"Everyone needs to just say no to Bush and his meglo-maniacal dreams to salvage his legacy by bombing the sh*t out of Iran."
The problem is that Bush doesn't take "no" for an answer. The only way to stop him is to impeach him as quickly as possible or cut off all funds. Of course, if memory serves me well, didn't he divert money for his macho War?
By-the-way, remember when Bush wanted $200 billion for this War? Well, here is what $200 billion could have done:
- $200 billion would hire and pay for 400,000 teachers for ten years.
- $200 billion would hire and pay for 500,000 social workers for ten years.
- $200 billion would double the amount spent by US industry on Research and Development.
- $200 billion would pay for the prescription drug cost of the elderly for seven years.
You also might be interested that Bush says bombing Iran is nothing more than "wild speculation." Anytime he denies anything, you can take it to the bank that the denial is exactly what he is going to do or has done.
If Bush bombs Iran it will be evidence of smoking mushrooms. Maybe if some Generals quit under protest it will expose the emperor's new plans. No nukes, please.
Posted by TIKI AL at April 11, 2006 03:20 AMHand Counted Paper Ballots in 2008
Document Actions
Send this page to somebody
Print this page
Sheila Parks
The right to vote, as well as the principle of “one person, one vote,” are cornerstones of our democracy. The anti-slavery, women’s suffrage, and civil rights movements as well as the expansion of voting to young people are all part of the history of electoral reform in this country. Equally fundamental is the assurance that each voter knows that her or his vote counts and is counted as intended. At this time in our history, many have lost confidence in our voting system.
The presidential elections of 2000 and 2004, and at least six contests in the mid-term elections of 2002, raised many questions about fraud and electronic voting machines. The Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) established by HAVA, and the Carter-Baker National Commission on Federal Election Reform were all created after the 2000 election to improve the electoral process. All of these efforts, however, have been detrimental to the prevention and detection of election fraud and error due to their advocacy of the use of electronic voting machines. One election reform advocate, Bev Harris of Black Box Voting, provides a particularly vivid glimpse into the scope of the problems associated with electronic voting machines. She notes that, at a special Texas meeting of the Carter-Baker Commission, “I asked a member of the Panel why they [the Commission] had not asked a single question about how hacks can be done. He said it is not necessary to understand how the system can be compromised in order to protect it.”
The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) in its nonpartisan September 2005 report on elections states in its conclusions: “Numerous recent studies and reports have highlighted problems with the security and reliability of electronic voting systems…the concerns they raise have the potential to affect election outcomes.”
Currently there is no government agency that regulates the voting machine industry in the United States. Roughly 80% of votes in the 2004 presidential election were cast and counted on machines manufactured by two private companies, Diebold and ES&S (Election Systems & Software, Inc.), both controlled by registered Republicans. There are two principal types of machines now in use: (1) touch-screens (DRE – Direct Response Electronic), on which no audit or recount is possible because they have no paper trail and (2) optical scans, which use paper ballots for the vote but are counted by central tabulators (particularly susceptible to fraud).
Although several bills currently pending in the U.S. House and Senate, introduced by both Republicans and Democrats, propose changes to electronic voting machines, as do HAVA, the EAC and the Carter-Baker Commission, none consider hand marked, hand counted paper ballots (HCPB) as a possible solution. Most of the proposed legislation advocates for what is variously called a voter verified paper audit trail (VVPAT), a voter verified paper trail (VVPT) or a voter verified paper ballot (VVPB). A discussion of the nuances between and among these systems is beyond the scope of this article, but all share a potential weakness – namely, there is no way to prevent hacking of electronic voting machines later in the process, whether a voter receives a record of how she or he voted and/or whether there is a paper trail in the machine. Mandated random audits of the vote raise the question of whether the audit will really be random and bring back flashes of Florida in 2000 and a long drawn out struggle. Will the Supreme Court again put a non-elected person in office as president of the United States?
Although much has been published on the Internet, the mainstream media have mostly chosen to ignore or dismiss the questions of fraud and error raised in relation to electronic voting machines. Notable exceptions are discussions by Keith Olbermann on MSNBC’s “Countdown” and Mark Crispin Miller’s article “None Dare Call It Stolen” in Harper’s Magazine, in which he strongly suggests that the presidential election of 2004 was rigged, much of it by electronic voting machines.
HCPB are an alternative to the current widespread and increasing use of electronic voting machines. An HCPB system of voting has the following major advantages over electronic voting machines: (1) Counting of ballots is publicly done, observed and filmed by everyday citizens who are registered voters in the precinct where the counting takes place. (2) Security safeguards are much more easily built in to protect against tampering. (3) The cost is far less.
We are a non-profit. We can't afford to buy your name from the direct mail folk. Yet you obviously have an interest in what we are doing. Please help us out.
The simplest way you can do that is to give us your email address and full name. We'll send you updates of information about no more than once every few days. To sign up for free Tikkun Mail click here.
If you REALLY WANT TO HELP US OUT, here are three more significant steps you could take.
Join the Tikkun Community and become involved with our Network of Progressive Spiritual Activism, our projects for healing Israel/Palestine, our efforts for A New Bottom Line in American society, our work to challenge the Religious Right (you get Tikkun Magazine as part of joining the Community). Or subscribe to the magazine, or donate to Tikkun.
Or you can subscribe to the content of this website. That gives you access to our web based articles. To do that, click here.
Tikkun... to heal, repair, and transform the world. All the rest is commentary. A Jewish magazine. An Interfaith movement.
There have been two recent efforts to promote an HCPB system in the United States, and a third will take place later in 2006. In 2004, voting rights activists Sharona Merel, Kaen Renick, Ellen Theisen, and Kathleen Wynne proposed federal legislation for federal offices. In 2005, four voting rights activists (this writer and three members of CASE Ohio – John Burik, Phil Fry, and Dorri Steinhoff) began work on a protocol for HCPB. Some of this writing has been modified and is included in this paper in the specifics for HCPB. In November 2006, voting rights activist Joanne Karasak plans to promote a state constitutional amendment for HCPB in Ohio. There are 18 states where such constitutional amendments are possible.
The key elements of an HCPB system are as follows: (1) Electronic voting machines are not involved in this process in any way whatsoever. (2) Nothing used in an HCPB system is purchased from companies or vendors who have ties to partisan political groups or parties. (3) Each voter hand marks a sturdy paper ballot with a black felt pen provided at the precinct. (4) The counting process happens at each precinct immediately after the polls close. (5) Each ballot is hand counted by registered voters from that precinct in full view of other registered voters from that precinct. (6) The counting process is filmed. (7) A chain of custody of the ballots and ballot boxes is specified. (8) Ballot boxes are observed and filmed as they are opened and closed and move from place to place.
Three categories of registered voters are included in this process: the official counters, the official observers of the counters, and the public watchers of the counters and observers. The hand marked, paper ballots are hand counted in full view of the public in each precinct by a specified number of registered voters in that precinct – e.g., four, six or eight voters. Half of the counters will consist of one person from each party on the ballot, chosen by the party itself; the other half of the counters will consist of registered voters, chosen by lottery. The hand counting is observed by the same number of registered voters (e.g., four, six or eight), and chosen in the same way as the counters. Counting is filmed by a video projection unit; a process will be set up to determine how the videotaping unit will be selected. The videotaping will be broadcast over closed-circuit TV and streamed over the Internet while the counting is happening. All watchers may also videotape and/or take photographs.
Each polling place must be arranged so that registered voters from that precinct (in addition to the above mentioned official observers) can easily watch the vote counting. These watchers are not to be confused with the observers of the counters. Watchers will include two registered voters from each party on the ballot, chosen by the party, and eight registered voters chosen by lottery. The polling place must be large enough to accommodate these numbers.
Even with all these safeguards in place, the chance for fraud still exists. Therefore, immediately after the first count, there will be a 100% hand counted audit of the vote, carried out in the same way as the first hand count, but in the audit, the observers will be the counters and the counters will be the observers.
Ballot boxes must be clearly marked and visible in plain view. Ballot boxes will be sealed and locked whenever they contain ballots and are not being actively used. Ballot boxes are secured from the beginning of voting until the end of counting by a chain of custody procedure. Ballot boxes never leave the precinct until after the vote is counted, audited and certified. Each time ballot boxes move from the physical control of or visual contact from one person to another, a duplicate record signed by all counters and observers must be made relinquishing and gaining control. There will be a documentation process wherein each ballot box will have a record of its handling from the beginning of the day to the end of counting. On the web site of computer science expert Professor Douglas W. Jones, there is a very clear and detailed protocol for “Ballot and Ballot Box Transportation” and “Ballot Storage.”
The call to action now is: HCPB for all federal races in the 2008 elections. This would mean hand counting just 1-3 races (the president and vice president; your U.S. senator if s/he is up for re-election; your U.S. Representative). Yes, we would need two ballots, one for these races and one for all other contests and questions on the ballots. Canada already uses an HCPB system for its federal races. Various states and municipalities already have protocols for HCPB, and one has been presented in this paper. These could easily be adapted from one jurisdiction to another. Elections are governed by state rather than federal statutes (HAVA notwithstanding). According to electionline.org, a website that provides an ongoing analysis of election reform, “Each state strikes a unique balance in allocating responsibility for elections between state and local governments. A survey of all 50 states reveals a wide spectrum of power-sharing arrangements.” There is a “Snapshot of the States” on pp. 11-14 of the Election Reform Briefing. When you begin this work, call your local Secretary of State and get the exact rules for your state.
It is time to make electronic voting machines a NIMBY (not in my back yard and not in anyone else’s back yard either) issue. To begin a movement for HCPB, ordinary citizens, registered voters, must begin organizing door-to-door with their neighbors to petition their local election officers and demand HCPB in their city or town. Although organizing could also proceed on a state level, going municipality by municipality is a good way to start, depending on your state’s laws.
Sheila Parks, Ed.D. (sheila.parks@verizon.net) is a longtime activist/organizer. She has been working against electronic voting machines for four years. Please contact her to get involved with other election reform activists working for HCPB across the country.
Please consider subscribing to Tikkun because without that financial support we won't have enough money to print the magazine and provide you with these exciting writers and thinkers. You can subscribe online or by calling (510) 644-1200.
Posted by suzanne at April 11, 2006 04:44 AMStephen Elliott over at Huffington Post makes the point that even those folks who are drinking the kool-aid about the legality of the president's ability to spontaneously declassify have got to be wondering why a president with that kind of power has allowed a costly investigation of this leak to proceed.
After all, if what he was doing was declassification in the interest of the public's right to know, he could have saved the taxpayers millions simply by stepping forward sooner.
And now, two years into the leak of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity, with millions of dollars spent on investigating this serious breach of public trust, after reporter Judy Miller spends 80 days in jail, after George W. Bush promises to reckon with anyone in his administration responsible for the leak, we're told George Bush is actually responsible for the leak after all.
So why have the investigation? Why this egregious irresponsible use of tax money from an administration so adamant about tax cuts? If the information was declassified and the president authorized it, what were we investigating? This administration is so used to not being held accountable that it means nothing to them to waste millions of tax payer dollars investigating a leak that they knew all along was their own.
Posted by AJ at April 11, 2006 05:07 AMOops, forgot my quotation marks above -- the last two paragraphs in the previous post are quotes from Elliott.
Posted by AJ at April 11, 2006 05:10 AMAJ,
The declassification issue is about Libby leaking the NIE to select reporters (at least Judy Miller and Bob Woodward), and about Libby getting the go-ahead to engage in multiple leaks of classified information both before and after the war to advance the Admin's fraudulent case for war. It's not about the Plame leak.
Fitzgerald explicitly said in his Oct. 28 press conference that
"I will confirm that her association with the CIA was classified at that time through July 2003."
That means that no one had declassified Plame's CIA relationship prior to her outing.
Posted by KM at April 11, 2006 05:36 AMKM,
Yes, you are right, of course. But Bush still could have come forward and played this as a situation in which he authorized the leak of one thing and an overzealous staffer accidentally leaked something else that he had not declassified. That would have been far more credible as a defense for Libby than "I was so busy I forgot".
They stonewalled instead and I'm not sure why. Unless Libby was unwilling to do a Tenet and take the fall. Or they underestimated Fitz.
Posted by AJ at April 11, 2006 06:05 AMI've got an itchy trigger finger. I'll shoot 'em up when in doubt. I'm no peacenik, and if someobdy attacks this nation, or is has indicated imminent intent to do so, I favor their annhilation. Having said that, if Bush really does unleash nuclear weaponry upon a nation that has not attacked us, it will be our patriotic duty to remove this administration via any and all methods. They do not warmonger in the name of self defense. They warmonger in the name of greed, arrogance, and usurpation of power.
In other words, they are traitors in the purest sense and must, MUST be treated accordingly.
Posted by God Of War at April 11, 2006 06:13 AMYes there are still dumbasses that will follow this idiot. I know some of them. I'm amazed that anybody could be that stupid. I am a believer in the cult theory.
Posted by JohnT at April 11, 2006 06:17 AMKM, AJ - the point is that the classified stuff Bush released was widely considered to be, at the least, dubious if not a plain falsehood. So Bush wasn't leaking to get the truth out, he was leaking information for political gain, having been told it was highly questionable at best. It was all for politics and had nothing to do with "truth". The president lied to us.
Posted by T2 at April 11, 2006 06:28 AMSo Bush wasn't leaking to get the truth out, he was leaking information for political gain, having been told it was highly questionable at best. It was all for politics and had nothing to do with "truth". The president lied to us.
He also lied in continuously asserting that there was no WH effort to discredit Joe Wilson.
Maybe someone can help me understand this (serious question).
If it's against the law to out an undercover agent with the CIA, then wouldn't it be against the law to declassify information that exposed the agent? Did I miss something?
Posted by A Reader at April 11, 2006 06:55 AMIf it's against the law to out an undercover agent with the CIA, then wouldn't it be against the law to declassify information that exposed the agent?
The declassified NIE didn't have anything to do with disclosing Plame's identity. Libby's defense, against perjury and lying to federal investigators charges, seems to be that he was so busy dealing with the criticisms of the Iraq intelligence that he did not recall the details of his conversations with reporters during which he mentioned Wilson's wife. Thus he testified that Cheney told him that Bush had approved the releash of info from the NIE. Libby is not claiming that Bush or anyone else "authorized" him to discuss the identity of Valerie Plame. See, it's really two distinct issues as far as Libby is concerned. He's claiming he was authorized to discuss the NIE contents because that is what the focus was and that any revelation about Plame occurred unintentionally within that context. And that there was no intentional effort on his part to mislead anyone. However, the process by which the NIE came to be released is now suspect in and of itself. The official administration spin was that the NIE was declassified on July 18th. But this is several days/a week after Libby was discussing the conents with reporters using the cover of "a former Hill staffer". Hence the questioning by the press. Why was Libby discussing the info using cover if it was not being leaked? Why did the administration release only the portions that supported its position if it was trying to get the truth out and not trying to deflect criticisms arising from the Wilson op-ed? Why did they not release the NIE summary prepared specifically for Bush that contained the clear caveat about the dissenting opinions on the aluminum tubes? The answer, as far as many people are concerned, is because they were not trying to get the truth out, they were trying to ofuscate about what Wilson pointed out. That being that there was serious problems with the uranium charges. They were engaged in a smear of Wilson and they dug into his background to find dirt on him. Their efforts turned up the fact that his wife was an analyst for the CIA who had NOC status. They used this info to spread the nepotism charge in an effort to discredit Wilson.
Thus the two issues come together indirectly. It's important to remember that Libby is not claiming that Bush authorized him or anyone to discuss Plame.
Posted by snark at April 11, 2006 07:20 AMMy question is this: why is it always up the infidels to take care of the Arab worlds problems. First we are used by the Saudis and others Middle Eastern nations because, as Bush said, "Saddam posed a threat to his neighbors."
Now the Persian Islamic extremists in Iran pose a threat to the Middle East, in particualar to the Arab Muslim nations of Syria, Saudi Arabia and others. So why are we once again being the scapegoats to take out a threat to the Arab world. Everyone knows the Arabs hate the Persians and are more against a nuclear-armed Iran than even we are. Is it because we are the infidels and the Koran forbids one muslim shedding the blood of another?
The real question is, just how long are we going to be the dupe and tool of the Arab kingdoms and shieks?
Posted by Hank at April 11, 2006 07:33 AMYou also might be interested that Bush says bombing Iran is nothing more than "wild speculation." Anytime he denies anything, you can take it to the bank that the denial is exactly what he is going to do or has done.
The message of this statement is probably a meme in Central Asia too. Unfortunately, though most experts believe Iran is three years away from a building a nuclear bomb, that does not mean that Iran cannot get a nuclear bomb. The threat created by the meme may make the getting more likely, as other Islamic partisans may well decide that the response to a nuclear attack and the continued viability of the Islamic world requires a nuclear response against the US mainland to once and for all get the US out of their affairs.
What the "bomb'em to dust" crowd in the US fails to understand is that nuclear attack on Iran also constitutes a nuclear attack on Pakistan and India who are in the fallout shadow. If we nuke Iran, tens of millions will suffer the effects of radiation in Pakistan and India. They will not be happy.
While the US is a super power, it is not all powerful. If the US keeps being so aggressive, eventually, it will piss off enough people so that the issue of "border control" between the US and Mexico will be the issue of how Americans get visa permission to leave as the US gets put under international sanctions.
We need to rediscover that we are in a neighborhood and we need to be a good neighbor or we will be a pariah.
Hank, IMO you need to factor one more thing into the equation: the Middle East is where the cheap oil is located. And most of the known reserves.
SUV Nation is therefore simply delighted to be involved in "solving" all the region's problems. In fact, we insist!
Posted by euzoius at April 11, 2006 08:09 AMjust how long are we going to be the dupe and tool of the Arab kingdoms and shieks?
Ask the bush family and/or the carlyle group.
Posted by Jim Faith at April 11, 2006 08:30 AMHas anyone heard anything about the trumped up ethics charges against John Conyers?
They are going after him because he is investigating the WH.
We need to stand behind him.
Posted by Anjha at April 11, 2006 08:58 AMeven more so than the Senate Intelligence Committee.
You're just being nice, right? Pat Roberts will go down in history on a par with Bush and Benedict Arnold.
Posted by Zappatero at April 11, 2006 09:06 AMAnjha, Here's a link.
I don't think anything has come of it, yet. Never know how long the repukes could have planted spies.
actor212, That is what I'm talking about!
Don't be too suprised if bu$he$ numbers fall are directly related to this. A lot of people vote by their pocketbook alone and they see gas prices everyday!
It cost me $100.00 to fill up this weekend.
Anytime he denies anything, you can take it to the bank that the denial is exactly what he is going to do or has done.
Judith: Bush is a totally psychotic bastard. He should be under 24-hour care. What price are the citizens of the US willing to pay for this idiot's erotic fantasy?
Posted by tempus at April 11, 2006 09:14 AMAs usual, the left isn't much different than the right in this country. Both cherry pick and spin data to their benefit and gatekeepers from both parties avoid the real murderous crime that occurred on 9/11 with old and relatively insignificant news. For those that really care have a listen to this presentation on the myths of 9/11 which begins about 12 minutes into this audio:
http://www.911podcasts.com/files/audio/20060330_David_Ray_Griffin_32k.mp3
Warning, if you do more research into this then be aware of the counter-intelligence campaign ( click link on Trojan Horses here: http://911review.com/disinfo/index.html ) that has been going on which tries to keep the truth from being more widely disseminated.
Posted by at April 11, 2006 09:18 AMAnjha, bb, that Conyers thing appears to be much ado about less than nothing. Disgruntled employees, big deal.
Just saw deadeye Dick throw the first pitch into the dirt at RFK stadium on CNN.
Posted by TIKI AL at April 11, 2006 10:12 AMI wish I had a stick with which to beat the looney spammers . .
Anyway - if you haven't read the Jack Hitt piece from the Sunday NYT on The Pro-life Nation of El Salvador, you should. It's horrific. And it's where the Republicans want to take us - where etopic pregancies are illegal to abort, the wealthy can have abortion on demand, and where medical professionals have a 'duty to the state' to report suspicious wombs.
Posted by idiosynchronic at April 11, 2006 10:15 AMApparently if you are a civil rights attorney in the US, you might just end up in Gitmo.
Who else is there? And are we next?
This is done in our name guys. In our name.
Posted by Anjha at April 11, 2006 10:24 AMIdio, I was going to go for lunch, thanks!
Is this what the Christian Right wants?
Posted by bbtb at April 11, 2006 10:39 AM"And by the way, I read the articles in the newspapers this weekend. It was just wild speculation, by the way. What you're reading is wild speculation. Which is, kind of a -- you know, happens quite frequently here in the nation's capital."
This f*cking idiot is the President of the United States? Tell me I am hallucinating!! I just don't believe this!!
Tempus
Posted by tempus at April 11, 2006 11:08 AMIt's almost as if you wrote it, tempus!
Posted by bbtb at April 11, 2006 11:17 AMShort of impeachment an attack on Iran is a done deal. Cheney's bloodlust, Bush's political/military ineptitude and the rabid xenophobia of the administration in general guarantee bombs will be dropping.
Posted by steve duncan at April 11, 2006 11:20 AMI just ran across this article on craigslist and I thought it was a parody. Sadly, it most definitely is not:
"Anyway, kind of rambling here,"
Posted by ann at April 11, 2006 11:46 AMbbtb: yes, but I did not. This is real meal deal, straight from the horse's anus.
Posted by tempus at April 11, 2006 11:48 AMThe horse's anus is less than a mile from me as I type. He's pressing senior citizens at Wesley Acres - I'm praying that his Stepford Crowd screener has missed some cantankerous old coot who'll give him what for.
Later, Dubya will be porning for the GOP right-wing, trying to get them to support hypocritical right-wing divorcee' Jim Nussle as governor.
Idio, I was going to go for lunch, thanks! Is this what the Christian Right wants?
Hey, if your lunch was supermarket catered tacos like ours was, I did you a favor. And in a word - Yes. We may have 'life of the mother' overrides, but expect that override to be construed as narrowly as possibile. In the case of an ectopic pregnancy, they have to wait until the the blastocyst ruptures the fallopian tube before putting the mother up for an aborting proceedure.
Posted by idiosynchronic at April 11, 2006 12:24 PMIdiosynchronic: I am just hoping KKKarl does not detect the 'old coot' who will trash the Moron-in-Chief. God, they are getting absolutely pathetic. Bush will not show up unless the crowd is screened. Sounds a bit like Saddam, don't you think?
Posted by tempus at April 11, 2006 12:44 PMGod forbid if another Harry Taylor shows up!
Posted by bbtb at April 11, 2006 02:17 PMbb, dam, what do you drive that can gulp a c-note in one sitting? I'm assuming it's not a Toyota Pious.
idio, eating tacos in Darth Vader's dick? How appetizing.
Posted by TIKI AL at April 11, 2006 02:38 PMTIKI, it was both my vehicles and they were empty, empty.
Posted by bbtb at April 11, 2006 02:42 PMbb, could you hear that F-16 go kaboom, or see the smoke when it crashed in Glendale today?
Posted by TIKI AL at April 11, 2006 02:58 PMIs that what that was! After that, every siren for miles was going in that direction!
Posted by bbtb at April 11, 2006 03:13 PMWhat the hell happened to the F-16? Single engine, bad news, but what caused the smack? Did the pilot bail?
Posted by tempus at April 11, 2006 03:38 PMMillers talking about those progressives and moderates like Seixon.
Posted by jondee at April 11, 2006 03:56 PMtempus, pilot bailed, is ok, this is the 4th F-16 to go down from Luke AFB in past 5 years. Last year the pilot from Singapore was killed. Bird in the intake was the cause on one of them.
25 million dollars that could have been spent wisely by Haliburton in Iraq.
Posted by TIKI AL at April 11, 2006 05:14 PMThanks for the heads up, TIKI.
Posted by tempus at April 11, 2006 05:53 PMBbtb: maybe we should show up in dress uniform at one of Georgie's screened audiences. Just imagine how much shit we could create before being sent to Gitmo.
Posted by tempus at April 11, 2006 08:20 PM