There are two events in Sacramento which would be great to have representation by the Kossack community.
TONIGHT is a demonstration of an open, verifiable voting system that SHOULD appeal across all demographics, party lines, etc.
TOMORROW, the California Secretary of State's office is holding a hearing Thursday Morning to decide on certification for electronic voting machines.
More below the fold.
1) Tonight, the Open Voting Consortium presentation:
Open Voting Consortium
Power Point Presentation
By
Arthur M. Keller, PhD
Wednesday June 15, 2005, starting at 7 PM
Evelyn Moore Community Center 1402 Dickson St. Sacramento, CA
From the Sacramento for Democracy website:
The Open Voting Consortium is a non-profit organization, comprised of a group of experts who have a well-developed proposal on HOW an open source voter verified voting system ought to work, and they are asking for HAVA money to fund the development at UCSC.
Please come and find out how this voter verified system works, why it is far superior to existing systems, and why it deserves your support. For a list of endorsers (Rep. Maxine Waters, Jim March, etc..) CLICK HERE
For further information, call
Cheryl Lilienstein, California Election Protection Coalition (650) 856-0624
Karen Bernal, Sacramento for Democracy (916) 359-2151
DONATIONS WELCOMED!!
Time: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 - 7:00pm PST
Length: 2:00
Location:
Evelyn Moore Community Center
1402 Dickson St.
Sacramento, CA
2) Thursday morning, California Secretary of State's Office Hearing on Electronic Voting Machines
From the Sacramento For Democracy:
VOTING SYSTEMS AND PROCEDURES PANEL
MEETING AGENDA
LOCATION
Office of the Secretary of State
1500 11th Street
1st Floor - Auditorium
Sacramento, California 95814
MEETING DATE AND TIME
June 16, 2005 10:00 a.m.
Pursuant to Elections Code section 19204, notice is hereby given that the
Voting Systems and Procedures Panel will meet on the above date to consider the following items:
1. Diebold Election Systems
a. GEMS central tabulation software
b. AccuVote TSx DRE system
i. AccuView AVVPAT system
c. Spyrus voter card encoder
d. Key Card Tool software
e. VC Programmer software
f. AccuVote-OS optical scan system
i. AccuFeed
2. Election Systems & Software
a. Unity election management system
b. Model 100 precinct scanner
c. Model 550 central scanner
d. Model 650 central scanner
e. AutoMARK Voter Assist Terminal
f. AutoMARK Information Management System
- Federal Qualification Process Report
- Other Business
Although the meeting is scheduled to begin at 10:00 AM, people are asked to gather at 9:00 AM in front of the Secretary of State's office to organize.
For further background, information is provided by the Sacramento for Democracy:
Key Documents on Electronic Voting Systems
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/touchscreen.htm
A good introduction to electronic voting technology and related political struggles in California, including the decertification and security measures ordered by former Secretary Shelley.
Clarification of Decertification/Recertification Orders from Secretary of State Kevin Shelley
http://www.calvoter.org/issues/votingtech/sosorders_clarification.html
This is the most clear and concise presentation of the voting security measures former Secretary of State Shelley instituted on April 30, 2004 and that still underlie the ongoing debate. Most of these measures were incorporated into state law, but the measures and the principles they are based on are under attack.
(former) CA Secretary of State Shelley's Task Force Report
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/taskforce_report_4.htm#alt
As disturbing as it is informative, these recommendations by the state voting systems staff indicate that despite all the revelations to date, the institutional momentum is still in the wrong direction. Shelley was swimming against a tide of voting vendor money and inside influence with the state elections bureaucracy.
California Do Not Buy DRE Machines
http://www.countpaperballots.com/CADoNotBuyDREMachines110.htm
This graphics-packed webpage by a Georgia activist focuses on Diebold (GA is 100% Diebold DRE), but its lessons apply to all blackbox voting systems regardless of maker. Shows you where the multiple security holes are in a blackbox system.
Maryland Impounds Diebold Machines in Post-Election Investigation
http://truevotemd.org/Press_releases/html/2005-03-08_Press_Release.html
Maryland experienced election meltdown on Diebold machines in Nov. 2004 and is subjecting Diebold to tough examination, tending toward decertification.
(They could have saved themselves the trouble by attending to Diebold's record in California).
Florida Op-Scan Systems Hacked Three Ways by BBV Investigators
http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/board-auth.cgi?file=/1954/5921.html
It's not just the DREs we have to worry about. The proprietary optical scan ballot counting and tabulating software that counts the majority of American votes is just as prone to vote-rigging hacks (though at least there's a paper record if the hacks are detected in time).
A Compendium of Votes Mangled, Lost, and Switched by ES&S
http://www.votersunite.org/info/ES&Sinthenews.pdf
Diebold has gotten more bad press, but ES&S is just as bad--and they're bigger.
Voting Technology Costs and Considerations
http://www.verifiedvotingfoundation.org/article.php?list=type&type=77
Handcounting paper ballots is still the safest, most accurate and cost-effective voting technology.
In the meantime, precint-counted op-scan balloting is the next best, low-cost, high-accuracy, safer alternative to DRE systems and it is available in every county now.
Don't waste HAVA millions on blackbox junk. Educate the voting public and poll workers instead.
I apologize if these meetings have been discussed elsewhere; the meetings are tonight and tomorrow morning and wanted to spread the word.