We’ve been dreading this. And you’re not gonna like it either.
It’s an entirely new can of worms in the Electronic Rape of American Electoral Democracy. The next wave — beyond the electronic voting machines, and perhaps even more alarming — in the arsenal of those out to game the system for partisan advantage.
No matter what we do, no matter how many successes, the Bad Guys — those who hate Democracy and American Values — are always one step ahead of us, it seems.
The horrifically written and, of course, ironically named “Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002” requires, as of January 1, 2006, each state to implement “a single, uniform, official, centralized, interactive computerized statewide voter registration list.”
And guess who’s writing the software for it, in California, Ohio and elsewhere? That’s right…our old friends at Diebold, Inc.
While we’ve put off reporting on much of this until now — as prompted by story out today (in the MSM of all places!) — we’ve been working on an extremely disturbing part of this story for some time relating directly to all of this out in, you guessed it, Ohio. We’ve yet to run the story for a number of reasons. But we hope to have much more on it, in all its troubling detail, in the not-too-distant future.
For today, however, we’ll stick to the report coming out of California in this morning’s Los Angeles Times which says that, since the first of year, when California’s new computerized Voter Registration Database has gone state-wide, Los Angeles County has “rejected 14,629 people — 43% of those who registered from Jan. 1 to March 15.“
The rejections occur, amongst other reasons, due to failures of exact matching between voter applications and the state’s motor vehicle registration (DMV) database to which they are now auto-magically compared. So, if a voter registers (or re-registers after moving to a new location) as “Brad Friedman” but has “Bradley Friedman” on his driver’s license, he’ll be auto-kicked out of the voter registration system and may not find out until he shows up at the polls on Election Day! That is, if he even knows where to show up since he may no longer receive sample ballots and poll location information etc. in the mail!…
Jacqueline Jacobberger, the president of the League of Women Voters in California sent a letter yesterday (posted in full at the end of this article) to California’s Sec. of State Bruce McPherson — who is credited in the LA Times story as being behind the design and installation of the new system — objecting to the new Voter Registration Database and the way it’s being implemented.
In her letter, Jacobberger writes: “We must object. Our procedures should guard against inappropriate elimination of legitimate voters from the system. It is not enough to allow them to cast a provisional ballot if they make it to the polls. Being excluded from the registration list means that they will not receive a sample ballot or a ballot pamphlet, they will not receive notice of the location of their polling places, and they will not be permitted to request an absentee ballot.”
She goes on to explain to McPherson that the comparison between databases was meant, by HAVA, to “supplement the information provided by voters when they register or re-register, thereby helping to correct an application so it can be processed and accepted, if the applicant is eligible, instead of rejected.” (emphasis in original)
Whether or not that’s what HAVA’s authors (hello, Bob Ney) actually meant when they included that provision is another matter. We’ll associate ourselves with Jacobberger’s optimistic interpretation for the moment.
With a Special Election scheduled to replace the disgraced, convicted and resigned Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham in San Diego just weeks away on April 11, the race to correct the problem somehow is even more accute. The rest of the state has primaries in June and even that timeline will likely be hard to meet if all of the “errors” are to be corrected.
U.S. Congressional Candidate Marcy Winograd, who is running in that primary to unseat right-leaning Democrat Rep. Jane Harman in California’s 36th District released a statement today expressing concern as well. “If I register to vote as Marcy Winograd and my DMV application reads Marcy A. Winograd, I may not be able to vote for myself in this congressional race,” said Winograd.
According to the Times, “McPherson’s office plans to launch a campaign in April to educate Californians about the new registration rules.” Winograd is not impressed.
“Before investing time, energy, and taxpayer money into this misguided education program,” she said, “McPherson should acknowledge the potential for disaster and scrap the program altogether.”
State Sen. Debra Bowen, who has been a long-time champion concerning issues of Electoral Integrity and Transparency in this state as chair of the State Senate’s election committee is also running against McPherson for Sec. of State this year. She warns that “We’re looking at the potential for thousands and thousands of people to lose the right to vote.”
According to the LA Times coverage today…
A new statewide database designed by Secretary of State Bruce McPherson to authenticate voter registrations has blocked otherwise valid registrations because of computer glitches, slight discrepancies in spelling or incomplete applications.
The problems have required registrars to contact voters — a time-consuming process that is already taxing some counties facing elections next month.
San Diego County is racing to rectify rejected registrations in time for the April 11 special election to fill the seat vacated by convicted Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham.
…
The new database system was installed to meet the requirements of the Help America Vote Act, the 2002 federal law designed to avoid the voting irregularities cited in the 2000 presidential race.
…
Voter information is checked against records with the federal government and state motor vehicles department. Under an agreement negotiated by McPherson and the U.S. Justice Department, California is one of nine states that use the standard of an “exact match,” in which the records must be the same to the letter, according to a national survey by the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonprofit group in New York City. Thus, “Robert Smith” and “Rob Smith” would not be considered a match.
Ashley Snee Giovannettone, spokeswoman for McPherson, who oversees elections, said a sampling of statewide registrations found that 74% were immediately verified.
As usual, McPherson’s spokesholes (where do they find these people?!) will say anything in attempt to polish McP’s turds. Even if Giovannettone’s comment is taken at face value, it means that 26% of all statewide registrations have been rejected by the new system!
…And once again, it’s the voter — who has done absolutely nothing wrong — who gets screwed in the bargain:
“These are errors that are not the fault of the voters and not related to voters’ eligibility,” said Wendy Weiser, a deputy director at the Brennan Center. “They should not prevent voters from being able to cast votes that count.”
As mentioned, we’ll have much more on all of this new Voter Registration Database mess…much more….not that we’re happy about it…in the near future.
The complete letter from, Jacqueline Jacobberger, the president of California’s League of Women Voters to Secretary of State Bruce McPherson follows…
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF CALIFORNIA
801 12th Street, Suite 220, Sacramento, California 95814
(916) 442-7215 P Fax (916) 442-7362
Web site: www.lwvc.org E-mail: lwvc@lwvc.org
March 28, 2006
The Honorable Bruce McPherson
Secretary of State of California
1500 11th Street
Sacramento, California 95814
Dear Secretary McPherson:
The League of Women Voters of California is concerned that under new state procedures for adding registered voters to the CalVoter state database, it appears that a large number of registrations are being inappropriately rejected.
The Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002 requires each state to implement, by January 1, 2006, “a single, uniform, official, centralized, interactive computerized statewide voter registration list.” Recognizing that the state of California would not have such a database in place by that deadline, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the California Secretary of State entered into a memorandum of agreement to update and use the existing CalVoter registration system for HAVA compliance. Emergency regulations were adopted by the Secretary of State to implement that memorandum.
Judging from statistics compiled since the first of this year for Los Angeles County, most of the rejected registrations and re-registrations fall into one of two categories. One type of problem occurs when individuals provide a driver’s license number or the last four digits of their Social Security number (SSN) on their registration form, but their name or birth date is not exactly the same as in the DMV records. Another type of problem occurs when individuals do not provide a driver’s license number or the last four digits of their SSN on the registration form although their other information can be matched with DMV or other state agency records.
Since many registrations are in fact re-registrations prompted by a voter’s change of address, party, etc., many of these individuals have already been on the voter registration rolls in California. However, in both types of situation, the current system does not allow any of those individuals to be included in the statewide registration list.
We must object. Our procedures should guard against inappropriate elimination of legitimate voters from the system. It is not enough to allow them to cast a provisional ballot if they make it to the polls. Being excluded from the registration list means that they will not receive a sample ballot or a ballot pamphlet, they will not receive notice of the location of their polling places, and they will not be permitted to request an absentee ballot.
We hope that a resolution to this problem can be reached quickly. We urge you to find alternatives to the current rules (data standards and match criteria) for processing registrations. If possible, that would be done by administrative procedures available to you. However, if it proves that legislation is needed, the LWVC would support that approach.
Under HAVA, it is intended that information provided by other databases, such as DMV data, will supplement the information provided by voters when they register or re-register, thereby helping to correct an application so it can be processed and accepted, if the applicant is eligible, instead of rejected.
It is a well-known problem that mistakes are made in database administration and management. Applicants transpose or forget numbers and letters, and make other noncritical errors as well. Officials likewise inadvertently make data entry errors. Databases themselves maintain these errors over time, compounding problems if databases are compared and matched with each other.
A well-run system will use the wide variety of information that is available from a number of sources to make corrections in order to maintain an accurate system. If, for example, the applicant transposes digits in his or her driver’s license number, as evidenced by the driver’s license record, a correction is made and the application is processed.
The corollary is that a failure to match the applicant or his/her data with another database must not result in the rejection of the applicant. This is important for a variety of reasons. First, matching is not an eligibility requirement under HAVA or state law. Second, the database information is likely to have significant errors. The Social Security Administration acknowledges that its data is not foolproof, data entry and other errors in DMV and voter registration agencies are well known, and simple matching mistakes—from the use of different forms of names to transposed or missing numbers—are significant. Third, the absence of information does not suggest a problem. Only positive information of a disqualifying characteristic should result in the rejection of a voter in a database matching system. Rejection must be based on a positive match of the identity of the voter, and a positive match with a disqualifying characteristic.
In the voter registration context, the failure to find a match does not provide information that the voter is ineligible. If there is no match, the voter registration application should be processed on its own terms.
If the applicant is eligible to vote, then his or her name should be entered on the list. If necessary, the applicant can be placed on a “pending” list of individuals who receive the normal election materials and services but must provide identification (if a first-time voter) or swear to his or her identity in order to cast a normal ballot.
Uniform and nondiscriminatory practices are important for any process concerning the registration of voters. We must not go into this election season burdened by processes that disenfranchise voters.
Sincerely,
Jacqueline Jacobberger
President
"The rejections occur, amongst other reasons, due to failures of exact matching between voter applications and the state’s motor vehicle registration (DMV) database"
So, since Diebold wrote the software for this system, does that bode ill for Democratic registrations? In other words, if someone registers as a Democrat, will the software determine that the registration is invalid? I would like to see the registrations that have been rejected. Assuming that all of the person’s info matches the dmv record, and the person is still rejected, what percentage of the rejections were attempting to register Democrat?
This sounds like Ohio all over again. Remember , before the 2004 election, in Ohio, suddenly tens of thousands of voters were pull off of the roles.
Expect the same strategy in California in 2006.
1) A combination of voter supression and creative programing
2) One "working diebold machine" in democratic areas?
This is why we have the Diebold certification rammed down our @##!!
So.. let’s see.. you have to be in the DMV database.. and I’m guessing the way to do that is to PAY FOR A DRIVER’S LISCENSE.. or PAY FOR AN ID?.. Uh..
Didn’t they just over-turn a law in Georgia that required a photo ID for voting? so that if you are going against a "paid to be on" database, you’re doing the same thing? The equivalant of a Poll Tax?
I’m doing phone banking for Busby tonight in 50th District election. Others doing the same might want to be able to help voters by having the following web site handy to help them locate where they are supposed to vote, and ask for a provisional ballot when they get there, if they aren’t "registered". We NEED to win this election!
http://www2.sdcounty.ca.gov/rov...ling_query.asp
You know its going to supress the minority vote
Just how many Martinez, Gonzales, White, Washington, etc, with the same first names, kinda reminds me of Choicepoint ? circa 2000 in Florida and Georgia
What does it take for the mainstream to really cover this, Good lord these cheating bastards arent even discrete.
OK, people have got to take to the streets…it’s as simple as that…
…OR…
stop joining the military and stop paying taxes
#7 you have the right idea. But I would like to modify it a bit:
Take to the streets AND stop joining the military AND stop paying taxings.
And it couldn’t hurt to own a hand gun or hunting rifle,
You never know when you’ll need it to defend yourself FROM your Government.
It seems to me that the general description of excuses for name refusal and de-listing would hurt anybody, Republican or Democrat. The question I have is whether those already de-listed represent a reasonable proportion of each party in the districts where they are trying to register. If you had a lot of Dems de-listed disproportionate to the district’s normal political demographic, big red flags ought to go up. If it is just routine "stupid computer" problems that we all might have, I would be less inclined to declare war on these companies. I would be increasingly inclined to say they are resembling George Bush: breathtakingly incompetent.
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/touchscreen.htm
Has anybody reviewed the staff reports of our last Secretary of State and the attachments on the above link?
Report on March 2, 2004 Statewide Primary Election. Scroll down until Diebold shows up.
I plan on running a parallel election most definately against David Dreier this November based on the Mississippi model. I no longer have any trust in the system.
I am Citizen Michael John Keenan
Joe Stalin would be proud. Not only have our abductors learned to steal elections seamlessly, they can now dienfranchise whole segments of the population at will – WITHOUT REPERCUSSIONS. The coup would appear to be a fait accompli.
Let’s start with "breathtakingly incompetent."
A comment from Joe Katzman over at Winds of Change sums up my thoughts fairly well:
"… whatever the rate of registration fraud is, 40%+ over LA County is pretty unlikely. And the nature of the errors being described adds fuel to that belief.
Which means this is a system that needs to get a fix so it works with human realities, not against them (as so many computerized systems do). More to the point, voting is sufficiently important that using actual elections as beta tests is a pretty stunningly stupid idea. Yet this appears to be the M.O.
Liberal or conservative, I think we can all agree that this is pretty poor performance."
The issues surrounding voter disenfranchisment under the new statewide database scheme were raised in a December 5, 2005 letter from the National Assocation of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials and the Asian Pacific American Legal Center.
The response from staff for the SOS, dated February 24, 2006, was that the issues would be reviewed after the June 6 primary.
Democracy can’t wait that long!
If they have to be entered into the motor vehicle Registration to be able to vote, it’s an unconstitutional poll tax. If they are subjecting some people to this chgeck and not others, it’s an unconstitutional poll test and a violation of equal protection under the law. Either way, this is clearly unconstiutional. It’s deisgned ot disenfranchise poor people, But this SC won’t are. The bottom line is, if it’s proven they are rigging system, what can we do? We can’t do anything and adhere to democracy. But Democracy will already be dead. So what do we do?
The saddest thing to me about rigging elections is that people lose faith in government, and no longer think of it as legit. It’s just part of the royal corporate landscape in the culture of corruption. When I read the Declaration of Independence, it makes me wonder if the people who founded this country might say it is time to start again. Many of their complaints against the abusive King of England now fit the executive branch of the Republican Party.
#13:
Of couse something can be done and still adhere to democracy. Bring a lawsuit and sue. Ask for an immediate injunction to stop this program. Meanwhile, the previous method of registering voters can be used until the court case is settled.
Mike in FLA. – re: #14 – Exactly. It’s so hard NOT to be discouraged by everything that happens. The natural human instinct is to say "Why bother?"
I come here, to this blog, to the kindred spirits that post here, quite often for courage in continuing this fight. I get sooo tired of being angry all of the time – it’s just not good for a person to deal with so much negativity for so long, it’s against our nature. Sometimes I want sooo badly to go back to my simple life, where the major decisions are what to fix for supper, what to plant, and how to work the family’s schedule and budget around everything that needs to be done while allowing time for play and relaxation.
Sometimes I wish so badly that I didn’t think so much – that I didn’t care so much.
Then I come here and read that someone else has had their eyes opened – someone who might actually be able to do something about it, if only they will – and I get my second wind.
We have to keep focusing our energy forward, and encouraging others at every turn.
The fact that the emperor is "buck nekkid" is being accepted by more and more people – we ARE in the MAJORITY now.
Feels kinda weird sometimes – but I gotta tell ya – it is SO COOL!!!
gtash #9
I think Savantster #3 shows how it would disenfranchise a portion of the population more than others when it comes to the cost of having a driver’s liscense or ID.
But the problem here has to do with the information not matching exactly. Such as the registration having a middle initial while the ID has the whole middle name. In that sense it probably is evenly distributed.
Not only is the verification system a problem, but having to have an ID or liscense is an even bigger problem.
Brad & SenatorDebra Bowen –
Today on my drive home Christine Craft on KSAC1240AM
ran this story and unlike the MSM attributed the information to BradBlog and read portions of your report and Debra’s letter to McPherson.
Senator Bowen – it was good to hear you talk on the subject with Christine. I extend my personal thanks you for all you are doing for us here in Ca. If you check back here I have a question – you mentioned something about absentee voters caught in this but I didn’t catch the connection. I’m concerned since I vote absentee, but don’t know if my info matches. I may well be a victim of the middle name/initial failure.
We (Canada) have a question on our Income Tax form asking us if we wish to provide our name, address and date of birth to Elections Canada for the National Register of Electors. Do you have that also on your tax forms?
KestrelBrighteyes #16
I know that feeling too. Early last November I got in a real funk. Nothing seemed to be changing and I just wanted to give up. I’d come here and read a couple of lines and leave without commenting or even forming an opinion. I felt hopeless in all the crap that’s going down. Then something happened – I’ll be darned if I can remember what – that revived me and brought back hope. Now I’m energized by all of the attention these faulty voting machines are starting to receive. It would be much easier to deal only with day to day life, but I guess it’s not in me to sit back and watch. I’d rather use my mind in other ways.
GWN #19
No – nothing like that at all – we can choose to give a couple of dollars to various political causes but that’s about it.
Of course now they are talking about selling our personal information from the tax forms – so much for privacy!
One word: Hackers. Genius-level, Mensa-cerified, 18-carat, USDA prime quality Super-Hackers. Let’s level the billiard table, fight fire with a better fire. If we get our own hackers, and if it turns out that our hackers hack better than their hackers, at least we’ll win a Phony Election Results War. Dirty pool? Unethical? Cheating? Too low? There ain’t no too low, not against them. Against them, it’s Whatever It Takes.
#9 – Like the river in Egypt, you’re in denial… OF COURSE this will disproportionately affect Democratic voters… for various reasons… and certainly just because the county is overwhelmingly Democratic (most in the nation). I foresaw the whole Kove Rove engineered scenario playing out when the previous (Democratic) secretary of state Kevin Shelley got run out of town, and it was up to Schwarzenegger to install a Repug – McPherson. Voila! First thing he does is get California Diebolded. And of no help is the LA County registrar of voters. She has been a rabid supporter of Diebold machines. And guess where she came from? Yep, Dallas, Texas board of elections. HELLO! Schwartzenegger’s campaign manager is an ex-Cheney aid (!), so der junior fuhrer has drunken die kool aid. So don’t expect him to help on this. And by the way, has ANYBODY ANYWHERE heard a Republican complain about Diebold machines, or the Ohio debacle, etc.? WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU?
Just got back from phone banking tonight for Busby here in San Diego. Had over 3000 contacts just in our small office tonight.
It just then occurred to me that we’re likely getting only the "registered" voters to call, and that many of those that are affected by this messup, are not even going to be in our list of voters to call (and those are the folks that need directions to the polling booths the most!).
A more sinister thought then occured to me, and it would be good if someone could check this out somehow. What if the Republican Party organizations are getting a more "complete" registered voter list, which doesn’t throw out those voters in question, and the Busby campaign isn’t getting those voters. That would mean that even though the sample of those not getting registered might be demographically evenly divided between the two parties to not be statistically significant, that the uneven access to the voting rolls between the different campaigns COULD make a big difference in how much more access the Republicans (or at least certain "connected" Republicans) have to get to this list of "affected" voters. Access to that set of voters without access by Busby’s operatives could swing the election. Any way we might be sure this isn’t happening? I’m hesitant to call the ROV on this one directly, as if there is a conspiracy, that call could trigger a coverup.
There is only one answer to this problem, and that is democratic party policy.
If the party starts working with the local districts, and mobilizes the base around a policy they want to go out and right FOR, then we can get a LANDSLIDE and overturn any amount of electoral fraud, gerrymandering and voter suppression and intimidation.
Enough is enough. We need an FDR policy and a commitment to return to constitutional government, end free trade, the whole deal.
Then people will get up and vote in sufficient numbers to shut the GOP out of politics for a decade or two.
The bottom line, is this: Voting shouldn’t be hard. Anyone making it harder is a Republican. They are called "roadblocks". Voting should be easy, and available to everyone.
WHENEVER YOU SEE A LAW ADDING MORE DIFFICULTY TO VOTING, IT’S A REPUBLICAN DOING IT! WAKE UP!!!!!!!
And let’s crunch some numbers. How many of these disenfranchised people are registered Democrat or at least NOT registered Republican? That should be in the story, that’s the most important part. Does it say this???
The whole point of exposing who’s behind it (for Christ’s sake) is to point out the % of disenfranchised voters who aren’t Republican-registered. THAT is exactly how you expose who’s behind this!!!!!!!!!
Diebold must stand for Diabolical
What can we do? Boycott Repubican Business. Hit them sharply in the pocket. The qicker it bites the better. Before they tighten the noose too tight.
Use your money as a weapon of Republican Dictatorship Destruction.
Savantster #3
Excellent point.
The current suit against the California Secretary of State could (should) be amended to add another cause of action against the database concept (probably copied from JebLand, a.k.a. Florida) for the reason you mentioned (in effect a poll tax).
There are other reasons too. The posts here hit upon some of the other reasons.
This topic hit the recommended list at Dkos. If anyone has any suggestions for activism/solutions, please stop by and add them to the mix.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2.../30/103433/106
Thanks.
It looks Bruce Mc Phearson is running the elections just like J. Kenneth Blackwell (Secretary of State In Ohio).
In Ohio, Whoops, we just dropped 175000 votes off the roles (in democratic areas).
Diebold systems everywhere with working ones only in republican districts.
Closed doors when the Gems tabulators are fired up. (BTW, do these systems have wireless enabled?, I know they are NOT OPEN Source)
Thats the plan for the Republicans for taking over California elections
How do stop this?
1) Write/Cal/Email your assembly person and Senator. Tell them that Bruce is in complete violation of California law. He has certified systems illegally (not certified by the Federal Government), has not tested recommend patches, has not shown any suggested security processes. He is using the election (as best case) for an alpha test of his Debolt system.
2) Write/Call the editors of every paper in your county, demanding a paper vote only, citing New Mexico’s dumping of evoting along with Maryland. Noting the disasters in Texas and California
3) Write the local/call the local elections officials. Find out if they the voting machines go home before the election (even though they are sealed).
They are programming the 2006 election today.
Please help stop the new Republican voting architecture today.
K-brighteyes- I feel EXACTLY the same way, so thank you, and thank you Bradblog for covering the election issues like no other- this feels like another sock in the gut, I’m honestly doubled-over in horror at this latest example of shameful, criminal, anti-american activity… DOWN WITH DIEBOLD! Also, if anyone’s had to deal with the DMV in Cali, and I know the DMV sucks everywhere, I wouldn’t doubt if more than half the problems stem from their end- they take incompetence to a whole new level, on par with the President and Co., but until now relativeley harmless…
Brad, how do we know that it’s Diebold who built the CA database? You say it, but with no link.
It wasn’t in the LA Times story, or the press release from Bowen’s office — I dont find confirmation with a google, I find info about the CalVoter "statewide voter registration database" project at the Sec’y of State website — looks like ES&S might’ve been involved initially in that.
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/elections_q.htm
got a link for me?
While I agree with most of the points made today…
California Law requires ALL adults to have a photo ID. Thus the CA DMV should have a record of all legal Californians. Photo IDs are already required and yes, you have to pay a fee.
To cross check voter registratin against this list would seem logical. The flaw is in the nature of the DMV database, you can’t just call DMV and request a new CDL or CID everytime you change addresses, thus the question you get when you present your CDL, "is this information current?", because in a state where the average HOMEOWNER, not to mention RENTER, moves every 6 to 7 years you can bet the database is always outdated.
These are not arcane facts, the CA SOS knew of this from day one… He has been suborned.
As to whose ox will be gored…
My guess is that the Dem/Ind rate will be about 85% of the total, due to socio-economic factors…Republicans don’t move as often as Dems, as they have no need to.
It should be noted that this system would also eliminate double registered voters, people who have registered at more than one legitimate address. In most of the cases that have come to light, these are people who vote absentee from the vacation home and then go to the polls at "home".
In a case close to home, my father was capable, in 2004, of casting ballots in both California and Florida as he requested absentee ballots in California not knowing if circumstances would alow him to properly register from his new home in Fla. As it tuned out the CA Absentee ballot was not needed, but if submitted it would have been counted. This is a larger problem than thought… one that a state-based verification system would not catch.
I am a partisan Democrat. Google it, privacy is dead, my tracks are all over the Internet… With that said, I am going to say something that is probably gonna get me in trouble…
Taken as a whole, immigration, voting rights, welfare fraud, identication theft etc…
Maybe it is time for a national ID system.
We already have one that we say we don’t use, but we do… the current system is fraught with opportuniy for fraud, it is broken. All of our rights are endangered by the continued distrust from both sides of the political divide, Dems worry about voter disenfranchisement, Reps about dead people voting and Dems who vote early and often…
Politics being the art of compromise, we must build in safeguards while we give up what is a great but empty principle, "NO NATIONAL ID", for the end of disenfranchisement and the elimination of voter fraud.
These should not be "partisan" issues… Respect for Law is a double-edged sword, cuts both ways…
We must never forget that the word illegal means that the respect for the Law has been ignored, and the Law violated.
Doesn’t matter whether the subject at hand is voting, FISA, Gitmo or immigration. You can’t have it both ways.
RG Johnson
San Jose CA
You want to see some real manipulation of the disenfranchising of voters? Look at what is happening to those displaced by Hurricane Katrina, it makes what’s happening in California look like a mere glitch in comparison.
The republican attempt to simply make the City of New Orleans over to their liking is nothing more than a blatant, in-you-face, coup.
"California Law requires ALL adults to have a photo ID. Thus the CA DMV should have a record of all legal Californians. Photo IDs are already required and yes, you have to pay a fee."
So, it’s illegal in Cali to be a poor adult with no car?
wow.. so much for liberal.
Jennifer P #34
Here is a thread at BBV which discusses voter registration programs. They have records of billings for Diebold’s VoteRemote in California. This is a suite or programs for processing mail-in ballots that works together with Diebold’s DIMS voter registration program. It’s not completely clear to me from this thread whether or not CA uses DIMS.
I’ve posted to that thread to ask for an update, since the last post was in July.
See here for an informative thread about voter databases in general. Much food for thought here. Though it doesn’t specifically address CA it may give you ideas for more questions to be asked.
Jennifer P,
More refs here for CA election programs in use, including Diebold. This is from the SoS Elections Division April 2004 but you can tell where to go for updated information.
It seems that different counties used different programs and it’s not clear how they may have consolidated to meet HAVA requirements.
Catherine A — can you help out with the BradBlog links in your post, above? I’m getting a page cannot be found error.
Thanks!
Renska,
Try this one here. It’s the pdf version of the same info; the link that didn’t work was for the html version.
I got this by googling Diebold DIMS California CA.
Savantster
No, it is not illegal to be a poor adult with no car in California… we got lots of ’em, used to be one myself…
Yes, it is illegal to be an adult and not have an ID in California. Poor or otherwise…as well it should be. The fee is minimal, 26 bucks, as I recall.
I was once arrested in the 1970’s, while hitchiking near Mendicino, for not having my ID…I was 18 and didn’t drive. Might have been the long hair… or the leather…or heck, it might have been just the Law. I was detained until identified, got a nice breakfast next morning and a ride to the county line…no beatings just a warm bed and a much needed shower.
As to liberal, please see last paragraph, illegal is illegal, not conservative, not liberal, just illegal…
Don’t like the Law? Work the system… I would bet that every state has a similar law. And should!
RG Johnson
San Jose Ca
When people’s registration is rejected, are they immediately informed? Or do they show up Nov. 2 and are told they are not registered?
Chicago Ballot Chaos
When people’s registration is rejected, are they immediately informed?kit
I have done wrong operation.
I have done wrong operation.
I keep tellin people…. it will come to armed revolution. Democrats will never win another election. Get ready. Revolution is better than dying in the camps they’re building for us.
The proof of this pudding will be in Nov. 06. And then it will be obvious to all.
R. G. Johnson #42
California has gotten into Constitutional trouble with its ID requirements before the US Supreme Court in the past.
I think that your blanket requirement for an ID is going to be unconstitutional in many scenarios.
For instance, take a case where a police officer has no probable or other cause to believe an individual has committed or is about to commit a crime, can the officer ask for identification?
If the officer cannot ask for it in the absence of any indication of wrong doing, why is an ID required?
I think that law will be held unconstitutional in many contexts.
There is a right to anonymity under the US Constitution which cannot be taken away on whim.
Write your local and national representatives that items 1) and 2) are a start and may be the only way to keep vote acquisition, counting, and delivery honest, under constant public scrutiny, and under public ownership.
1) Insist on "Open Source" programming of all computers associated with official election processing. A company awarded a voting contract should not have to re-invent the wheel, create new tests, and add even more costs to the election process. Every time this is done, the integrity of the election process is put at needless risk and extra cost.
Each successive election should be able to build on the technology and knowledge that preceeded it. This is a matter of contracting the WORK…and not giving away the intellectual property. Companies do this all the time with temporary contract workers and government bodies can and should do the same…the workers do NOT own the programs….the company that hired them does…in this case, it would be the governmental body/the public that owns the IP, and simply hires the company(ies) to do the work. Open Source programming and licensing assures that this will happen.
2) Prohibit any election contracts that involve "proprietary" processes, programs, programming, hardware, etc. Anything that allows a company to hide results, or add more costs to post-election analyses should be illegal. Such proprietary mechanisms effectively establish monopolies, as the established company has an automatic economic advantage when it comes to bidding for the contract..
Contracts should specify, contain, and manage any potential costs up-front. This will help avoid claims by a company for added "processing" fees to deliver vote data as is being done in Alaska. Such follow-up work should be contained within the original contract, and bids should take that into account.
==============================
As for general economic incentives…
3) Where possible, boycott or limit business with banking institutions that use Diebold ATMs, Teller Windows, Safety Deposit Boxes, Processing systems, and Vaults.