Home
  • Blogs
  • Posts
  • Tips
  • Login
  • Search


Sign up here to enjoy the
full benefits of this site.

Click here to log in.

Forgot your username
or password?

Reach out to Oregon progressives--
advertise on this site.




Please note: Paid ads on this site for candidates, ballot measures, products, etc. are not representative of an endorsement, support, opposition, etc. by the owners and maintainers of this site.

 


Vote today...

Rate our blog on BlogNetNews.com!

Home » Blogs » Ginny Ross - DFO's blog

When Democrats Ask For Money

Submitted by Ginny Ross - DFO on December 1, 2005 - 9:12am
  • Progressive Action Alerts
  • National

Published on Tuesday, November 29, 2005 by CommonDreams.org
When Democrats Ask For Money
by Susan H. Pitcairn

It happens daily: Letters and emails arrive unbidden, one after the next, urgently seeking money for various Democratic causes, great and small. Message after message warns me of what will happen if Democrats fail to win in 2006.

Because I share these concerns, I have opened my wallet time and again.

Yet never do these appeals mention the one peril that most endangers Democrats, as well democracy — corrupt elections.

Ever since Bush's alleged victories challenged by countless election watchers and analysts, I have doggedly sent dozens of messages to Congress, urging an end to "black box voting." I have joined protests and I have passed petitions. The response? Little but thundering silence, especially from those who should be leading this charge —the likes of John Kerry, Howard Dean, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Al Gore, Jimmy Carter and Hillary Clinton.

Finally, I have seen the light. It is time to send the ultimate message — no more money for Democrats until they speak out united for serious election reform.

Yes, this is a risky strategy. But it is riskier still to allow privatization of our votes and a gaping security hole in our election process to destroy our hard-won democracy. Even so, I tremble a bit as I invite other party faithfuls to join me in the unthinkable: to cut off support to those who may be our only hope in dangerous times.

So from now on, when Democrats ask for money, this is what I will send. This is what I will slip in their pre-paid envelope. This is what I will paste into the email comments box.

Furthermore, I will spread the word — until Democratic leaders finally get the word.

To the Honorable Governor Howard Dean, Chair of the Democratic National Committee, all state and county Democratic Party Chairs, Move On, Emily's List, DCCC, DSCC, www.democrats.org, all Democratic Party fund-raising groups, Friends of John Kerry and all Democrats who do not champion voting rights:

Dear Fellow Democrats,

Over my lifetime, I have been a loyal supporter and have donated a considerable amount of time and money to the Democratic Party.

Sadly, however, I have reached a crossroads. From this day onward, I will no longer offer my financial support to Democratic fund-raising groups until the party's leaders seriously address the single most important issue facing our country: electronic election fraud. For, in the brave new world of electronic vote counting, it is apparently one thing for candidates to win the people's vote —and another to win office.

Why should we Democrats continue to waste our time and money playing a game stacked against us? It is entirely immoral, and should become entirely illegal, that partisan Republicans control each of the three private corporations now recording or tabulating the overwhelmingly majority of America's votes.

The histories of such companies are tainted with criminal convictions and bribes to election officials (www.ecotalk.org/Sequoia.htm). Some say we can overcome this problem if we win by an unmistakable margin. But even "big wins" can no longer save us; three recent election reform referenda in Ohio were mysteriously "defeated" with unchallenged discrepencies of as much as thirty percent from polls conducted just one day prior to the elections.

Concerns about electronic vote counting fraud have been expressed for years. As far back as 1988, an article in the November 7th New Yorker magazine warned that it was inevitable that a presidential election would someday be stolen, given the security holes in electronic voting. Since the debacle of the 2000 election, and the subsequent counterproductive passage of HAVA in 2002, such concerns have grown exponentially.

Perhaps many of our leaders fear to tread where mainstream media will not go. Yet, can any reasonable person doubt that the media's silence may reflect the fact that they are mostly no longer independent? That their owners are also heavily invested in defense, energy, and other industries favoring Republican policies?

Many citizens have tried repeatedly to call the Democratic Party's attention to this issue, which we feel trumps all others. Yet we have gotten extraordinarily little support from party leaders, including John Kerry and Al Gore, whose likely victories were sabotaged by corrupt election processes, including electronic vote recording and counting based on secret source software and easily-hacked systems. Not to mention voter suppression and "the usual dirty tricks."

Privately, Senator Kerry and Mr. Gore may share this view, but publicly they ignore or even refute it. A recent Kerry aide disavowal to "Raw Story" was my personal "last straw: on this issue. Senator Kerry was not even aware of the recent GAO report which confirmed discrepencies in vote tabulation in Ohio in the 2004 election.

I appreciate the brave few who challenged the 2004 election last January in Congress and will continue to support such leaders. And I appreciate that Howard Dean raised concerns about electronic voting during his presidential campaign. But as DNC chair, his many messages to party members have been oddly silent on this key issue.

All told, this sad state of affairs has left many of us confused and discouraged. We are left only to speculate, our letters and concerns unanswered. Are they being threatened, or bribed? Are they all "in it together"? Are they asleep, or simply in denial? Do they just lack the courage and leadership necessary to confront this national disgrace? Or "all of the above"?

I am left with little recourse but to withdraw my financial support for Democratic groups, and to encourage fellow Democrats do the same, until the Democratic Party at every level publicly challenges this issue with a united and unmistakable voice: NO MORE ELECTION FRAUD.

No more paperless voting. No more unchallenged exit poll discrepancies. No more secret source partisan-controlled software counting the majority of American votes. And, if need be, a return to paper ballots, hand-counted, in public view, like in Europe.

Only at such a point, will I again pledge my full support to the Democratic Party. Meanwhile, I WILL support individuals of any party who fully support the rights of voters to have their votes counted.

Democracy first, Democrats second.

Respectfully,

(Name)

Susan H. Pitcairn (susan at drpitcairn dot com) lives in Oregon

»
  • Ginny Ross - DFO's blog

Dean on the machines

Submitted by Ruth Adkins on December 1, 2005 - 8:52pm.

For what it's worth, here's what Howard Dean said in his recent "Dems will win" piece:

Americans of all political persuasions are tired of and worried about the
culture of corruption that Republicans have brought to Washington and to so
many statehouses around America. We will offer real ethics reform and election
reform so that the Government Accountability Office can report in three years
that we can have confidence in our voting machines.

I don't think this is strong enough, and he only touches on it briefly, but at least he does mention it.

I guess it is up to all of us to keep sounding the alarm and getting the word out. It's tough when people like Cong. Wu refer to "conspiracy theorists" when approached by concerned constituents.

One way to frame it for those in denial might be to talk about unreliability, lack of security, lack of oversight, etc. and not bother to get them to see the elections were *stolen*--I think it is the "S" word where a lot of electeds and people like Al Franken get hung up. So let's drop that part and just keep hammering on the private ownership, the hackability, the failure rate, the need for reform when campaign officials can be secretaries of state, etc.

»

Nov 2005 Ballot Measure Election in Ohio

Submitted by Mike Litt (not verified) on December 5, 2005 - 10:56pm.

Here is a message I sent to Thom Hartmann about the recent disastrous defeat of election reform measures in Ohio:

From: littm10@comcast.net
Subject: Has American Democracy died an electronic death in Ohio 2005's referenda defeats?
Date: November 27, 2005 5:53:14 PM PST
To: thom@thomhartmann.com

Dear Thom;

Like many other progressives, I'm convinced that the 2004 election in Ohio was stolen due to the widespread use there of electronic voting machines with no paper trail. However, many of my friends have taken the view that the only thing we can do about this problem is to "win big" next time, i.e., to make the margin of victory so large that the righties won't be able to steal the election. But what happened in Ohio on Nov. 8th suggests that this is a comforting fallacy and that we've just been sticking our heads in the sand. See the following article for details. As the article states, what happened in Ohio on Nov. 8th has received virtually no media attention, even by the liberal alternative media. So I hope that you will look into this and that you will publicize it as widely as possible.

Thanks,

Mike Litt
Lake Oswego
Oregon
===================================================================================================

Has American Democracy died an electronic death in Ohio 2005's referenda defeats?

by Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman
www.freepress.org
November 11, 2005

While debate still rages over Ohio's stolen presidential election of 2004, the impossible outcomes of key 2005 referendum issues may have put an electronic nail through American democracy.

Once again, the Buckeye state has hosted an astonishing display of electronic manipulation that calls into question the sanctity of America's right to vote, and to have those votes counted in this crucial swing state.

The controversy has been vastly enhanced due to the simultaneous installation of new electronic voting machines in nearly half the state's 88 counties, machines the General Accountability Office has now confirmed could be easily hacked by a very small number of people.

Last year, the US presidency was decided here. This year, a bond issue and four hard-fought election reform propositions are in question.

Issue One on Ohio's 2005 ballot was a controversial $2 billion "Third Frontier" proposition for state programs ostensibly meant to create jobs and promote high tech industry. Because some of the money may seem destined for stem cell research, Issue One was bitterly opposed by the Christian Right, which distributed leaflets against it.

The Issue was pushed by a Taft Administration wallowing in corruption. Governor Bob Taft recently pleaded guilty to misdemeanors stemming from golf outings he took with Tom Noe, the infamous Toledo coin dealer who has taken $4 million or more from the state. Taft entrusted Noe with some $50 million in investments for the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation, from which some $12 million is now missing. Noe has been charged with federal money laundering violations on behalf of the Bush-Cheney campaign. Taft's public approval ratings in Ohio are currently around 15%.

Despite public fears the bond issue could become a glorified GOP slush fund, Issue One was supported by organized labor. A poll run on the front page of the Columbus Dispatch on Sunday, November 6, showed Issue One passing with 53% of the vote. Official tallies showed Issue One passing with 54% of the vote.

The polling used by the Dispatch had wrapped up the Thursday before the Tuesday election. Its precision on Issue One was consistent with the Dispatch's historic polling abilities, which have been uncannily accurate for decades. This poll was based on 1872 registered Ohio voters, with a margin of error at plus/minus 2.5 percentage points and a 95% confidence interval. The Issue One outcome would appear to confirm the Dispatch polling operation as the state's gold standard.

But Issues 2-5 are another story.

The Dispatch's Sunday headline showed "3 issues on way to passage." The headline referred to Issues One, Two and Three. As mentioned, the poll was dead-on accurate for Issue One.

Issues Two-Five were meant to reform Ohio's electoral process, which has been under intense fire since 2004. The issues were very heavily contested. They were backed by Reform Ohio Now, a well-funded bi-partisan statewide effort meant to bring some semblance of reliability back to the state's vote count. Many of the state's best-known moderate public figures from both sides of the aisle were prominent in the effort. Their effort came largely in response to the stolen 2004 presidential vote count that gave George W. Bush a second term and led to U.S. history's first Congressional challenge to the seating of a state's delegation to the Electoral College.

Issue Two was designed to make it easier for Ohioans to vote early, by mail or in person. By election day, much of what it proposed was already put into law by the state legislature. Like Issue One, it was opposed by the Christian Right. But it had broad support from a wide range of Ohio citizen groups. In a conversation the day before the vote, Bill Todd, a primary official spokesperson for the opposition to Issues Two through Five, told attorney Cliff Arnebeck that he believed Issues Two and Three would pass.

The November 6 Dispatch poll showed Issue Two passing by a vote of 59% to 33%, with about 8% undecided, an even broader margin than that predicted for Issue One.

But on November 8, the official vote count showed Issue Two going down to defeat by the astonishing margin of 63.5% against, with just 36.5% in favor. To say the outcome is a virtual statistical impossibility is to understate the case. For the official vote count to square with the pre-vote Dispatch poll, support for the Issue had to drop more than 22 points, with virtually all the undecideds apparently going into the "no" column.

The numbers on Issue Three are even less likely.

Issue Three involved campaign finance reform. In a lame duck session at the end of 2004, Ohio's Republican legislature raised the limits for individual donations to $10,000 per candidate per person for anyone over the age of six. Thus a family of four could donate $40,000 to a single candidate. The law also opened the door for direct campaign donations from corporations, something banned by federal law since the administration of Theodore Roosevelt.

The GOP measure sparked howls of public outrage. Though again opposed by the Christian Right, Issue Three drew an extremely broad range of support from moderate bi-partisan citizen groups and newspapers throughout the state. The Sunday Dispatch poll showed it winning in a landslide, with 61% in favor and just 25% opposed.

Tuesday's official results showed Issue Three going down to defeat in perhaps the most astonishing reversal in Ohio history, claiming just 33% of the vote, with 67% opposed. For this to have happened, Issue Three's polled support had to drop 28 points, again with an apparent 100% opposition from the previously undecideds.

The reversals on both Issues Two and Three were statistically staggering, to say the least.

The outcomes on Issue Four and Five were slightly less dramatic. Issue Four meant to end gerrymandering by establishing a non-partisan commission to set Congressional and legislative districts. The Dispatch poll showed it with 31% support, 45% opposition, and 25% undecided. Issue Four's final margin of defeat was 30% in favor to 70% against, placing virtually all undecideds in the "no" column.

Issue Five meant to take administration of Ohio's elections away from the Secretary of State, giving control to a nine-member non-partisan commission. Issue Five was prompted by Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell's administration of the 2004 presidential vote, particularly in light of his role as co-chair of Ohio's Bush-Cheney campaign. The Dispatch poll showed a virtual toss-up, at 41% yes, 43% no and 16% undecided. The official result gave Issue Five just 30% of the vote, with allegedly 70% opposed.

But the Sunday Dispatch also carried another headline: "44 counties will break in new voting machines." Forty-one of those counties "will be using new electronic touch screens from Diebold Election System," the Dispatch added.

Diebold's controversial CEO Walden O'Dell, a major GOP donor, made national headlines in 2003 with a fundraising letter pledging to deliver Ohio's 2004 electoral votes to Bush.

Every vote in Ohio 2004 was cast or counted on an electronic device. About 15%---some 800,000 votes---were cast on electronic touchscreen machines with no paper trail. The number was about seven times higher than Bush's official 118,775-vote margin of victory. Nearly all the rest of the votes were cast on punch cards or scantron ballots counted by opti-scan devices---some of them made by Diebold---then tallied at central computer stations in each of Ohio's 88 counties.

According to a recent General Accountability Office report, all such technologies are easily hacked. Vote skimming and tipping are readily available to those who would manipulate the vote. Vote switching could be especially easy for those with access to networks by which many of the computers are linked. Such machines and networks, said the GAO, had widespread problems with "security and reliability." Among them were "weak security controls, system design flaws, inadequate security testing, incorrect system configuration, poor security management and vague or incomplete voting system standards, among other issues."

With the 2005 expansion of paperless touch-screen machines into 41 more Ohio counties, this year's election was more vulnerable than ever to centralized manipulation. The outcomes on Issues 2-5 would indicate just that.

The new touchscreen machines were brought in by Blackwell, who had vowed to take the state to an entirely e-based voting regime.

As in 2004, there were instances of chaos. In inner city, heavily Democratic precincts in Montgomery County, the Dayton Daily News reported: "Vote count goes on all night: Errors, unfamiliarity with computerized voting at heart of problem." Among other things, 186 memory cards from the e-voting machines went missing, prompting election workers in some cases to search for them with flashlights before all were allegedly found.

In Tom Noe's Lucas County, Election Director Jill Kelly explained that her staff could not complete the vote count for 13.5 hours because poll workers "were not adequately trained to run the new machines."

But none of the on-the-ground glitches can begin to explain the impossible numbers surrounding the alleged defeat of Issues Two through Five. The Dispatch polling has long been a source of public pride for the powerful, conservative newspaper, which endorsed Bush in 2004.

The Dispatch was somehow dead accurate on Issue One, and then staggeringly wrong on Issues Two through Five. Sadly, this impossible inconsistency between Ohio's most prestigious polling operation and these final official referendum vote counts have drawn virtually no public scrutiny.

Though there were glitches, this year's voting lacked the massive irregularities and open manipulations that poisoned Ohio 2004. The only major difference would appear to be the new installation of touchscreen machines in those additional 41 counties.

And thus the possible explanations for the staggering defeats of Issues Two through Five boil down to two: either the Dispatch polling---dead accurate for Issue One---was wildly wrong beyond all possible statistical margin of error for Issues 2-5, or the electronic machines on which Ohio and much of the nation conduct their elections were hacked by someone wanting to change the vote count.

If the latter is true, it can and will be done again, and we can forget forever about the state that has been essential to the election of every Republican presidential candidate since Lincoln.

And we can also, for all intents and purposes, forget about the future of American democracy.

Updated November 13, 2005

--

Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman are co-authors of HOW THE GOP STOLE AMERICA'S 2004 ELECTION AND IS RIGGING 2008, available at http://www.freepress.org/ and http://www.harveywasserman.com/, and, with Steve Rosenfeld, of WHAT HAPPENED IN OHIO, available from The New Press in spring, 2006.

»

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post your events!

Does your campaign, political group, organization, etc. have upcoming events? Post them on our site.

Recent comments

  • Measure 65
    9 weeks 4 days ago
  • Thanks
    9 weeks 5 days ago
  • Americans are to blame!
    10 weeks 3 days ago
  • Oregon
    12 weeks 4 days ago
  • Welcome!
    12 weeks 5 days ago
  • GILCHRIST, TEXAS
    15 weeks 17 hours ago
  • Tiki Island
    15 weeks 6 days ago
  • Finally...
    16 weeks 3 hours ago
  • Hitchcock, Tx
    16 weeks 1 day ago
  • State and Federal officials...
    16 weeks 1 day ago

Take Action Everyday



Take Back Your County



Find your local
DFA group



The name is Bond..... Democracy Bond



Vote with your dollars



Get real news



© 2004-8 Democracy for Oregon
The views expressed on this site are those of the author, and not Democracy for Oregon.
Web site designed & hosted by Nu-Look Media

RSS feed Drupal Firefox Add to Technorati Favorites

Site Meter