequate system version controls Vague and incomplete voting standards 2005 GAO Report to Congress

135 The 2005 GAO report states that, although the Election Assistance Commission has led efforts to address problems, changes have not been implemented. Therefore, there will be little improvement in the 2006 elections over the 2004 elections. 2005 GAO Report Warning

136 40% of all votes will be cast on paperless electronic voting machines (66 million voters) More than 30.6 million voters will see new voting equipment 2006 Mid-Term Elections

137 Towards a Solution

138 ignore the strong evidence of systematic election fraud in the last 3 federal election cycles? trust private companies like ES&S, Diebold and Sequoia to accurately count our votes? ignore the estimated 36 million voters who were not confident that their vote in the 2004 election had been counted or counted accurately? believe that the 2006, 2008, or 2010 elections will be any different if we do nothing to address problems? Questions to Ask Ourselves Can WE THE PEOPLE afford to:

139 WE THE PEOPLE need to take action in order to reclaim our common right to an open, transparent, and verifiable Actions to Take election to reclaim our vote and our democracy

140 Actions to Take demand that corporations and politicians get out of counting our votes develop open-source election software for transparency use a scientifically designed election verification process WE THE PEOPLE need to:

141 Ensuring Election Integrity Methods of ensuring election integrity: Logic and Accuracy Test Audit of Precincts Countywide or Statewide Verification Recount

142 Methods of Ensuring Election Integrity Logic and Accuracy Test Purpose: To test machine calibration Method: Compares the machine count with a small test deck of paper ballots, e.g. 100 or 1,000 ballots

143 Methods of Ensuring Election Integrity Audit of Precincts Purpose: To determine if a pattern of machine errors occurred by checking the accuracy of results in a specified percentage of precincts* Method: The machine count is compared with a hand-recount of paper ballots in a percentage of precincts; a pattern of discrepancies between the counts MAY trigger further investigation * This method is NOT, in itself, designed to find countywide or statewide inaccuracies or to trigger a countywide or statewide recount

144 Methods of Ensuring Election Integrity Countywide or Statewide Verification Purpose: To ensure that the certified countywide or statewide results are accurate Method: Compares the countywide or statewide machine count with a hand-counted, scientifically determined sample of paper ballots; a significant discrepancy between the sample results and the machine results will trigger a mandatory full hand-recount

145 Methods of Ensuring Election Integrity Recount Purpose: To determine the actual results Method: Hand-recounting ALL of the paper ballots for the race(s) in doubt

146 Democracy Requires Action We as patriotic individuals need to: support non-partisan election integrity efforts become more informed about the FACTS help raise awareness about the need for election reform ask your elected officials to support election reform

147 dont let another questionable election go unchallenged! Democracy Requires Action Most importantly,

148 For more information, visit Either every vote is sacred, or democracy is a sham. ~David Cobb, 2004 Green Party presidential candidate Either every vote is sacred, or democracy is a sham. ~David Cobb, 2004 Green Party presidential candidate

Download ppt " The Illusion of Democracy: An Urgent Call to Action for National Election Reform An Urgent Call to Action for National Election Reform."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google