GuvWurld

Meet The New Blog, Same As The Old Blog

2006-05-31T23:15:00.000-07:00

In just a few hours I will be interviewed on the nationally syndicated Thom Hartmann radio show. We'll be discussing election conditions, peaceful revolution, and my new book We Do Not Consent. If you are in Humboldt County, tune in at 11am to KGOE, 1480-AM. The show airs on over 80 radio stations plus it streams online so if you are outside of Humboldt, please click here to find the best way to get the signal.

This is the broadest exposure yet for these ideas. Obviously it is important that the many thousands of Hartmann listeners know where to get more of this information and how to continue receiving it on a regular basis. I do not want Hartmann to be spelling out G-U-V-W...since the word GuvWurld is difficult to remember and to spell correctly. As a result, this will likely be my final post here at GuvWurld.

The advocacy journalism work of GuvWurld will transition uninterrupted at my new blog http://WeDoNotConsent.blogspot.com. If you are a GuvWurld subscriber, please visit the new site and enter your e-mail address to continue receiving dispatches when the site is updated. You will receive only one more reminder after this. If you do not opt-in to WDNC then you will not receive e-mail updates from me.

We Do Not Consent, the blog, is also set up to process payments automatically for the sale of We Do Not Consent, the book (you can also click Buy Now at the top of GuvWurld). A free .pdf version of We Do Not Consent is still available here: http://tinyurl.com/rlnr2.

This is quite the moment in time and I have much more I'd like to share. But it will have to wait. It seems like there ought to be some significant point to make in wrapping things up here at GuvWurld, but this isn't really any kind of an ending at all. So for now I'll just say what we all want: PEACE.

If you don't want PEACE, what do you want?

PRESS RELEASE: Berman to Appear on Hartmann Show

2006-05-29T23:02:00.000-07:00

May 29, 2006

TO: All media

FROM: Voter Confidence Committee

CONTACT: Dave Berman, 707-845-3749, or info@voterconfidencecommittee.org

LOCAL AUTHOR DAVE BERMAN TO APPEAR ON NATIONALLY-SYNDICATED THOM HARTMANN RADIO PROGRAM TO PROMOTE NEW BOOK, VERIFIABLE ELECTIONS

Local author Dave Berman, whose new book, We Do Not Consent, grew out of his two-year campaign to ensure verifiable elections, will receive statewide and national exposure on Thursday, June 1, when he guests on the nationally-syndicated Thom Hartmann radio program. The program can be heard in Humboldt County on KGOE, 1480 AM. Berman's interview is scheduled for 11 a.m. (Pacific Time).

Berman is also expected to discuss protest actions that his Voter Confidence Committee may take at the June 6 election. The VCC has a long-standing campaign advocating transparent, secure and verifiable elections, which cannot be achieved with the discredited Diebold optical scanners used for vote counting in Humboldt County.

Hartmann is a progressive radio talk show host with a growing following. He is heard on more than 80 stations in 29 states from California to North Carolina as well as on the Sirius satellite radio network. He also appears on the Air America progressive radio network. KGOE airs the Thom Hartmann Show locally from 9 a.m. to noon on weekdays. Programs are also archived online at http://www.thomhartmann.com.

Officially launched in late March, Berman's new book (the full name is We Do Not Consent: Peaceful Revolution and Other Provocations from the GuvWurld Blog) is a compilation of essays originally posted on his blog, http://guvwurld.blogsot.com. The book is dedicated to "conscientious objectors everywhere" and covers topics such as election integrity, U.S. involvement in Iraq, media reform, propaganda, and strategies for large scale social change.

Berman also plans to announce the launch of a new blog, http://WeDoNotConsent.blogspot.com, where he will continue the work started at GuvWurld. The new blog will be able to process purchase transactions for readers wishing to buy a hard copy of We Do Not Consent. The book will continue to be offered as a free .pdf download.

In the introduction to his book, Berman says that "GuvWurld is advocacy journalism. That means I often write about the work I do for change in the world and I write in a way that promotes these efforts. To judge whether my advocacy journalism is successful, I consider only whether my intended real-world results are produced."

The Voter Confidence Resolution (VCR), which was adopted by the Arcata City Council last year, "is so far my best example of successful advocacy journalism," he said. It took Berman more than a year of organizing and doing re-writes before a majority of the Council affirmed, "the Declaration of Independence refers to the Consent of the Governed as the self-evident truth from which Government derives 'just Power'...elections are [currently] conducted under conditions that prevent conclusive outcomes, [therefore] the Consent of the Governed is not being sought. Absent this self-evident source of legitimacy, such Consent is not to be assumed or taken for granted."

A protest at the June 6 election in Humboldt County would focus on the reporting of election results by Diebold optical scanners, which use illegal "interpreter code" to count votes. This computer programming is the proprietary property of the machines' manufacturer, Diebold, and is vigorously guarded and protected as secret. Thus, there is no way to verify the results--except to count the ballots by hand, which the Voter Confidence Committee believes is presently the best way to restore transparency, security and verifiable accuracy to election results.

More information about the Voter Confidence Committee is at http://www.voterconfidencecommittee.org.

# # #

Eureka Councilmember Leonard Speaks Out For Verifiability

2006-05-27T16:24:00.000-07:00

Saturday's Eureka Times-Standard (archive) and Eureka Reporter both cover comments made by Eureka City Councilmember Jeff Leonard who is challenging the legitimacy of a recent public opinion poll. The topic of the poll and the players in the story are of local interest, but for the sake of GuvWurld, it is this quote in the T-S that brought this story alive:

"If CREG [Citizens for Real Economic Growth] commissioned a legitimate survey of public opinion on this issue, that information should be part of the public record so the City Council can use it as part of our decision-making process," Leonard said. "The community should be allowed to verify whether or not their polling was legitimate."

Let's try a slight variation on that and see if it is a stretch or if Leonard has come around to the GuvWurld position:

If the Elections Department conducted a legitimate survey of public opinion (election), those votes should be part of the public record so the City Council can use it as part of our decision-making process. The community should be allowed to verify whether or not their election was legitimate.

My variation is materially the same as the Councilmember's original statement. If we don't count the ballots, we cannot know who won.

Currently, Humboldt ballots are "counted" by optical scanners. However, the ballots do not simply go in one end of the scanner and out the other with a report of the results. In the scanner, the votes recorded on the ballots become data acted upon by computer programming, specifically illegal "interpreter code." The vote information is transformed into AccuBasic, the proprietary language of the scanner manufacturer Diebold that neither the public nor elections officials are permitted to examine. Let's pause here for a second.

"The community should be allowed to verify whether or not their polling was legitimate." - Eureka City Councilmember Jeff Leonard

We should be allowed to verify, but are we? Our system is supposed to have checks and balances and accountability. Instead, blind trust is required to accept the results according to Diebold. Worse, we have no demand for verification from the media. Instead, we have faith-based reporting about faith-based voting. There is no rational basis for confidence in the unverified results reported.

Fortunately we have paper ballots that can and should be counted by hand ("verified"). It is an old tradition, therefore perhaps even considered conservative. Or if you are progressive, it might seem like everything old is new again, what comes around goes karma, etc. And if you are like me and apparently Eureka Councilmember Jeff Leonard, it is as simple, basic and fundamental as the public deserving access to public records so we can make informed decisions. In this case, the choice is whether to accept or reject the legitimacy of an election.

Last June, when California's special initiatives election was announced for November, the Voter Confidence Committee put out a press release saying we would not accept the results as conclusive. Look for more along these lines in the next 10 days and help your friends and neighbors to understand that unverifiable elections are just simulated competition, like professional wrestling or the Harlem Globetrotters.

Tune In 6/1, GuvWurld on Thom Hartmann Radio Show

2006-05-24T18:01:00.000-07:00

On June 1 at 11am PT, I will be on the nationally syndicated Thom Hartmann radio show talking about my new book, We Do Not Consent (.pdf). Thom's show airs on the Sirius satellite radio network as well as Air America and a total of more than 80 stations in 29 states. There are multiple online listening options too. See this page for details.

Inherent Uncertainty

2006-05-21T13:27:00.000-07:00

On the heels of the latest BlackBoxVoting.org reports filed by Harri Hursti, and covered in depth by BradBlog.com, Newsweek via MSNBC.com now has an article called "Will Your Vote Count in 2006?" The piece strives for "balance" by including the following opposing quotes:

"If Diebold had set out to build a system as insecure as they possibly could, this would be it," says Avi Rubin, a Johns Hopkins University computer-science professor and elections-security expert.

Diebold Election Systems spokesperson David Bear says Hursti's findings do not represent a fatal vulnerability in Diebold technology, but simply note the presence of a feature that allows access to authorized technicians to periodically update the software. If it so happens that someone not supposed to use the machine--or an election official who wants to put his or her thumb on the scale of democracy--takes advantage of this fast track to fraud, that's not Diebold's problem. "[Our critics are] throwing out a 'what if' that's premised on a basis of an evil, nefarious person breaking the law," says Bear.

Note that "fast track to fraud" are the words of Newsweek writer Steven Levy. That's nice, suggesting it could happen. But instead of being forced to prove that Diebold machines are secure, which he can't do, Baer is allowed to make the argument that the machines are not secure but the company bears no responsibility for any breach. This is precisely at issue in Denver right now where a City Auditor made news for complaining about the terms of the contract he just signed with Sequoia limiting that company's liability for their machines' potential (inevitable) failures.

So where does this Newsweek article take us? Levy is trying to comment that we should be concerned but he doesn't quite grasp the problem. The closest he gets is at the very end:

In other words, it's unlikely that every voter using an electronic voting device in 2006 will know for sure that his or her vote will be reflected in the actual totals.

It is not a matter of being unlikely, and it is not an open question, as the article's title suggests. Unverifiable voting, by definition, produces inconclusive outcomes. We are being asked to have blind trust which will continue to result in a lack of unanimous acceptance of election results. There is no rational basis for confidence in the results reported from elections in America today.

I wouldn't expect Newsweek to offer such paradigm-shattering analysis. Instead, while raising questions and feeding the existing and growing doubt, the effect is to further reinforce the inherent uncertainty which leaves ordinary Americans divided about what constitutes reality. Rather than stating unequivocally that we cannot know for sure the true outcome of an election held under these conditions, Newsweek appears to be giving ground coveted by those seeking to wake up the masses to America's election problems. This classic technique is called a limited hangout.

* * *

GuvWurld correspondent Dennis Kyne was back in the news this week. Amy Goodman interviewed Kyne's lawyer, Gideon Oliver, on her Wednesday Democracy Now program (transcript).

They discussed the Justice Department's new criminal investigation of the NY police department's work during the Republican National Convention in 2004. As chronicled here at GuvWurld, Kyne was falsely arrested, imprisoned, and eventually put on trial. Charges were dropped and the case dismissed after video evidence showed officers had perjured themselves about the circumstances of Kyne's arrest. This made the front page of the New York Times. At the time, 91% of the 1670 convention arrest cases that had run their full course "ended with the charges dismissed or with a verdict of not guilty after trial."

When we can show that cops are lying to get convictions, or simply to cover their wrongful behavior in the field, and we know how often defendants do not have the benefit of video evidence against their accusers, we have identified another type of inherent uncertainty. If you are a juror, think very carefully about what constitutes a reasonable doubt nowadays. Everything is geared toward making certainty impossible. I need no further cause to support local efforts here in Humboldt for the creation of citizen police review board.

Palo Alto Defers On VCR, McPherson Rejects Vote-PAD

2006-05-10T02:12:00.000-07:00

On Tuesday night, the City Council of Palo Alto (.pdf) had its first discussion of the Voter Confidence Resolution (VCR). The Council considered the version of the VCR (.pdf) adopted in February by Palo Alto's Human Relations Commission (HRC). Commission Chairperson Shauna Wilson has taken the lead in pushing the voter confidence message in Silicon Valley and we need to get her more support. Following Tuesday's meeting, Shauna sent me these observations, printed with permission:

The Voter Confidence Resolution was sent back to the HRC for revision. Some members of Council did not like the call for Election Day to be a National Holiday, Equal time provisions, or Preferential voting. With some tweeking I think we can draft a resolution that would pass the City Council. I am not willing to drop the Equal time provisions as I believe the FCC not enforcing that aspect has greatly contributed to our deteriorated electorate.

Two members of the public spoke to the issue. I'll put the revison [sic] on the HRC agenda for June and hopefully have it sent back to Council by the end of June. When I spoke at the Council meeting tonight, I expressed my concern about the lag time between when the HRC passed the VCR and the City agendized it. I found out it was City staff not preparing the CMR (CIty Manager's Report) that caused the delay. I think we'll see the revised VCR before the City Council before July.
-Shauna

My friend Emily, who has also done a considerable amount to promote the VCR, traveled from Santa Cruz to speak at Tuesday's meeting in Palo Alto. She posted these comments on Democratic Underground:

Our agenda item wasn't over until nearly 11:00 p.m., not because they spent hours debating it but because it got pulled from the "consent agenda" (the list of things that get approved without discussion) and put at the end of the regular agenda.

Most of the nine council members were in support of the idea of the council making a statement about the importance of verifiable elections, but nearly all felt the VCR was too broad. They sent it back to the Human Relations Commission, which had drafted the VCR based on Arcata and Berkeley versions but also added some of their own ideas, for major revision.

Notably, Council Member Peter Drekmeier, an election integrity activist before he ran for the P.A. City Council, expressed support for the VCR as it stood.

It looks like they would pass a much narrower version, which I suspect the HRC will agree to draft, though I don't know anything about the politics of that commission.

I want to make a trip down to the Bay Area to promote the VCR and my new book, We Do Not Consent. I need help setting up speaking gigs in San Francisco, Palo Alto and Santa Cruz. If you can help with logistics, please write me: blog@guvwurld.org. Meanwhile, copies of the book are getting out and I am hopeful to get more media presence soon.

I have an article coming out any day now in Green Focus, the quarterly newspaper published by the Green Party of CA. Like several previous articles I've written for the Humboldt Advocate (.pdf), Arcata Eye, and Eureka Times-Standard, this new essay emphasizes election reform as a tactic toward peaceful revolution (.pdf) rather than its own end goal. I confess that I am still struggling to help others see this as the elephant in the room. With bogus elections and no right to privacy or speech or due process, the inescapable conclusion must be that peaceful revolution is necessary, NOW!

One small but encouraging sign emerged last Thursday at the monthly meeting of the Humboldt County Election Advisory Committee. Clerk/Recorder and Registrar of Voters Carolyn Crnich announced that Secretary of State Bruce McPherson had forbidden Humboldt and other counties from using Vote-PAD, the non-electronic paper ballot assistive voting device. Humboldt had recently committed to a "pilot program," making a good faith effort to comply with the disabled voter provisions of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). Many aspects of this McPherson decree are maddening, so bear with me as I build up to the encouraging sign. According to section 19211 of the CA Election Code, McPherson should not be able to block Humboldt's experiment with Vote-PAD:

The governing board, without formally adopting a system that it might lawfully adopt, may provide for its experimental use at an election in one or more precincts. Its use at the election is as valid for all purposes as if it were lawfully adopted.

Crnich said she cited this section of the Code and simply met with further insistence that the devices not be used, thus ensuring Humboldt's non-compliance with HAVA. So should we be out of compliance and offer disabled voters the benefit of Vote-PAD and the ability to vote privately and independently, or should we remain non-compliant and disenfranchise disabled voters?

At this point, Humboldt County Supervisor Jimmy Smith expressed his frustration with "state and federal mandates" that interfere with the local government's ability to make decisions. I validated him, noting how refreshing it is to hear this acknowledged. It is common and obvious, I said, and rather than wind up in a non-compliant position by default, we should be more purposeful in resisting and rejecting this outside control over our local decision making. This argument is straight from Blueprint For Peaceful Revolution and watching Smith nod encouragingly struck me as a very good sign.

* * *

Update: 5/11/06 11pm

The following are not official minutes, and reflect only the first hand observations of GuvWurld correspondent Emily Levy.

Palo Alto City Council Meeting 5/8/06

Council Members (all present): Bern Beecham, Peter Drekmeier, Ladoris H. Cordell, Yoriko Kishimoto (vice mayor), Judy Kleinberg (mayor), Larry Klein, Jack Morton, Dena Mossar, John Barton.

As soon as Shauna Wilson’s presentation concluded, Beecham moved to deny the request to approve the VCR. This was immediately seconded (by Mossar, I think).

Beecham said that the VCR calls for the city to “follow above guidelines,” and it’s unclear how they’d do that, and that the “therefores” don’t make sense. He expressed concern about costs to the City if election day became a national holiday.

Mossar said that despite her awareness of concerns about elections this resolution is troublesome. She would support a council letter to registrar with concerns about elections, but not this resolution.

Drekmeier talked about exit poll discrepancy and other election problems. Hey said that they key point of the resolution is voter-verified paper ballots, which he stated is a bipartisan issue. He noted that what the HRC was requesting was for the city attorney to draft a resolution, and supported that.

Klein said resolution needs more work and that it sounds like a canned resolution from some group or other. That deeper analysis needs to be done. He said that the part about supporting clean money laws is too vague. He questions the part about national standards because California often does things better than national standards. He said that VVPB “may or may not be the way to go.” He said the HRC should have consulted with county supervisors. He said equal time provisions weren’t voluntary but were imposed by the FCC and that internet communication makes the equal time provisions less important. Regarding preferential voting and proportional representation he said this would be a “dramatic change in the political system” and can’t be dealt with in this way (the resolution).

Shauna did get to respond to him briefly. She said the resolution is not canned, but was based on resolutions from Arcata and Berkeley combined with other research. She said the clean money part was left vague because at the time the HRC passed the VCR it was unclear what would happen with the clean money bill in the state legislature, that it’s now AB530 and is currently in the State Senate elections committee. She said the HRC contacted the county which is taking some action regarding VVPAT but not on open source. Regarding the national holiday she said it could be taken out. She said proportional representation “would be nice.” About equal time she noted that the airwaves belong to the people and people have a right to access information via the airwaves.

Kishimoto said she would welcome a cleaner, more focused resolution regarding a verifiable voting system.

Barton echoed Kishimoto and expressed concern about the money to pay employees for a national holiday. He said #8 and *1 need further thought. He said on p. 1 “not the last whereas but the two above it” have something in them that is not supported by fact and require further evidence.

Drekmeier encourages HRC to come back and address the feedback and said he supports VCR as is.

Cordell suggested the resolution be pulled tonight but return to HRC for reworking.

Attorney said it couldn’t be pulled but could be tabled.

Morton moved to refer it back to the HRC. Kishimoto seconded and notes that a new version should focus on voter security and assurance elements.

Kleinberg noted that it’s awful how low voter turnout is and that people wouldn’t necessarily use a voting holiday to vote. She asked how the HRC can inspire more people to vote in Palo Alto.

The motion to send the VCR back to the HRC for revision passed 8-1. Beecham voted no.

respectfully submitted by Emily Levy

Palo Alto, CA City Council Takes Up Voter Confidence Resolution

2006-05-04T23:42:00.000-07:00

May 8 Agenda (.pdf)
http://tinyurl.com/hy8ks

Recommendation to Palo Alto, CA City Council from Human Relations Commission (.pdf)
http://tinyurl.com/gjm6b

Voter Confidence Resolution as adopted by Palo Alto Human Relations Commission (.pdf)
http://tinyurl.com/lxzjg

Voter Confidence Resolution template (adopted by Arcata, CA City Council)
http://tinyurl.com/amryg

The HRC's recommendation is to have the Council direct the City Attorney to draft the resolution. I don't think there will be real debate or public comment, but I could be wrong. Attendance is definitely recommended. I think most likely they will accept the recommendation, the City Attorney will draft the resolution, and a real debate will occur at a future meeting.

Public Service Announcements

2006-04-27T00:44:00.000-07:00

I do not like going this long between GuvWurld Blog entries but sometimes life intrudes and kills my computer. Actually, it seems I had a somewhat rare experience that I'll share here in hopes of sparing others this hassle. Consider it a GuvWurld public service, followed by several other announcements that also fit the bill.

Microsoft Outlook: It is very important to use the auto archive feature of Microsoft Outlook. I was not doing that. Ultimately my outgoing mail could not move into my sent folder because I had reached the limit that the folder could hold (something like 16,350 messages). As a workaround, it is easy enough to make a new folder and move some of the messages. But I hit a second limit which was the overall size of my .pst file. That means Outlook could no longer display my e-mail, calendar or contacts, the data contained in the .pst file that only opens in Outlook. It seems different versions of Outlook can handle different size .pst files. At a little over 2 gigs, Outlook 2000 will crash and so I've "upgraded" to 2003. Using auto archive will still leave messages easily accessible while also preventing encroachment upon these limits. Of course, many will say just don't use Microsoft, and we'll let them have the last word here.

Humboldt County dismissed from election lawsuit: On Wednesday, VoterAction.org announced through PRNewswire that Humboldt and six other counties have been dismissed from the California Voters Lawsuit (Holder v. McPherson). The press release strikes an excited and celebratory tone in noting that these seven counties will not be using Diebold touch screen "voting" machines. I too recently touted the flash of enlightenment displayed by Humboldt's election department in choosing not to use the DREs. However, virtually all of the arguments in this lawsuit apply to the optical scan technology that Humboldt will be using. I'm still seeking legal representation to take the case against interpreted code to a Humboldt Judge to request an injunction against their continued use.

Voter Confidence: With Humboldt's continued intention to use secret and illegal vote counting machines, the Voter Confidence Committee is planning another Parallel Election (PE) to double check the accuracy of the June 6 primary results. This will only work with lots of citizen volunteers. Please join us for a parallel poll worker training session on Monday, May 1, at 6pm at the Redwood Peace and Justice Center, 1040 H St. in Arcata. Fore more info: info@voterconfidencecommittee.org

Board of Supervisors: I wanted to mention the PE, among other things, at Tuesday's Board of supervisors meeting. Unfortunately, I misread the agenda and failed to request that the item be removed from the Consent Calendar. I understand that Tom Pinto spoke later, during the public comment, asking the Supes to add information on the mandatory 1% manual audit to the County website. Tom works in the district attorney's office and typically prefaces comments to speak only for himself. On Tuesday he also suggested that County employees be allowed as paid volunteers for the hand count. Right on.

9/11 Truth: This announcement also from Tom:

Americans have the right to ask questions about 9/11 and demand the release of the evidence that will address these questions. Don't confuse your sympathy for the victims with your beliefs about what happened that day. Join the northcoast 9/11 citizen's CSI team and let's do the job the 9/11 commission failed to do. We'll be having an organizational meeting at the Redwood Peace and Justice Center, 1040 H Street, Arcata, Saturday April 29th at 12 noon.

Police Review: Thursday, April 27, 6:30pm there is a community meeting to advance efforts to establish a citizen's police review board. This essential program should be a no-brainer for everyone who has been reading about the recent police killing of Cheri Moore

Solidarity: Mobilize for the National "Day Without an Immigrant" action on International Worker's Day

*** MONDAY MAY 1ST, 2006 ***

NO WORK. NO SCHOOL. NO SALES. NO BUYING.

Don't go to work, cancel classes, walkout and join others in your community to build a movement to end racist violence and policies against Latin and undocumented communities. Solidarity with all migrant and undocumented workers! End the exploitation and abuse of migrant labour! Resist racist attacks on all workers and peoples of colour! Stop the militarization of the border! Stop deportations! No one is illegal!

This is happening everywhere. Humboldt: 7th and Broadway in Eureka at 10am

The New Road to Impeachment: A rule of Congress never before used has recently come to light. Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of the Rules of the United States House of Representatives allows federal impeachment proceedings to be initiated by joint resolution of any state legislature. Illinois state representatives are now working on House Joint Resolution 125. OpEdNews has the resolution text. California has also put this wheel in motion by completely overhauling Bill AJR39, which was about a depleted uranium moratorium. I spoke to the offices of both Senator Wes Chesbro and Assemblymember Patty Berg today and both confirmed they are receiving other calls about this from members of the Humboldt Nation. Chesbro (707-445-6508); Berg (707) 445-7014.

We Do Not Consent: I have begun sending out hard copies of my new book, We Do Not Consent. I have launched another blog at http://WeDoNotConsent.blogspot.com. I figure this will be easier to say in media interviews so I don't have to spell out G-U-V...plus I hope it will come up in more searches. But have you ever Googled GuvWurld? I see over 26,000 hits right now. Anyway, now there is also a place for the book to get reader comments and another place where donations might originate. If you can help offset the cost of printing more hard copies, please click here or look for the PayPal button on either blog. Everyone who contributes $15 or more will receive a complimentary copy of We Do Not Consent.

You Must See Loose Change

2006-04-16T16:30:00.000-07:00

Loose Change is a documentary about what happened on 9/11. You can watch it in your browser and/or download it free HERE. I don't write in depth about 9/11 here at GuvWurld but I have long since read enough to conclude that the official story is full of contradictions and scientific impossibilities.

In more devout 9/11 circles, a debate continues about MIHOP (made it happen on purpose) or LIHOP (let it happen on purpose). Loose Change doesn't directly address this, in that it leaves it to the viewer to draw some conclusions. This approach may be more likely to penetrate the denial and defenses of those not versed in all that has been independently researched about 9/11.

After watching the movie last night there was definitely one thing above all else that I was grokking on. As with my comment in the second paragraph, I think about how we are more or less likely to get messages through to the other side. I imagine myself talking to various people and having them disregard my retelling of events as I've come to understand them. I imagine e-mailing people with links for their own verification, only to find that websites may have dubious credibility to them. So watch this film and be reminded of what the news networks reported as events unfolded that day.

If I tell you bombs brought down the towers you may scoff; if I point you to articles, you may dismiss them as noisy dissonance; but watch, and remember, this is what we all saw. When it happened, they told us bombs were going off. Then over the next couple of days they simply stopped reporting it and we Consented to an alternate reality. We accepted the same brainwashing with weapons of mass destruction and the 2004 "election."

Don't get me wrong. If you are new to debunking the official story of 9/11 this may challenge your worldview in other ways as you learn about the contradictions and scientific impossibilities. You may literally want to wretch. I cried. Cleanse. Now be ruthlessly honest. Who hates your freedoms and acts over and over to limit and remove them?

* * *

Read more about 9/11 in the GuvWurld News Archive.

LIHOP is MIHOP.

LISTEN: Thurs 7:30pm PT, GuvWurld on KHSU.org; Parallel Election Plans Announced

2006-04-13T01:45:00.000-07:00

I will be interviewed Thursday night (4/13) at 7:30pm PT on "Thursday Night Talk." This radio show airs in Arcata, CA at 90.5 KHSU and streams online at www.khsu.org.

We will be discussing my new book We Do Not Consent (.pdf), including the Voter Confidence Resolution and Blueprint For Peaceful Revolution (.pdf), and the Voter Confidence Committee (VCC), which is planning to do another parallel election for the June 6 CA primary. Please call in to the show, especially if you have participated in a parallel election anywhere else. Studio phone: 707-826-4805 or toll-free 1-800-640-5911.

The book has received some local media coverage, as did the VCC in the lead up to the Demand Your Democracy Forum we held Tuesday night. I posted a collection of media briefs HERE. Not included in the list are the channel 3 TV news interview I did Tuesday morning for that day's 6pm news (I never saw this on air, please contact me if you recorded this), and the KGOE radio broadcast from Wednesday which included excerpts of comments from Tuesday's forum. I am trying to get this audio from Tom Sebourn.

The forum attendance was not what we had hoped, teaching us a lesson about scoping the accessibility of our location, especially for parking and foot traffic. By my head count we drew 35 people, though the Eureka Times-Standard (archive) reported the audience was just 20 strong. Writers from the Eureka Reporter and the Humboldt Advocate were present so I anticipate more coverage in the next few days.

The crescendo of the event was my announcement of the next parallel election, to be conducted in conjunction with the June 6 CA primary. To begin organizing and training volunteers we will be meeting on Monday, 4/17, 6pm at the Redwood Peace and Justice Center at 1040 H St. in Arcata. This is open to the public. We need dozens of volunteers to be able to set up at a large number of polling places. Please help us double check the accuracy of the official vote count done on secret and illegal Diebold optical scanners.

UPDATE 4/13 2:06am: Eureka Reporter article on Forum now online.

Media Briefs

2006-04-10T22:35:00.000-07:00

Eureka Reporter

Local activist publishes essay collection
4/7/2006

Local elections activist Dave Berman has published a collection of his essays, “We Do Not Consent,” dedicated to “conscientious objectors everywhere.”

The 20 essays have been posted on Berman’s GuvWurld blog and address U.S. involvement in Iraq, election reform and the Voter Confidence Resolution, among other things.

MORE...

* * *

Humboldt Advocate (.pdf)

GuvWurld Blogger Authors 'We Do Not Consent'

Cameron Langford
Humboldt Advocate
April 7-13, 2006

As the vote count in the 2000 presidential election ended in uncertainty and controversy, the ultimate decision passed from the hands of the American people to the nine justices of the Supreme Court. In this void of disconnect between verifiable will of the people and the verdict of the nation's highest court a fire kindled to life in the belly of Humboldt County Voter Confidence Committee co-founder Dave Berman.

MORE... (.pdf)

* * *

Eureka Times-Standard (archive)

Article Launched: 04/09/2006 4:16 AM PDT

Democracy forum scheduled for Tuesday
The Times-Standard

EUREKA -- Voter Confidence Committee (VCC) of Humboldt County has scheduled a “Demand Your Democracy Forum” to be held Tuesday.

The forum, to be held in Founders Hall Room 118 at Humboldt State University, is scheduled to begin at 7 p.m.

Speakers will include Nathan Smith, vice president of the Humboldt Chapter of the NAACP; David Cobb, Green Party presidential candidate in 2004 and steering committee member of Democracy Unlimited of Humboldt County; and Dave Berman, VCC founding member and author of the just-released book, "We Do Not Consent."

MORE...

* * *

HSU Lumberjack

Flawed voting machines affect elections

Wednesday, April 05, 2006
Written by Jon Koriagin

I have never in my life seen anything so stunning as our press' inability to deal with the issues surrounding the subversion of our national elections.

[snip]

A real democracy demands real participation. I would urge those who care about democracy to come to the Demand Your Democracy Forum, on Tuesday, April 11, 7 p.m. at HSU's Founder's Hall, Room 118, to find out how you can stay informed about and make a difference concerning issues surrounding democratic reform.

MORE...

* * *

Eureka Reporter

It's time for people to reclaim their rights and make their voices heard

by Larry Hourany, 4/2/2006

[snip]

With the voting machines dependent on a proprietary code that Diebold refuses to allow election officials to monitor or verify, and with the presence of uncertified machines to keep us company in the voting booth, Americans are participating in a sham process. At the time of the last election it was not known that the programming was illegal. However, now it is clear, thus every official who abides this violation is in dereliction of duty.

One organization, VoterAction.org, has filed suit against the California secretary of state, C. Crinich, Humboldt registrar of voters, and 16 other county registrars. This suit alleges that voting laws have been violated by use of the Diebold machines and that voters’ constitutional rights have been infracted.

On the local level, we are having mixed results confronting this problem. On March 21, the Elections Department proposed, and the Board of Supervisors indicated a willingness to approve, a non-electronic, low-tech assistive voting device called Vote Pad. This would satisfy the disabled voter provisions of the Help America Vote Act and presumably stop the county from buying Diebold touch-screen machines.

Despite this good news, we must still object to the optical scanners used to count all votes, including those cast on Vote Pad. The illegal interpreter code simply requires blind trust and gives no basis for confidence. A secret ballot means casting your vote in private, not counting the votes in secret.

[snip]

Come to the Demand Your Democracy Forum presented by the Voter Confidence Committee on Tuesday, April 11, at 7 p.m. at HSU Founders Hall Room 119. For more information, go to www.voterconfidencecommittee.org.

MORE...

* * *

Against These Wars

Dennis Kyne: An Uncommon American Hero

By Cathy Garger
3 April 2006

[snip]

I remember some time back reading one of Dennis Kyne's articles, thinking he was my kind of person. You know the type - one way cool dude. I wrote to him, he wrote back, and since then I've followed his work, his travels (including Camp Casey) and his awesome humanitarian effort down in New Orleans after Katrina with Cindy Sheehan and friends.

A man who's definitely more action than talk, Army veteran of 15 years Dennis Kyne is without a doubt one of my all-time favorite heroes. This advocate for both vets and current military soldiers informs us on his website www.denniskyne.com that to simply say we Support the Troops is not enough. Instead, Kyne maintains, we must Support the Truth.

MORE...

* * *

Eureka Times-Standard (archive)

Article Launched: 04/09/2006 4:16 AM PDT

Arkley opposes Measure T
Kimberly Wear The Times Standard the initiative.

EUREKA -- In letters to elected officials and political candidates, businessman Rob Arkley asks for their response to a ballot initiative that would ban outside corporations from donating to local races -- saying that Measure T will open the county up to a lawsuit and suppress free speech.

[snip]

Arkley writes that the measure suppresses speech by attempting to limit campaign contributions -- a "hallmark of fascism."

"We do not need any form of fascism here in Humboldt County," Arkley said in the letter dated April 7.

MORE...

Humboldt Supervisors Approve Limited Vote-PAD Pilot Project

2006-04-04T10:41:00.000-07:00

As the first order of business on this morning's agenda, the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors heard a revised report from Carolyn Crnich, Recorder/Clerk-Registrar of Voters. As noted in GuvWurld's Sunday dispatch, the plan now calls for deploying Vote-PAD at only the elections department for the June 6 primary. This was approved unanimously by the Supes.

For my part, as indicated on Sunday, I pointed out the "alternatives to staff recommendations" that Crnich included with her proposal (.pdf) because they indicate her preference for blowing off the Help America Vote Act rather than falling back upon purchasing Diebold touch screen machines. Today's approval would have made this a moot point had I not brought it up. Chairman Woolley thanked me for offering this perspective which I called a welcome willingness to consider "municipal civil disobedience" (.pdf).

In addition to bringing recognition to that important position shift at the elections department, I requested that the topic of vote counting and election security be added to the next Supervisors' agenda so that we may "report out of committee" what is discussed at the meeting coming up this Thursday for the Election Advisory Committee (6:30pm at the Courthouse in Eureka; open to the public). Elections Manager Lindsey McWilliams requested that the Supes delay hearing the item due to Fortuna's local election next Tuesday and so the matter is now slated for April 25. Altogether, I think we got what we needed this morning.

GuvWurld 2nd Anniversary Post

2006-04-03T22:33:00.000-07:00

Last year on April 3, I wrote the GuvWurld 1st anniversary post, paying homage to the first-ever GuvWurld post, and linking to some of the highlights of the first year. Another year later and one of the biggest highlights yet occurred one week ago. That's when I launched We Do Not Consent (.pdf), a free online book containing the essential GuvWurld Blog posts of the past two years. While a tad early, consider the homage to be more robust this year. We will look back on 2006 as an even better vintage still.

Together, this set of complete essays portrays advocacy journalism in action. The GuvWurld Blog was conceived for writing in this style, as I've noted many times. Yet now that this material has been assembled this way the advocacy journalism concept requires increased emphasis. Hence the Introduction and Epilogue, both written specifically for the book, and of course the press release. Everything written here is meant to advance the Movement for a peaceful revolution (.pdf).

GuvWurld is advocacy journalism. That means I often write about the work I do for change in the world and I write in a way that promotes these efforts. To judge whether my advocacy journalism is successful, I consider only whether my intended real-world results are produced. What better way to be the media than to create my own account of what I'm doing?

--Introduction, We Do Not Consent (.pdf)

For evidence of how this approach works, read the book. There will be a slight version change in the next few days before we print the first batch of hard copies. The only difference will be the quotes added to the inside of the back cover. Here are a few of those kind words:

"I urge everyone to read "We Do Not Consent", and distribute it as widely as possible."

--B Robert Franza MD, Seattle, WA

"What's special about this book (and it fits because there's nothing more fundamental to Democracy than our vote) is the raising of consciousness. Someone recognizing they have no basis for trusting elections may well ask what else is being taken for granted."

--Eddie Ajamian, Los Angeles, CA

"If in the future we have vital elections, the "no basis for confidence" formulation that GuvWurld is popularizing will have been a historically important development. This is true because by implicitly insisting on verification and checks and balances instead of faith or trust in elections officials or machines as a basis for legitimacy, it encourages healthy transparent elections. It's also rare that a political formulation approaches scientific certainty, but this formulation is backed up by scientific principles that teach that if you can't repeat something (such as an election) and verify it by independent means, it doesn't exist within the realm of what science will accept as established or proven truth."

--Paul Lehto, Attorney at Law, Everett, WA

All of these, and other quotes I've received, are very flattering and encouraging. But Paul's quote is something else. Historical importance will require quite a bit more reinforcement of the "no basis for confidence" message than I can hope to convey by myself. Fortunately, I know and work with people like Larry Hourany. See his Eureka Reporter opinion column from Sunday for a great piece on current election conditions in Humboldt County. Larry has also put up $100 toward book printing costs, bringing us to 32% of the goal, which is $500.

If you would like to support GuvWurld brand advocacy journalism, withdrawing the Consent of the Governed, and creating a peaceful revolution, please help get this message out to a larger audience by making a small donation using the PayPal button at the top left of the GuvWurld blog or by clicking here. All monies collected will go toward printing copies of We Do Not Consent (.pdf).

Larry's use of the "no basis for confidence" angle, Paul's high praise for "the formulation," fantastic news coverage from sources like the Lone Star Iconoclast and New Zealand's Scoop, and recent endorsements of the Voter Confidence Resolution (VCR) from the Human Relations Commission of Palo Alto, CA (.pdf) and Progressive Democratic caucuses in Washington state - these are essentially the day to day signs of progress for advocacy journalism. The next stage, in addition to gaining even more widespread adoption of the VCR, is to prompt other writers to take up this organizing style and other organizers to take up this writing style.

A few other things on the horizon: a long awaited re-vamp and re-launch of the Reinventing Activism program, the original source for my advocacy journalism concepts; first-hand courtroom reporting on the VoterAction.org lawsuit (.pdf) from GuvWurld correspondent Jane Allen in San Francisco; development of a media and speaking appearances history to reference available interviews and articles in a single place; expanding upon that list with many new media appearances in support of We Do Not Consent (.pdf) (Hi Tom Sebourn, I'm ready for Thom Hartmann's call!); and more collaborative efforts with HumboldtRevolution.org, BradBlog.com, VelvetRevolution.us, California Election Protection Network, and Study California Ballots, among others.

So after two years I think it is fair to say that the GuvWurld blog has stayed on track and true to its purpose. Tangible progress has been made with both immediate impact and long-term big picture implications. Though I don't update GuvWurld every day, 320 posts, the VCR, the Blueprint (.pdf), and We Do Not Consent (.pdf), plus more than a dozen published letters and essays all show I've met a personal goal of being more prolific. What will be the highlights of the GuvWurld 3rd anniversary post? Keep your mind open...the future's coming.

Humboldt Registrar Downgrades Vote-PAD to 'Pilot Project', Prefers HAVA Non-compliance to Diebold Touch Screens

2006-04-02T21:45:00.000-07:00

The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors will meet once again this Tuesday, April 4, at 9am. The agenda begins with this financial request from Recorder/County Clerk-Registrar Carolyn Crnich. The Supes are now expected to approve just $3730, a much smaller allocation than previously mentioned, for the purchase of two Vote-PAD packages comprised of 20 booklets and 10 extra ballot sheaths. The Elections Department would serve as the only polling place offering the low-tech, non-electronic assistive voting device. According to Crnich, Vote-PAD, designed to allow disabled voters to vote privately and independently, will also "demonstrate good faith efforts to meet HAVA [Help America Vote Act] requirements."

As noted previously at GuvWurld, Crnich recently appeared before the Supes to request substantially more funding (.pdf), which would have made Vote-PAD more widely available throughout Humboldt County. The revised plan downgrades the Vote-PAD implementation to a "pilot project" and calls for spending less than 2% of the original projection. The primary reason for the change is the lack of time required for elections department staff to manually prepare the six hundred Vote-PAD booklets that were to have been put in use for the June 6 primary.

Crnich cites assurances from Secretary of State Bruce McPherson's office that the limited outlay will be reimbursed by HAVA funds, even as she acknowledges the uncertainty of the Secretary's approval for use. This is about par for the course for McPherson who knowingly certified election machines that do not comply with state or federal law. VoterAction.org recently filed a lawsuit (.pdf) against McPherson, Crnich, and 17 other CA county registrars.

In this week's submission to the Supes, Crnich mentions the lawsuit. The reference is part of the second of two "alternatives to staff recommendations." I interpret this to mean that if the Supes don't want to go along with the minimal use of Vote-PAD, the next idea is to be non-compliant with HAVA. If that is not acceptable, purchasing Diebold TSx machines is not off the table, despite the lawsuit.

I don't think there is much question that the Supes will approve the Vote-PAD plan. But to Crnich's credit, it is a strong statement for her to put on the record that she would rather not comply with HAVA than use Diebold TSx machines. I have to admit, I take exception with Crnich for several things but this is totally right on. It suggests the glimpse of optimism I flashed five weeks ago might have been justified:

In a previous meeting I attended with Crnich and Vets For Peace Secretary Jim Sorter, I encouraged Crnich to consider municipal civil disobedience. She reacted quite negatively. However, yesterday we discussed what an untenable position she is in and it seemed like maybe, perhaps, I hope I'm not just wishing that she began to get the idea that being controlled by others is not a suitable excuse to offer after everything has gone to pot and people are seeking accountability.

Another important part of this story is simply the topic getting an official hearing again on Tuesday's Supervisors' agenda. This is an opportunity we should not pass up. Last time, Chairman Woolley curtailed my public comment when I expanded the topic to include vote counting. How can we have any serious conversation about a new vote casting method and not also discuss how the votes are counted?

We need more citizens present this Tuesday to speak out for hand counted paper ballots. Perhaps an upshot here is that the Election Advisory Committee is meeting this Thursday, April 6, at 6:30pm at the Courthouse in Eureka. The main topic is scheduled to be election security and we need lots of citizens to show for that too. If they're not willing to hear about it at Tuesday's Supervisors' meeting, we should recommend strongly that their next agenda have an item "to report out of committee" about Thursday's election security discussion.

In his regular Friday afternoon guest slot, Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com recently interviewed (.mp3) Crnich on the Peter B. Collins radio show originating in Monterey, CA on KRXA and aired in Humboldt on KGOE. A few interesting, but disappointing comments from Crnich:

(Collins): What is your level of confidence in the Diebold optical scan?

(Crnich): Well Humboldt County is considerably smaller than some of the counties that you may be broadcasting into or from. Um, but, we have through our audits in the past, we have not had any reason to, uh, any reason for concern over the security of the ballots cast...to this point in time, our 1%, or 1%-plus actually, uh, manual recount of those ballots has verified that the, uh, the results we have received have been accurate.

...

(Collins): Do you ever permit poll workers or precinct directors, whatever title you give them, to take a machine home overnight and then take it to the polling place in the morning or are the machines under your control at all times?

(Crnich): They, uh, the poll workers do have them at their homes and deliver them to the polling place. Before they receive them, the memory cards are sealed in them.

...

(Friedman): 1% certainly isn't sufficient to catch problems because you're going to miss them 99% of the time, essentially. But, um, as she [Crnich] says, when those machines go home at night with the poll workers, anything can happen to those machines, because they--my understanding is--they can be networked, they can be accessed through all kinds of ways and information can be put onto those memory cards even if the memory cards are locked in the machine and that's a very serious concern because that code can then be programmed to essentially delete itself the next day before anybody gets to see what has actually happened to that code.

(Collins): Carolyn, a comment?

(Crnich): Um, you know, I don't have any comment to that. I, uh, um, I have heard that comment before and I've, you know, I've not been able to address it and prove it or disprove it.

So let's review. Friedman is correctly asserting, according to the Berkeley/VSTAAB report (.pdf), that the memory cards can be altered even when "sealed" in the machines. By allowing the machines and cards out of their control, by definition, the elections department cannot vouch for the condition of the equipment when deployed at the precincts. And to validate the accuracy of the vote count, 99 out of 100 possible discrepancies are disregarded without consideration. Is it any wonder this approach has not revealed any problems in the past? Perhaps there were none, but how would we know? It is easier to miss what you are not looking for than what you are looking for.

What I'm looking for is a rational basis for confidence. I want to see a reason why I should accept the results that will be reported by an elections department that speaks for its equipment by announcing that they can't really speak for their equipment because others get it at the last minute. I want conclusive election results delivered by an elections department that can prove, over and over, that the final numbers they report match the will of the people. I'm looking for an elections department so committed to instilling confidence in the system (.pdf) that they themselves apply this rational basis for confidence criteria when approaching the challenges of preparing for an election.

(Crnich): Um, you know, I don't have any comment to that. I, uh, um, I have heard that comment before and I've, you know, I've not been able to address it and prove it or disprove it.

Crnich is uncertain, and understandably so. As I wrote in Blueprint For Peaceful Revolution (.pdf), these conditions have been created intentionally to cause inherent uncertainty. The Voter Confidence Resolution proves unequivocally that current election conditions ensure inconclusive results. While Crnich is uncertain, she also seems unable or unwilling to recognize the systemic source of her uncertainty. She is willing to plod ahead with the optical scanners, denying that she is perpetuating the conditions ensuring the uncertainty, and believing she is serving her community by making the best of a bad situation. How Manchurian.

* * *

If you dig this writing, and understand that we must use our access to media, including blogs, to further the work we do for social change, please support We Do Not Consent, my new e-book. It is a free .pdf that you can download and forward. Or just send this link: http://tinyurl.com/rlnr2. If you'd like to see this material get more national media exposure, please consider making a PayPal donation through the button at the top left of the GuvWurld Blog or just click here. I'm hoping to raise just enough money to print a small run of hard copies to be sent to progressive broadcasters and writers. One dollar is not too little. It is a personal account and none of it will be syphoned off by fees for PayPal. What is the least you can do?

* * *

The Voter Confidence Committee is presenting the Demand Your Democracy Forum on Tuesday, April 11 at 7pm at Humboldt State University's Founders Hall Room 118. Click here for the press release. If you can help promote the event, there are links to downloadable leaflets and posters below.

Demand Your Democracy Forum leaflets (.pdf, 6 to a page)

Demand Your Democracy Forum poster (.pdf, 8.5 x 11, b&w)

Demand Your Democracy Forum poster (.pdf, 8.5 x 11, color)

Press Release: VCC Presents "Demand Your Democracy" Forum On 4/11

2006-04-01T23:30:00.000-08:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

FROM: Jack McCurdy, the Voter Confidence Committee, www.voterconfidencecommittee.org

CONTACT: Dave Berman, 707-845-3749 or info@voterconfidencecommittee.org

"DEMAND YOUR DEMOCRACY FORUM" WILL EXPOSE
A VOTING DISASTER WAITING TO HAPPEN HERE
----------------------------------------------------------------

March 31, 2006--Is Humboldt County heading for a possible vote count disaster on June 6? What can be done to prevent the use of illegal and untrustworthy optical scan machines to count votes? How can the community organize to demand the use of reliable hand-counted paper ballots?

Those questions--and an even bigger one: will your vote count on June 6?--will be explored, debated and answered at the "Demand Your Democracy Forum" beginning at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, April 11, sponsored by the Voter Confidence Committee (VCC) of Humboldt County, which is dedicated to ensuring electoral integrity in our community. The Forum will be held in Founders Hall Room 118 at Humboldt State University. Admission is free and refreshments will be served.

Outstanding speakers and their topics will be:

• Nathan Smith, NAACP Humboldt Chapter Vice President, the historical struggle for the franchise.

• David Cobb, Green Party presidential candidate in 2004 and steering committee member of Democracy Unlimited of Humboldt County, the recount in Ohio during 2004, which is still subject to pending litigation.

• Dave Berman, VCC founding member and author of the just-released book, "We Do Not Consent," the reliability of election conditions in Humboldt County.

A fourth speaker may be added to the program.

The Forum is aimed at explaining just why the VCC and other groups around the state and nation are so alarmed about not only how even local elections have been corrupted but how that may continue to occur if the optical scan machines continue to be used. These machines, including those manufactured by Diebold, which County officials intend to deploy, use secret codes that are expressly forbidden by 2002 Federal standards that must be complied with by California and other states.

Paul Lehto, an Everett, Washington, attorney, who has sued and won removal of similar machines manufactured by Sequoia, wrote this in his Foreword to Berman's new book:

"...whenever secret vote counting is used, there is no rational basis for confidence in the reported election results. This is so because nobody saw the count, nobody can verify it, and nobody can independently repeat it. Such conditions violate all of the basic principles of science necessary to have a basis for confidence in the reported election results. That's no way to run a system of elections if you're serious about defending democracy."

The Forum will provide an opportunity to review the purpose and importance of the lawsuit filed on March 21 seeking to prevent the use and purchase of Diebold machines in California. It was filed in San Francisco by attorney Lowell Finley and VoterAction.org and named as defendants California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson, Humboldt Registrar of Voters Carolyn Crnich, and 17 other California registrars. It alleges that McPherson did not follow proper procedures in certifying Diebold voting machines for use in California, that Diebold's equipment fails to comply with the law, and that voters' constitutional rights are being violated.

Following widespread expressions of concern, including an almost daily onslaught of news about problems with election machines, the county has seemingly abandoned its plans to buy new Diebold machines for use in the June 6 election. Instead, it plans to use the Vote-PAD system to satisfy legal requirements for disabled voters, but votes cast with Vote-PAD will still be counted on the illegal and secret optical scanners, leaving the accuracy of vote counts at risk.

What makes the use of these machines so objectionable, Berman said, is that the corporations that make them "are all claiming proprietary privilege to keep their computer programming from being scrutinized by the public, or even by the election officials on the county level." Thus, the public is kept from being able to have a transparent view of how it works. The state of Maryland has abandoned such machines, which also have been rejected by several Florida communities and the state of North Carolina.

The only good alternative is the use of hand-counted paper ballots, Berman said. "Hand counting paper ballots represents a transparent, secure and verifiably accurate voting system. In a county the size of Humboldt, this is practical, logistically-feasible and cost-effective when compared to the cost of more litigation."

The blueprint for bringing integrity to our voting process is found in the Voter Confidence Resolution, which is at www.voterconfidencecommittee.org. The Resolution was adopted by the Arcata City Council last July with a platform of election reforms aimed at creating a new basis for confidence in election results. The Demand Your Democracy Forum will be a reminder to community members of the civic role we share for overseeing the transfer of power from We The People to those who must then represent us.

###

GuvWurld Book Launch Off To Good Start

2006-03-28T22:37:00.000-08:00

We Do Not Consent was downloaded 637 times in the first 14 hours. Earlier today, Democratic Underground posted the press release on their home page.

Update 1, 3/29 6:22am PT:

I am astounded. In the first 38 hours, We Do Not Consent was downloaded 12,090 times.

Click screen shot to enlarge.

Donations are up to $40, 8% of our goal. Please see the PayPal donation button in the top left of the page if you can contribute to the printing cost of putting hard copies of the book in the hands of some of America's most progressive media. Thank you for your support.

Identify the least you can do...and commit to doing at least that much.

PRESS RELEASE: GuvWurld Author Publishes "We Do Not Consent," An Online Book

2006-03-27T12:18:00.000-08:00

PRESS RELEASE: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

LOCAL AUTHOR, ELECTION INTEGRITY ADVOCATE PUBLISHES FIRST BOOK
Dave Berman issues "We Do Not Consent," a compilation of essays from the GuvWurld blog
-----------------------------------------------

March 27, 2006—Just one week shy of the GuvWurld Blog's second anniversary, author Dave Berman has compiled 20 essential essays into an online book called "We Do Not Consent" (.pdf). The material highlights Berman's style of advocacy journalism, reporting on his own work for social change in a way that furthers those efforts. Berman puts himself above charges of bias by openly stating his progressive goals and promoting this approach as a key to successful community organizing.

Berman observes the obsolescence of mainstream journalistic neutrality, citing debunked threats of WMD, withheld reporting on unconstitutional surveillance, the unresolved contradictions and scientific impossibilities of 9/11, and thousands of uninvestigated electronic voting glitches.

"What the newspapers and network news don't tell us is enough to manipulate the common perception of reality," Berman explains. "Shaping perceptions this way is intentional, yet subliminal. I'm also trying to shape your view of reality but I'm telling you this up front and showing you the difference between what the media report and what you can directly observe for yourself. I'm asking you to be ruthlessly honest – with yourself."

GUVWURLD BLOG – LOCAL BY NATURE, NATIONAL BY STATURE

---------------------------------------------------------

In a January 2006 cover story on Humboldt County blogs, the North Coast Journal recognized GuvWurld for "gaining some stature in the larger blogosphere." This notoriety stems primarily from the Voter Confidence Resolution (VCR), a statement challenging the legitimacy of the U.S. government's claim to power after elections that did not seek the Consent of the Governed. Such Consent, according to the Declaration of Independence, is the source from which government's "just Power" is derived. The book's title, "We Do Not Consent" is a clarion call to peaceful revolution and served as the theme of a recent community forum in Eureka.

Last July, the City Council of Arcata, CA became the first to adopt the VCR. More recently, Palo Alto's Human Relations Commission and several Progressive Democratic caucuses in WA have also endorsed the VCR. Berman cites this as the GuvWurld Blog's most successful example of advocacy journalism.

LEADING ELECTION REFORM EXPERT ENDORSES GUVWURLD EFFORTS
----------------------------------------------------------

This work has brought Berman into contact with other thinkers on elections and election law. Paul Lehto is an attorney in Everett, WA. He sued election machine maker Sequoia, and eight months later their machines were removed from use in Snohomish County, WA. Lehto wrote the Foreword to "We Do Not Consent."

According to Lehto, "Berman, writing under the GuvWurld name, is spearheading one of the most incisive arguments to make against the secret vote counting that always occurs with electronic voting. Namely, whenever secret vote counting is used, there is no rational basis for confidence in the reported election results. This is so because nobody saw the count, nobody can verify it, and nobody can independently repeat it. Such conditions violate all of the basic principles of science necessary to have a basis for confidence in the reported election results. That's no way to run a system of elections if you're serious about defending democracy."

BERMAN TO DISCUSS BOOK AT UPCOMING LOCAL EVENTS
------------------------------------------------

Berman's writing and quotes often appear in Humboldt County media and he keeps an active speaking schedule. Upcoming appearances include the Demand Your Democracy Forum on April 11, 7pm, at HSU Founders Hall Room 118; and KHSU radio "Thursday Night Talk" with Rob Ammerman on April 13 at 7:30pm.

Berman is also a founding member of the Voter Confidence Committee (VCC) of Humboldt County, an election integrity watchdog group. Supported by GuvWurld promotion, the VCC conducted the county’s first parallel election last November and continues to lead the resistance to the use of Diebold and any other election machines containing "proprietary" programming.

"WE DO NOT CONSENT" AVAILABLE ONLINE AND IN PRINT
----------------------------------

"We Do Not Consent" is available at no charge, without copyright restrictions, at http://tinyurl.com/rlnr2. The book is an easy to navigate Adobe PDF file with cross-referenced pages and numerous, comprehensive hyper links to online resources for readers.

Eureka-based Agreda Communications worked with Berman to publish the book in both PDF and printed, bound versions available at discounted costs. For a printed version, please contact the author.

###

CONTACT:
Dave Berman, author, "We Do Not Consent"
Tel: (707) 845-3749
blog@guvwurld.org
http://tinyurl.com/rlnr2 ("We Do Not Consent")
http://guvwurld.blogspot.com (GuvWurld blog main page)
http://tinyurl.com/amryg (Voter Confidence Resolution)

-------------------------------------------

Note to blog readers: We are only planning to print a very limited number of hard copies which will be sent to progressive media such as Thom Hartmann and Randi Rhodes. First, if you can assist in getting the book to someone like that, please contact me (see above). If you want to suggest someone who should get a book but you don't know how to get it to them, please leave a comment using the link below. And finally, if you believe in the idea of voting with your dollars and can help offset the cost of this printing, please click the PayPal donation button at the top left of the page.

Coming Monday 3/27: We Do Not Consent, a GuvWurld e-Book

2006-03-23T19:55:00.000-08:00

Coming this Monday, March 27, GuvWurld presents We Do Not Consent, an e-book comprised of essential GuvWurld blog posts, a Foreword by attorney Paul Lehto, and two new bits, an intro and epilogue that I've written to bookend the set within the context of advocacy journalism.

I won't give away the full chapter list but you can be sure that the Voter Confidence Resolution (VCR) is amply represented. At this time, I'd like to invite readers to take a look at the VCR with new eyes. Isn't it obvious now, to conclude that our election conditions ensure inconclusive results that will not be unanimously accepted? Can you even conjure an argument that might be used to explain maintaining confidence in election results, other than with blind trust? Isn't it time we say We Do Not Consent?

At the bottom of the resolution is a link for comments. Remember, the VCR is a template, meant to be adapted in each community that adopts it. If you can get behind the general ideas, please add your name and town as an endorsement, and consider asking your City Council to adopt it. All endorsements posted by 4pm on Friday 3/24 will be included in the book.

We Do Not Consent will be a free download and the link will be posted Monday 3/27. Meanwhile, we want to put hard copies in the hands of Thom Hartmann, Randi Rhodes, and other progressive media. If you think these ideas need more attention, please help offset the cost of printing with a small donation. See the PayPal donation button at the top left of the page. We are only collecting a total of $500 and then the fundraising will stop. Support The Truth!

http://guvwurld.blogspot.com/2005/04/voter-confidence-resolution.html

VoterAction.org Sues CA Sec. of State, Humboldt Registrar, Others

2006-03-22T00:44:00.000-08:00

Tuesday was a landmark day for the election integrity movement. Attorney Lowell Finley and VoterAction.org filed a lawsuit in San Francisco naming as defendants CA Secretary of State Bruce McPherson, Humboldt Registrar of Voters Carolyn Crnich, and 17 other CA registrars. The case alleges that McPherson did not follow proper procedures in certifying Diebold voting machines for use in CA; that Diebold's equipment is not compliant with the law; and that voters' constitutional rights are being violated. GuvWurld readers will recognize some of these points as familiar.

The case was filed Tuesday morning though word had started to leak out Monday afternoon via BradBlog.com. See Brad's Tuesday coverage for more details, where he links to the actual court filing (.pdf) and posts an excellent response from Debra Bowen, State Senator from Redondo Beach and challenger to McPherson for the Secretary's office. GuvWurld correspondent Dan Ashby, speaking on behalf of the California Election Protection Network, also gave a great interview (.mp3) Tuesday morning to Will Durst and former SF Mayor Willie Brown on their Will and Willie radio show for Air America.

Around this same time, I was at the Humboldt County Courthouse for the Board of Supervisors meeting at which we knew that Crnich would be presenting a proposal for the county to buy Vote-PAD rather than Diebold touch screen machines in order to satisfy the disability requirements of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). I did not learn until later in the day that Crnich was named as a defendant in the lawsuit.

Crnich's proposal did not seem to arouse any enthusiasm from the Board though it received a modicum of acceptance. She was told that they would need more specific financials in order to give final approval and so the item was rescheduled for next Tuesday's agenda. Board Chairman John Woolley did at least two unfortunate things in this process. First, he did not call for public comment immediately and in direct response to Crnich's proposal. Instead, he allowed a motion to be made, seconded and discussed by the Board before calling for public comment.

As the first speaker, I noted the rarity of my agreement with the elections department and stated my support for Vote-PAD as a partial solution that eliminates half of our problem by removing the prospect of buying Diebold touch screen machines. The other half of the problem, I began to explain, is how the Vote-PAD votes would be counted, using the optical scanners, just like all other votes. The optical scanners, I pointed out, have interpreted code that is illegal.

Before I could mention the lawsuit, which I had in front of me on a brief list of talking points, Chairman Woolley did the second unfortunate thing. He cut me off and said this was beyond the matter at hand which was the motion to bring the matter back next week for funding approval. I somewhat meekly said that you can't consider a voting system without taking into consideration how the votes are counted. But somehow I did not stand my ground and continue my testimony. The "woulda, coulda, shoulda" thought I had only a few minutes later was that I had missed a great chance to use another item from my notes:

"The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything" - Joseph Stalin

I do wonder now whether Crnich and/or Chairman Woolley were already aware of Crnich's status as defendant in the VoterAction lawsuit. When I arrived at the meeting, Crnich was rather cold to me but this did not surprise me since she had told me late last week that I had offended her here on the pages of GuvWurld by suggesting the possibility that she might not be honest with the public about the Diebold training she was attending. It is hardly impossible to imagine such behavior when the track record shows repeated defenses of illegal election machines and irresponsible denial of the problems these machines pose.

Frankly, it is getting tiresome to have people in the community defend the elections department entirely on the basis of personal relationships, or on the mistaken impression that personnel is really trying to address core issues. Citizens need to educate themselves, and I am doing my part to assist, in order to understand that the supposedly upstanding, reputable and popular community members responsible for administering our Democracy are in fact lying repeatedly and standing in the way of transparency, security, and verifiable accuracy.

The media, for their part, are uneven about all this. I certainly won't complain about how often I get on the radio or quoted in newspaper articles. But we've heard repeated calls (.pdf) for investigation regarding Diebold's installation of uncertified software two years ago, and while the press will report the call for investigation, there does not seem to be the will to do real investigative journalism. Heck, Tuesday's Eureka Times-Standard (archive) sets the bar even lower.

Dave Berman, a founder of the Voter Confidence Committee, claims the Diebold machines are illegal.

"Polite and passionate speakers are greatly needed to escalate the resistance to the illegal Diebold machines that count our votes in secret and are unreliable," said Berman.

County Elections Officer Lindsey McWilliams has said that the county's Diebold machines are legal and certified by the California secretary of state.

I don't know why this article has no byline other than The Times-Standard, but that is beside the point. The conflicting statements are a matter of verifiable fact that the newspaper simply doesn't bother to research, even though the Secretary of State's own report (.pdf) reveals all. Instead, McWilliams is permitted to flatly lie and go unchallenged and uncorrected. Too bad his name isn't included in the VoterAction lawsuit.

KHUM Interview re: Humboldt Election Conditions

2006-03-20T11:45:00.000-08:00

Less than an hour ago I was on KHUM doing an interview with Mike Dronkers. He has had me on several times before so we should all be very grateful for his role in getting the election integrity message out there. Plus he always hooks me up with a recording to archive. Listen to an .mp3 of today's interview here:

http://tinyurl.com/masfd

And if you don't take a few minutes to listen, at least consider this your reminder that the Humboldt County Supervisors will be discussing election conditions tomorrow, Tuesday March 21. Please come to the County Courthouse, 825 5th St. in Eureka at 9am and help us stand up for hand counted paper ballots, our only way to create a basis for confidence in the results of elections, even the local ones.

Breaking...

Before I could publish this post, KMUD called for an interview. This will air in tonight's 6pm news and again Tuesday morning at 8am.

Washington State Progressive Dem Caucuses Adopt Voter Confidence Resolution

2006-03-19T23:14:00.000-08:00

Periodically I Google phrases like Voter Confidence Resolution (VCR) and GuvWurld to find out who is writing about and linking here. Yesterday I found the VCR at the Progressive Action Alliance, a TX based group that I think Pokey Anderson belongs to. I appeared on her KPFT radio show on News Year's Day (.mp3). I also discovered this version (.pdf) of the VCR on the site of the Washington State Democratic Progressive Caucus. I was a little confused about what they had done so I e-mailed their contact person, Nancy Ging. She has granted permission to post her reply:

Thanks for contacting me. I'm Chair of the 2nd Congressional District Progressive Caucus (WA state), and it was our web site where you saw the VCR. I believe I picked it up from a statewide voting rights organization's web site, but can't find which one it was at the moment. :(

We had our precinct caucuses on March 4, and the resolution was passed in several precincts around the state. It will now be part of the proposed platform for several county conventions to be held on April 8.

From there, it will go to the state platform committee for a vote by the state convention delegates. At our 2nd CD meeting today, we passed a motion to write a resolution requiring all incumbents and candidates to guarantee to support and work for the points in the resolution in order to be considered for endorsement by the local and state Democratic Party organizations. That would be big, but we are ready to fight hard for it.

As we exchanged a few messages, I've emphasized that the VCR is a "think global, act local" strategy for laying a path to a tipping point (see the Guide to the VCR). The WA version linked above omits the final line from the VCR template, adopted by Arcata, CA (.pdf), which says:

When elections are conducted under conditions that prevent conclusive outcomes, the Consent of the Governed is not being sought. Absent this self-evident source of legitimacy, such Consent is not to be assumed or taken for granted.

As I told Nancy, I like the additions her group created to customize the VCR and I hope they would restore this line to facilitate our collective pursuit of a tipping point. She agreed, and clarified with the following message:

Our group didn't consider the resolution ourselves. We just made it available on our web site so members of our group (and others) could take the resolution to our various precinct caucuses, held on March 4. Several precincts in several counties passed the resolution, but I don't know exactly how many yet. That will get the resolution points into our county platforms, and then we'll take it on to the state platform committee. I'm a member of that, too, so will keep an eye on it there to make sure it gets introduced to the state convention. Will let you know how it goes as we move it along in the process.

So a strong show of support but still a little uncertain about how to reflect it in writing. This is the beginning of a new wave of big things for the VCR. More details later this week...

Humboldt Registrar To Recommend Vote-PAD, Forego Diebold Purchase

2006-03-18T00:14:00.000-08:00

Late Friday afternoon, Humboldt County Recorder, County Clerk & Registrar of Voters Carolyn Crnich circulated a document intended to be presented to the County Supervisors next Tuesday. The document (.pdf), also posted to the County website in the Supervisors' meeting agenda, is titled "Progress Report of the Humboldt County Elections Advisory Committee March 21, 2006." It concludes with two recommendations:

That the Board of Supervisors approve the purchase of the VotePad system for use in each polling place by disabled voters; That the Board of Supervisors approve the transfer of $213,980 (base price $199,515 plus sales tax) from reserve for contingencies to department 140 for the purchase of the VotePad system. These funds may be reimbursed by HAVA funds as they are directly related to the accessibility issues addressed by HAVA.

Additionally, I would recommend that the department be directed to negotiate with Vote Here regarding the implementation of their "Mail-In Ballot Tracker" system as a pilot project for the tracking of Absentee ballots from the verification that the correct ballot was mailed to the voter to it's [sic] receipt back in the Elections Department, verification of absentee voter's signature and the final status of the ballot (was it counted or rejected and if rejected, for what reason). The cost of funding this project is approximately $20,000 but may be less considering the status as a "pilot project". If it is the decision of the committee that this system should be implemented, I will return to you with more a more detailed proposal from the vendor. This product has yet to be discussed by the Elections Advisory Committee.

As I wrote following the recent Vote-PAD demo, it is a huge relief for Humboldt to abandon its interest (.pdf) in purchasing Diebold touch screen machines.

The Voter Confidence Committee has circulated PSAs, press releases, and subscriber e-mail to promote attendance and participation at Tuesday's meeting. I am scheduled for a radio interview with Mike Dronkers on KHUM at 11am Monday. Even though this is good news, there is a lot more that needs to be addressed regarding local election conditions and the public needs to use this opportunity to be heard.

The primary objection is that our votes are recorded by optical scanners that use illegal interpreter code. There is no basis for confidence in the results reported once the data has been converted into the non-human readable, proprietary AccuBasic programming language of Diebold (or any other vendor). The scanners will review all votes, including those cast on Vote-PAD. Sad but true, while Vote-PAD is far superior to touch screen machines, the method of counting renders it a false alternative.

Let us also not forget the known problems with the GEMS central tabulator software, also made by Diebold, and used to aggregate the numbers from various polling places. See for yourself in Votergate, the movie.

So for Tuesday's meeting, we've dodged the need to deal with Diebold on one front but not another. Our opportunity will be to bring the Supervisors into a discussion about how the votes are counted, ideally by hand in public with witnesses. Given the issue with the interpreter code, it is also worth asking why the elections department is so determined to comply with the disability requirements of HAVA while ignoring the fact that the scanners do not comply (.doc) with state or federal law.

Crnich indicates she intends to present a second recommendation on Tuesday, calling for funding a pilot project for tracking absentee ballots. She notes that Vote Here has not yet been discussed by the Election Advisory Committee and indeed it is new to me. Given the late hour and the peace march in the morning, I will have to leave that a topic for a future GuvWurld blog post.

Election News, Meetings and Events From The Voter Confidence Committee

2006-03-15T12:05:00.000-08:00

In this Voter Confidence Committee Newsletter:

1. Peace March 3/18
2. VCC planning meeting 3/20
3. Humboldt County Supervisors meeting 3/21
4. Demand Your Democracy Forum 4/11
5. Links and suggested reading

--------------------------------------------------

1. This Saturday, March 18 is the Peace March in Eureka. Gather at the
Eureka Municipal Auditorium on F St at 11:30. The end point of the march is
the Old Town Gazebo. The VCC will be tabling at both ends of the rally.
Please stop by and grab some leaflets to hand out for the Demand Your
Democracy Forum (more on that below).

2. Monday night, March 20 is the next VCC meeting at 1445 Fernwood in
McKinleyville. All are welcome. We will review planning for the DYD Forum
but mostly focus on preparation for the Supervisors' meeting the following
day.

3. Tuesday, March 21 is the next meeting of the Humboldt County Board of
Supervisors. The agenda has not yet been published but we expect election
conditions to be discussed (another VCC newsletter will confirm on Monday).
Polite and passionate speakers are greatly needed to escalate the resistance
to the illegal Diebold machines that count our votes in secret.

Specifically, the VCC advocates the following: no purchase of new Diebold
touch screen machines, instead using Vote-PAD to satisfy legal requirements
for disabled voters; AND, no more use of Humboldt's currently owned Diebold
machines because they count our votes in secret and they are not compliant
with state and federal law. Instead, the VCC advocates hand-counted paper
ballots for the June 6 primary. For specific background details refer to
the links below.

4. Save the date, Tuesday April 11 and join the VCC at 7pm for the first
Demand Your Democracy Forum at HSU Founders Hall Rm. 118. Local NAACP
leaders will discuss the historic struggle for the franchise. 2004 Green
Party Presidential Candidate David Cobb will talk about the Ohio recount.
And VCC co-founder Dave Berman will give an update on the Diebold situation
and the next action steps to address Humboldt election conditions. Fliers
and posters for this event will be available at Saturday's peace rally.
These documents are also available at the links shown below. Please
download and distribute.

5. Links and suggested reading

Demand Your Democracy Forum leaflets (6 to a page)
http://tinyurl.com/mafw9 (.pdf)

Demand Your Democracy Forum poster (8.5 x 11, b&w)
http://tinyurl.com/oa4f3 (.pdf)

Demand Your Democracy Forum poster (8.5 x 11, color)
http://tinyurl.com/qwblu (.pdf)

Humboldt Advocate: Interview with Dave Berman on Diebold
http://tinyurl.com/otasd (.pdf)

GuvWurld Blog: Vote-PAD Demo Well Received in Humboldt
http://tinyurl.com/qqt43

Note that the VCC website is being revamped. Most of the old content can be
found on the VCC History page. Please let us know if your webmaster skills
can help keep the site current.

The Voter Confidence Committee
www.voterconfidencecommittee.org

Humboldt Supervisors Hearing on Elections Delayed One Week

2006-03-08T15:35:00.000-08:00

This morning I posted that the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors would be including an item about election conditions on their 3/14 agenda. This claim was based on public statements made by Supervisor John Woolley, at the 2/28 Supervisors meeting, and also Clerk/Recorder Carolyn Crnich, speaking at the 3/2 Election Advisory Committee meeting. I have since learned from Lora Canzoneri, Clerk of the Board, that the topic is being pushed back to the 3/21 meeting of the Supes because Crnich is going to be out of town.

Indeed, I confirmed these travel plans with Crnich herself who told me that she is going to be attending a three day training conducted by Diebold. This will occur in Rocklin, in Placer County, next Monday through Wednesday. Crnich informed me that the training will pertain to Diebold OS machines and the GEMS central tabulator software. The importance of her attendance is underscored, she said, because currently only two Humboldt employees have had the training and one is retiring soon.

When I asked Crnich if she could raise concerns at this gathering on behalf of citizens such as myself, who think we shouldn't be using voting equipment that is plainly illegal, she likened the issue to jaywalking, another technically illegal act that people "just do." Lawlessness ain't just for unelected presidents anymore, don't ya know.

Meanwhile, Vote-PAD has yet to deliver its proposal to Humboldt County. Depending on the timing, this may or may not represent a potential reprieve from the County's original intent (.pdf) to buy Diebold TSx touch screen machines in order to comply with the disabled voter requirements of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). If the proposal arrives in time, the 3/21 Supes meeting could still focus, as a best case scenario, on approving this non-electronic alternative voting method for handicapped people to vote privately and independently.

This would be a great victory that would leave us then only to combat the continued use of Humboldt's existing Diebold OS optical scan machines. On the other hand, let's acknowledge the possibility that Crnich will come back from Rocklin with a contract for touch screen machines. When you oversee bogus elections, the possibility of lying to the public isn't too much of a stretch.

At any rate, planning for a legal challenge and the hand-counted paper ballots proposal continue to move forward as a comprehensive response. I am still urging all able voices to attend and speak out before the Supes, only plan for 3/21 and not 3/14 as I previously wrote.

Finally, if you typically read the GuvWurld blog in your e-mail, please consider making extra visits to the actual blog site starting later tonight. There are many important stories breaking today and I will likely be posting links that won't be sent around to your e-mail. There is also an enormous resource available in the GuvWurld News Archive.

Excellent Media Coverage, Important Upcoming Events

2006-03-08T02:35:00.000-08:00

Elaine Weinreb at the Humboldt Advocate interviewed me about a week and a half ago. The result is a cover story that is just fantastic. The Advocate doesn't publish online so either find the free weekly at Humboldt newsstands or see the scanned version (.pdf) uploaded to the GuvWurld News Archive.

As far as I know, Tuesday's Eureka Reporter contained the first coverage of the recent Vets For Peace open letter and press release on election conditions. Rebecca S. Bender wrote this article. She is new to the Reporter after spending over three years at the Arcata Eye. Bender has taken over Shane Mizer's beat and apparently Mizer has left the Reporter. He had been doing diligent work there and I hope he pops up at one of the many other Humboldt media outlets.

One thing these two articles have in common is a call for investigation of exactly how Diebold installed uncertified software (.pdf) in our voting machines (and machines in 16 other counties). These articles are totally welcome but they beg the question: when will the media go beyond reporting the demand for investigation and actually conduct an investigation? Please consider that a call to action targeting the media.

Personally, I found that the Humboldt Grand Jury was responsive to my complaint, but District Attorney Paul Gallegos has not returned several messages I have left him as follow-ups to a letter I sent him via certified mail a month ago. I don't have the resources to do a full-scale investigation so again I ask for public pressure to be increased. If you are in one of Diebold's other CA client counties, you can take these same steps where you live. This is the premise of the CA Unity Campaign.

Some upcoming events offer even more opportunities to join the fight for election integrity. This Friday at noon I will be speaking to the HSU Student Voting Committee at Nelson Hall East 116. I believe everyone is welcome. My intention is to discuss two things that GuvWurld readers should know about too. Both are developing so I'll update you later in the week.

Tuesday, March 14 @ Humboldt County Courthouse (825 5th St., Eureka)

The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors will be discussing election conditions. The agenda has not been posted yet so I don't know the exact parameters of their discussion. It seems likely, and this is a very optimistic and encouraging projection I'm offering, that last week's demonstration of Vote-PAD may lead to abandonment of the intent to purchase (.pdf) Diebold TSx touch screen machines. At least this is what we should lobby for. We need a big crowd of speakers. The published agenda will provide better insight on the time of day when this is likely to be addressed.

Tuesday, April 11, 7pm @ HSU Founders Hall Rm. 118

Save the date for the Demand Your Democracy Forum. The Voter Confidence Committee in conjunction with other community groups will be presenting several speakers and more action opportunities. More details coming very soon. We'll have fliers for this event ready to pass out at the Supes meeting next Tuesday.

One last note, also excellent media exposure, though not about elections. In response to this Eureka Reporter article from Saturday, the paper published this letter to the editor on Monday:

Dear Editor,

RE: Area residents question what Bush knew about hurricane, 3/4/2006.

During and immediately after Katrina, as we all watched in horror and disgust, there was a very clear and strong sense that we have to protect ourselves from our government. They had not only failed us, they repeatedly took proactive steps to prevent recovery and assistance from reaching those in need. For many of us, this was only a reminder of what we already knew. For others, it was a wake up call.

Katrina, as a unique weather phenomenon, was hardly the first sign that we need to protect ourselves from our government. We should know this from the way global warming and peak oil are ignored. From the threat of jail without charges or access to an attorney. Because peace organizations are infiltrated and spied upon, and protests are forced into "free speech zones." In the name of the U.S., torture is conducted at secret prisons. Warrantless wiretapping. 9/11.

If we are supposed to fear terrorism, let us clearly identify it. Those who hate our freedoms are those who sign legislation to restrict or cancel them. Those who inflict terror are those who have repeatedly ignored warnings before failing to protect us. The recently released videotape did not "allegedly" show Bush was warned. It showed Bush being warned and gave lie to his absurd claim that no one could have imagined the levees failing. Just like no one could have imagined planes flying into buildings while training exercises were being conducted on that exact scenario.

Fascism is a formula, a recognizable pattern that gradually engulfs a society. It is so blatant that it can't be seen only when the media distorts reality by maintaining illusions of normalcy and by perpetuating the myths of democracy, capitalism, free speech, free markets and free press.

We do not consent. Support the truth.

Dave Berman
Eureka

Vote-PAD Demo Well Received in Humboldt

2006-03-05T03:21:00.000-08:00

The Humboldt County Election Advisory Committee (EAC) received a presentation Thursday night from Dianna Smith of Vote-PAD, the assistive device designed to allow handicapped voters to vote privately and independently.

The "device" is about as low-tech as possible, taking the form of a spiral bound folder into which a paper ballot is inserted. Inside the folder is also a clear plastic sheath with holes that line up over the places on the ballot where the voter can mark his or her choices. The holes aid the voter in keeping the tip of the pen within the ballot's designated marking area while the sheath protects the rest of the ballot from stray marks.

Other features include braille dots, rubber-tipped page-turning clamps for dexterity impaired voters, a magnifier, and an audio tape that can be rewound, forwarded and played at variable speeds. Vote-PAD also allows voters to verify their vote choices through the use of a vibrating verification wand that can detect whether or not a bubble on the ballot has been selected. Smith noted a compelling anecdote of a deaf and blind MN voter who successfully tested Vote-PAD.

In addition to the clear plastic sheath, a removable opaque "privacy shield" page is also enclosed in the folder to enable removal of the ballot and insertion in either a ballot box or optical scanner without having to expose the voter's choices. One of the big selling points of Vote-PAD is that it is compatible with any voting system a county might use and appears also to be HAVA compliant. The Vote-PAD device can also be customized by the manufacturer to conform to any ballot size.

Vote-PAD is a privately owned and privately funded corporation based in Washington state. It is estimated that Humboldt County could spend $160,000 for 80 kits, each including 20 folders and all the accessories. These supplies should last for several years with virtually no maintenance costs and only nominal replacement fees.

Judging by the way County Clerk/Recorder Carolyn Crnich and Elections Manager Lindsey McWilliams were assisting Smith in answering questions, it certainly seemed Humboldt's top two election officials are supportive of Vote-PAD. If so, this ought to mean a change of plans from their previously stated intention (.pdf) to purchase about 110 Diebold TSx DRE machines. I don't think we can count on this for sure just yet, but I understand this subject will be taken up by the Board of Supervisors on March 14.

Meanwhile, the issue of Diebold's conditional certification was mentioned only briefly at this EAC meeting. I opted not to interject my concerns as they were already known to those present and could only have led to a futile argument in that moment. The EAC meets on the first Thursday of each month and is open to the public. My understanding is that next month's meeting will deal in more depth with Diebold and voting security issues in general.

Election Integrity Advocates Swarm Sacramento

2006-03-02T02:28:00.000-08:00

Election integrity advocates descended upon Sacramento on Wednesday to attend the public hearing on all the other election machine vendors besides Diebold. GuvWurld correspondent Dan Ashby filed this report.

Hi all,

I got home about 8:30. Glad to see you were able to catch some of the TV news. We had fewer TV cameras this time than last, but I think we actually received much more air time.

Great sign, Jackie, and a reminder of the power of graphic display. I think that your sign filling the screen for 5 seconds with that message probably achieved more media impact than any other single thing we did.

Here's what else I can tell you about the day:
The crowd started out small, perhaps 30 people, but with some good signage; and we had a literature and sales table with several informational placards on the stolen 2004 election.

Early on, Kevin Yamamura of the Sacramento Bee interviewed me. Then I was simultaneously interviewed by two radio stations and one TV station. I think the TV may have been Channel 2, and one of the radio stations I think was an ABC affiliate.

I didn't have time to get their cards, because the next immediate thing was to pull together the group for a press conference. We had about 50 people at that point, and formed into a tight group to fill the camera, with signs in the back.

Alan Dechert, Jim Soper, Judy Alter, Phil Harlan, and Judy Bertelsen each gave short talks, a good mix of people covering the issue from a variety of angles: open source and pending legislation, Sequoia security holes, Sequoia voting hacks, disability access relative to integrity of the count, and a recap of McPherson's Diebold recertification travesty.

As people filed inside to the hearing, I did another interview with Capitol News TV.

People continued to arrive for the hearing, so that what initially looked like a small turnout turned quite respectable. Some of our party counted the sign-in sheets and concluded there were 100 to 120 people in the auditorium.

The hearing format consisted of a reading of the Secretary of State's staff report summaries for each vendor certification item, followed by some responsive comments from vendor representatives, and then open comments from the public and assorted elections officials. The registrars of Contra Costa, Riverside, and Napa counties spoke (the latter two expressing complete confidence in their vendors, claiming never to have lost a vote, and assuring us their constituents just love their DREs).

Throughout the day, citizens--including many from CEPN, VRTF, Mainstream Moms, and CaliforniaBallots--made cogent, sharp, persuasive and moving comments against the machines, and for honest, transparent and secure elections. Comments opposing privatized electronic voting led by a ratio of about 97 to 3.

Everyone who wanted to speak got three opportunities for two minutes each. Testimony went on until 4:00.

At the noon break, San Jose NBC Channel 11 did a series of interviews with Ted Newman, myself, and Michelle Gabriel, for a total of about 20 minutes.

Ian Hoffman covered the hearing, so expect a good story in the morning.

Bruce McPherson was seen in the lobby. This was a first.

Registrars from Contra Costa, Riverside, and Napa spoke--the latter two praising their e-voting vendors, claiming they'd never lost a vote, and that their voters love their DREs.

Jim Soper gave a 15 minute presentation describing a Visio Basic script hack on Sequoia WIN-Eds software demonstrated by the latest addition to our CEPN team, Jeremiah Akin of Riverside County. Jim also told the secretary of state's staff that there really is an Easter bunny who lays well-hidden Easter eggs in voting software.

Riverside Registrar Barbara Dunmore asserted that whatever Akin was talking about, hadn't happened in Riverside. Dunmore also said there is no modem, internet or network connectivity on Riverside voting systems. (Two weeks ago, CEPN member Paul Jacobs reported the Riverside supervisors approving "use of a county Intranet system called "CORNET" to send election data from the Indio desert to Riverside . . . the CORNET Wide Area . . . according to the county Web site. . . will be accessible to all government agencies."

"There will be no transmission limitation placed on the CORNET. File transfers, interactive traffic and graphics can be transmitted at any time.")

Judy Alter came up from L.A. to present her findings, complete with machine internal tape copies, showing a vote-shifting routine on Sequoia Insight and Optech 400 scanners used in New Mexico, 2004.

At lunchtime, Ferris Gluck and Sherry Healy demonstrated the Equalivote assistive voting device they have developed, and Phil Harlan tried it out.

Around noon, Michelle fielded a radio interview on her cell phone (not sure which station). After the hearing, I did a 5-minute radio interview via cell phone with the Peter B. Collins show out of Monterey. On Monday I also had a 5 minute call-in on the Christine Craft show on 1240 AM Sacramento.

So, that's at least 2 newspaper stories, 5 radio interviews, and 5 TV interviews. Not bad.

When I got home, my answering machine messages included a follow-up call from Yamamura of the Bee, a Latina reporter from a Spanish-language newspaper (La Union) in L.A., and an aide to Assemblyman Mark Leno (D-SF) regarding the recertification of Diebold voting machines, "to get a sense of what you guys are doing about this, get some information from you, and find out how we can be of assistance; to let you know we're definitely interested in doing something about this situation."

My bet is that it was that 5-second TV billboard by Jackie that got Leno's attention. I'll bet it got McPherson's too, if he was watching. (scroll down)

Oh, and the VRTF literature table generated $90 in book, CD, and message-media sales income.

Dan Ashby

The Sacramento Bee article appeared online late Wednesday. While perhaps not overtly biased, it does seem to give the unwarranted benefit of the doubt to McPherson and the vendors. For instance, McPherson is allowed to get away with calling his certification procedures "stringent" and "transparent." Of course, the article does not point out, as I did last week, that McPherson didn't even follow his own "strict standards" (.pdf).

In addition, the certification justification (.pdf) that offered assurances that documented security flaws are "fixable" and "manageable" set the bar way too low. You might as well shoot me in the head, stab me, run me over with a truck and drown me, and then offer me a band-aid. Current election conditions provide no basis for confidence in the results reported and McPherson has no right to ask for blind trust.

Tuesday Re-Cap

2006-03-01T01:54:00.000-08:00

Tuesday felt like a good day, starting with circulating the press release and open letter on election conditions put out by Vets For Peace Humboldt Bay Chapter 56. The first version of that letter dates back to December. While it is still timely and accurate this week, it doesn't contain references to the most current events.

It has been suggested that perhaps after Thursday's meeting of the County's new Election Advisory Board (EAB) there could be a follow-up letter. I have missed the first two EAB meetings in favor of attending the conflicting VFP meetings that were necessary to move the letter along. Thursday will be my first EAB meeting which is open to the public and starts at 6:30 at the County Courthouse in Eureka. I haven't seen an agenda but I understand there will be a presenter doing a demonstration of Vote-PAD.

The Voting-on-Paper Assistive Device (Vote-PAD) is an inexpensive, non-electronic, voter-assist alternative that helps most people with visual or dexterity impairments to vote independently.

The Vote-PAD can be used in any jurisdiction. It is customized to provide access to each precinct's hand-counted or optically-scanned paper ballot. All jurisdictions must offer provisional ballots during federal elections, and many also provide paper ballot backups in case voting machines break down. It is particularly suited for jurisdictions that use hand-counted paper ballots.

I've been talking about hand-counted paper ballots (HCPB) quite a bit lately, including during public comment at Tuesday's meeting of theHumboldt County Board of Supervisors. In under three minutes I made the case for investigating Diebold's installation of uncertified software in Humboldt voting machines (.pdf), summarized the problems with Secretary McPherson's recent decision to conditionally certify Diebold, and served notice of my intention to both ask a judge for an injunction against continued use of Humboldt's illegal Diebold OS machines and to turn in a proposal recommending HCPB as an alternative.

Back to Vote-PAD for second, BradBlog.com reported this article back in January, followed by news of Wisconsin's approval for use. The Vote-PAD website also contains this announcement from Jan. 19 stating the company will be working with Yolo County, CA. Finally, Vote-PAD was founded by Ellen Theisen, an experienced technical writer who compiled the tremendous Mythbreakers (.pdf) document previously referenced at GuvWurld. Ellen also founded VotersUnite.org and attended the National Summit to Save Our Elections last fall in Portland. There I had a chance to meet and work with her and develop a strong sense that there is a basis for confidence in her work.

Another exciting part of my Tuesday was speaking to Eureka Mayor Peter La Vallee's graduate class in legal and political social work at Humboldt State University. The invitation was for 30 minutes but I was encouraged to finish out the full final hour of the class. This was much more of a discussion than a lecture covering many topics including: Consent of the Governed and the Voter Confidence Resolution; ranked choice voting, including the distinction between instant runoff voting for single seat elections and choice voting for multiple seat elections; background and current events on Diebold; fascism and the potential future of the Intentionally Divided States of America (.pdf); and ways to get involved with local efforts to address election integrity.

Welcome to the many students who became new subscribers to the GuvWurld mailing list (subscribe), and thanks also to the new subscribers to the Voter Confidence Committee list (reminder: there is a VCC meeting tonight - if you would like to participate, please contact me for the private location of this meeting). I was especially pleased with this speaking engagement because I went in cold, without preparation, planning only to heed the advice I'd been given: have fun with it.

The last part of my day involved talking to a lawyer about pursuing the Diebold injunction. We were considering the arguments to make. I said of course it should be open and shut with the interpreter code making the machines illegal. He then brought up the point that allowing continued use represents a great risk of harm. We both agreed the first argument was stronger. Then I said that the line I'd really like to use is...(guess, go on, wait for it...)...there is no basis for confidence in the results reported. He said this is the top argument. I was somewhat stunned. This is what I've used since I first started developing the Voter Confidence Resolution nearly two years ago. My mind boggles when I think that this phrase, the near equivalent of clicking my heels to go home, could turn out to be so influential in such a potentially pivotal action.

Finally, for your reference, the ITA report (.pdf) upon which CA Secretary of State Bruce McPherson was supposed to base his Diebold certification decision was finally released yesterday. I haven't had a chance to read it yet but I've seen commentary stating that it does not really address the illegality of the interpreter code, primarily due to the way Diebold framed the questions to be answered by the reviewers. That sort of takes the I (Independent) out of ITA. For more on the incestuous relationship between the machine vendors and those tasked with vetting them, read this piece by Dr. Avi Rubin. Also for reference, here again is the security analysis (.pdf) by the Voting Systems Technology Assessment Advisory Board (VSTAAB) used by McPherson to justify further rubbing our noses in the absence of democracy.

Press Release: Vets For Peace Ch. 56 Circulates Open Letter on Election Conditions

2006-02-28T11:12:00.000-08:00

----------------------------------------------------
PRESS RELEASE: FOR RELEASE TUESDAY FEBRUARY 28, 2006

HUMBOLDT BAY VETERANS FOR PEACE ENDORSES VOTER CONFIDENCE COMMITTEE'S CALL FOR
ANSWERS FROM COUNTY AND CITY LEADERS -
VFP concerned over questionable voting machine software, departmental
accountability, lack of voter confidence
--------------------------------------------------

Tuesday, February 28, 2006, Eureka, CA - Humboldt Bay Veterans for Peace
(VFP56) is officially endorsing the Voter Confidence Committee's appeal to
the Humboldt County elections department to take responsibility for ensuring
transparent and verifiably accurate election conditions. Among the
recommendations noted, VFP urges local city councils and the County Board of
Supervisors to adopt the VCC's Voter Confidence Resolution, which outlines
conditions likely to ensure conclusive election outcomes and create a basis
for confidence in the results reported.

In this recently released letter to county government leaders, VFP declared
that "current election conditions guarantee inconclusive outcomes. The
Humboldt elections department needs to be responsible and proactive in
creating transparent and verifiably accurate election conditions."

Regarding the call to action, VFP Secretary Jim Sorter stated; "We need to
have the illegal Diebold machines seen for what they are. We need paper
ballots to have an election or else it is just a selection and our voices
aren't heard."

VFP RECOMMENDATIONS
-------------------
According to the letter, VFP56 is recommending the following:

1. Investigation of Diebold uncertified software installation in voting
machines.
2. Election department officials acknowledge and affirm their understanding
of the GAO's findings, and to act in accordance with those findings.
3. Diebold be declared an unfit business partner, ruling out any further
use of Diebold voting equipment and any future contracts with Diebold.
4. Conduct town hall forums to involve the public in discussing preferred
election conditions, and to educate about current conditions.
5. Require the county's new election advisory board to detail steps and
costs for establishing voting processes owned and operated entirely in the
public domain.
6. City Councils and County Board of Supervisors adopt the Voter Confidence
Resolution outlining conditions likely to ensure conclusive election
outcomes and create a basis for confidence in the results reported.

VCC EXPECTS MORE CITIZENS DEMANDING ANSWERS
-------------------------------------------
Dave Berman, author of the Voter Confidence Resolution, the GuvWurld blog
and co-founder of the Voter Confidence Committee of Humboldt County, says
"I'm glad to have the support of VFP on this matter and expect to see more
citizens and community groups demanding answers and consequences."

Berman added that local media and law enforcement have an obligation to
determine what government official(s) allowed Diebold to install uncertified
software in Humboldt's voting machines. According to Berman, the Board of
Supervisors is long overdue to take responsibility for replacing the
County's illegal Diebold voting machines with a transparent, secure and
verifiably accurate voting system: hand-counted paper ballots.

"Public office holders in Humboldt County should know that personal
accountability comes with the job," he said.

Gordon Anderson, a member of VFP, added; "Vets For Peace is very concerned
about the election process. We want it to be a truly documentable and
accurate representation of citizens' vote choices. Hopefully the election
advisory board and the elections department can find a way to resolve the
discrepancies that still exist with using illegal and questionable
equipment."

The full text of the open letter follows this release.

CONTACT:
-------
Dave Berman,
Phone: (707) 845-3749 for an immediate live interview
Email: blog@guvwurld.org
-------

An open letter from Veterans For Peace Chapter 56
February 2, 2006

To the Humboldt County Elections Department, Board of Supervisors, and all employees of our local government.

As Veterans For Peace, our commitment to peace is equal to our devotion to justice. Over the last five years, both peace and justice have eroded. It is not just illegal and immoral wars; our most precious rights have been sacrificed to “free speech zones,” the suspension of posse comitatus and habeas corpus, and disenfranchisement that has become universal and guaranteed.

The Supreme Court decided the 2000 presidential election; the voting public did not. When paperless electronic voting was introduced, votes could not be recounted. Unverifiable votes ensure inconclusive outcomes that will never receive unanimous acceptance from the public. Arcata took notice of this and adopted the Voter Confidence Resolution(1) stating:

“When elections are conducted under conditions that prevent conclusive outcomes, the Consent of the Governed is not sought. Absent this self-evident source of legitimacy, such Consent is not to be assumed or taken for granted.”

VFP56 has twice endorsed this resolution. We seek not to accept election conditions that will continue to guarantee inconclusive outcomes. Vital to this effort is increased awareness of the report(2) released by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in October 2005. More than 100 pages meticulously document insecure and unreliable conditions of U.S. elections. Perhaps the most revealing comment occurs on page 38:

“Nevertheless, there is evidence that some of these concerns – including weak controls and inadequate testing – have caused problems with recent elections, resulting in the loss and miscount of votes.”

The official non-partisan watchdog arm of Congress has determined that votes were lost and miscounted in recent elections. This necessarily means that the true outcome cannot be known from those “elections.”

The GAO report also cites an April 2004 CA Secretary of State (SoS) Staff Report(3). On page 3, the SoS report confirms that in 2003, Diebold installed uncertified software in voting machines in 17 California counties, including Humboldt. The report indicates this violates state law, and that Diebold confesses to this crime. VFP56 is calling upon the Humboldt County District Attorney and Grand Jury, as well as all local government and media to investigate who is accountable for Humboldt’s voting machines having uncertified software installed, and whether those responsible were complicit in this action or simply negligent?

One other essential reference from the GAO describes problems inherent with using modems for data transfer (vote tallies, from precincts to a “central tabulator”). Page 25 of the GAO report points to a Trusted Agent Report(4) prepared for the Maryland General Assembly. This Maryland report describes (p.20) successful efforts to alter election results by exploiting vulnerabilities in Diebold’s GEMS central tabulator, the same software used for counting votes in Humboldt County. A successful “hack” of GEMS has also been conducted under the supervision of Leon County, FL elections officials, resulting in two Florida counties terminating their relationship with Diebold. The GEMS hack was also demonstrated on national television (CNBC) with the footage immortalized in Votergate the Movie, available for free download on the Internet(5).

Current election conditions guarantee inconclusive outcomes. The Humboldt elections department needs to be responsible and proactive in creating transparent and verifiably accurate election conditions. We know that it is a difficult time. To exhibit our understanding, here is one last citation from page four of the SoS report:

Diebold’s conduct has created an untenable situation for both county and state elections officials. Some county officials have felt compelled to defend untested, unqualified and uncertified Diebold voting systems, having authorized large capital outlays only to find out on the eve of or during an election that the systems do not function as promised. Before the March (2004) Primary, county officials repeatedly warned that, without certification of particular voting system components, the election could not be conducted because it was too late to devise and implement back-up plans.

Perhaps this “untenable situation” remains. Before it is too late we are depending upon you as county officials to solve this illegal and immoral dilemma. There are options available. A legitimate system must be in place that creates conclusive and verifiably accurate results. Priorities must be accuracy and transparency rather than expediency. Hand counted paper ballots may be a real option for now.

VFP56 recommends the following:

Investigation of Diebold uncertified software installation in voting machines.

Election department officials acknowledge and affirm their understanding of the GAO’s findings, and to act in accordance with those findings.

Diebold be declared an unfit business partner, ruling out any further use of Diebold voting equipment and any future contracts with Diebold.

Conduct town hall forums to involve the public in discussing preferred election conditions, and to educate about current conditions.

Require the county’s new election advisory board to detail steps and costs for establishing voting processes owned and operated entirely in the public domain.

City Councils and County Board of Supervisors adopt the Voter Confidence Resolution outlining conditions likely to ensure conclusive election outcomes and create a basis for confidence in the results reported.

In Respect and Peace,
Veterans For Peace Humboldt Bay Chapter 56

-----------------------------------------------------
(1) http://guvwurld.blogspot. com/2005/04/voter-confidence-resolution.html
(2) http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05956.pdf
(3) http://www.ss.ca. gov/elections/ks_dre_papers/diebold_report_april20_final.pdf
(4) http://www.raba.com/press/TA_Report_AccuVote.pdf
(5) http://www.votergate.tv

NOTE: This letter is archived here: http://tinyurl.com/rvks6

Diebold Developments and the California Unity Campaign

2006-02-27T23:39:00.000-08:00

Diebold stories have continued breaking at a rapid pace, thanks largely to BradBlog.com. I don't have time to comment on it all here so I'm just linking highlights you should know about:

Diebold Whistleblower Facing Three Felony Counts

Alaska Now Refuses Release of 2004 Election Data

Incredibly Bad Press for Diebold

CA State Senator Says Diebold Re-Certification in Violation of State Law!

Why do Diebold's Touch-Screen Voting Machines Have Built-In Wireless Infrared Data Transfer Ports?

It is starting to feel sickening to keep leading with Diebold developments, so the only further mention I'll make is that while some possibilities have emerged, I'm still seeking an attorney to help me file for an injunction against Humboldt's continued use of the Diebold OS machines. Contact me if you can work pro bono with me on this.

The other main thing I've been focused on is the hand counted paper ballots (HCPB) proposal. I've heard a lot of encouraging words for this project and help has come from some unexpected places. One thing I learned is the legal concept of remedial deterrence. The Harvard Law Review mentions it in this series of articles on voting and democracy. In a nutshell, when facing election administration issues, courts can find a violation but no remedy in which case the plaintiff will sometimes receive no relief. The lesson is to present the judge with the preferred alternative. In this case, it would be ideal to have the HCPB proposal handy when asking the court to prevent use of the machines. Pretty common sense, really. At any rate, there is somewhat of a conversation about this project at Democratic Underground.

A lot of what else I've been up to has been promoting these two projects and finding people with whom to collaborate. On that count, I have a very special, very strong exclusive announcement from a prominent Humboldt community group, which I will release separately Tuesday morning. The announcement responds to and reverberates the call to action laid out by GuvWurld in the campaign to unite California election reformers. This campaign was launched in December and endorsed by VelvetRevolution.us about a month ago.

More recently, Dan Ashby from the California Election Protection Network did an amazing job excerpting and summarizing various GuvWurld posts into a single page that was circulated by e-mail and archived at DeepEndNews.com. Please copy and paste the contents of that page into an HTML formatted e-mail message (to keep the links active) and send that to your lists. Note that the injunction and HCPB proposal are both steps that can and should be taken in other CA counties. It is this mirrored tactic approach that is the hallmark of the unity campaign.

I have been receiving a lot of public speaking invitations lately. Another came Monday from Eureka Mayor Peter La Vallee. I did not realize that he teaches at Humboldt State University. Tuesday afternoon I will get about 30 minutes with his graduate class on legal and political social work. I haven't blogged about it previously but Nezzie Wade and Dan Faulk have also put me before their students, a total of four other times in the past few months (HSU and College of the Redwoods).

In addition, Voter Confidence Committee member Kathryn Hedges has relayed to me a request from the HSU Associated Students Voting Committee. Their next meeting is at the same exact time as the next VCC meeting so we'll have to connect in the near future. For the record, that is this Wednesday at 7pm. The VCC meeting is in a private location though you can contact me for details if you would like to participate.

If you missed last Friday's Eureka Times-Standard (archive), there was a story about the Diebold certification that concluded with a quote a bunch of people told me was pretty good. Humboldt blogger Buhne Tribune picked up on it with a link to GuvWurld and several reader comments taboot. I was also interviewed by the Humboldt Advocate over the weekend for an article presumably due out this coming Friday.

There's more, but it will have to wait...big press release in a few hours...

Response To Diebold Certification Is Strong

2006-02-22T23:12:00.000-08:00

One month ago, CA Secretary of State Bruce McPherson was here in Humboldt County on his "I swear it's not a campaign" tour. At the time, GuvWurld obtained exclusive video of McPherson's press conference at the County Courthouse. BradBlog.com graciously hosted the content for me, though Brad did not do a story about the event until this week. On Tuesday, the first business day for official Diebold certification blowback, Brad posted this fine article with a big splash about the video. This was the second time in less than a week that Brad threw out a GuvWurld link. Cheers! What would be better? Brad's Tuesday piece also went up on Huffington Post.

CA Senator Debra Bowen is asking everyone to sign on to her petition letter to McPherson.

I urge you to reverse your decision to certify Diebold electronic voting machines in California's 2006 elections -- and to delay any further action until you schedule hearings to allow experts and the general public to review and comment the latest study results.

Last December, you announced that you were sending Diebold voting machines back for federal review by the "Independent Testing Authorities" because their memory cards hadn't been reviewed. Now you're going back on your word, approving Diebold machines for use in California even before receiving the results of these federal tests.

Instead, you've based your findings on a supposedly "independent state audit" that didn't even give Diebold a glowing recommendation. In fact, the report determined that "there are serious vulnerabilities" with the Diebold machines "that go beyond what was previously known."

Apparently you've based your decision on a report made a board that you appointed yourself, with no opportunity for public review. That's not how you restore public confidence in California elections.

Why are you so intent to rush through this Diebold certification? Where are the results of tests conducted by the "Independent Testing Authorities?" And why not allow experts and the general public to review and comment on the report you requested BEFORE making a decision?

I urge you to delay certification of the Diebold electronic voting systems until you schedule a public hearing to review the latest study results and until Diebold resolves the many security and performance flaws that have previously been identified.

As far as I know, calls to the Senate Rules Committee are still useful in pressing for a subpoena to compel testimony from McPherson and all the election machine vendors before the Senate Elections, Reapportionment and Constitutional Amendments Committee. See this GuvWurld post for more details and contact info. I called all the Senators on Tuesday and each one acknowledged that they were getting a lot of calls on this.

More locally, I spoke with both Humboldt County Elections Manager Lindsey McWilliams and his boss, Clerk/Recorder Carolyn Crnich. I was assured that there wouldn't be an immediate move to close a deal with Diebold, if only because the process of making the deal can take some time, plus the machines likely wouldn't arrive in time for the June 6 primary. I exhaled relief and reprieve.

Of note, McWilliams still has no concerns about the Diebold OS machines currently used in Humboldt County. When I pointed out that the Secretary of State has accepted a security analysis (.pdf) that calls the machines illegal, and describes myriad technical flaws, McWilliams would only say "it's certified."

On the other hand, Crnich was a little more contemplative. She seems to appreciate the strong potential for a morass to develop as a result of legal challenges to McPherson's "conditional" certification. Referring to the lack of guidance provided by Friday's certification announcement (.pdf), Crnich said "I'm not satisfied with what we've got and I'm not sure we're ahead of where we were last week."

In a previous meeting I attended with Crnich and Vets For Peace Secretary Jim Sorter, I encouraged Crnich to consider municipal civil disobedience. She reacted quite negatively. However, yesterday we discussed what an untenable position she is in and it seemed like maybe, perhaps, I hope I'm not just wishing that she began to get the idea that being controlled by others is not a suitable excuse to offer after everything has gone to pot and people are seeking accountability.

I've also talked individually with several members of both the Eureka and Arcata City Councils, and I spoke during the public comment Tuesday night at Eureka's Council meeting. To all of them I said that they should make the opportunity now to speak to County Supes because a stalemate over the machines will not be good for the cities and when it happens it will be too late to influence the situation. Councilmembers can stand to hear more encouragement on this so please see this post for contact info and call them.

And of course we need to work on the Board of Supervisors. A few extraordinary people have come out of the woodwork to help me with a proposal I am developing to offer the Supes an outline of what it would take to be prepared to run the June 6 primary using hand counted paper ballots. Please contact the Supes and tell them the illegal machines are unacceptable and if they want to maintain the legitimacy of local government, it is going to require a transparent, secure, and verifiably accurate voting system: hand counted paper ballots.

I'm hearing/causing lots of rumbles about legal actions against the machines or some other variable in the equation. Lawyers willing to support this cause pro bono please contact me. I also want to recognize my attorney friend in WA, Paul Lehto. I've blogged about him several times before and bring him up now to recommend reading his great new essay "Officials say "Trust Us" When Very Basis of American System is Distrust!!"

I also can't resist recommending Rev. Rich Lang's new essay "We Dare Not Speak Its Name," calling on other preachers to use their pulpits to speak the truth about fascism.

Action Alert: Reject Illegal Diebold Certification

2006-02-21T01:41:00.000-08:00

Action steps and contact info at the bottom. First a recap and some background...

On Friday afternoon, CA Secretary of State Bruce McPherson granted conditional certification (.pdf) for use of Diebold voting machines in 2006 "elections." McPherson's decision was based on a security analysis (.pdf) conducted by the Voting Systems Technology Assessment Advisory Board (VSTAAB).

Among the many significant findings of the security analysis is that Diebold equipment is currently out of compliance with state and federal law based on the presence of interpreter code. The analysis also confirms many known security flaws, and mentions finding 16 new bugs. This leaves readers wondering how such a document could be used to justify granting certification rather than denying it.

For more details, see this GuvWurld report; also visit BradBlog.com, BlackBoxVoting.org, and VoteTrustUSA for more coverage. Citizen engagement is now needed at every level throughout California to confront the lawlessness of our state's top elections official.

In Humboldt County, last April, the Board of Supervisors approved a proposal (.pdf) from the Elections Department indicating the intent to purchase approximately 110 Diebold TSX machines once certification has been granted. I hope to learn early on Tuesday whether Humboldt's top elections officials still think that's best. If so, there will certainly be a lawsuit challenging the illegality of the machines, despite the state's certification.

The cities of Humboldt, which rely on the County for their election equipment and administration, will likely be caught in the middle, potentially unprepared or unable to conduct an election. For this reason, I have been calling City Councilmembers in Eureka and Arcata to request that they contact the Board of Supervisors ASAP to encourage them not to go through with the purchase immediately simply based on the certification.

And one final bit of background is the story of last Thursday's hearing on voting systems testing. It was chaired by State Senator and Candidate for Secretary of State Debra Bowen (D-Redondo Beach) who writes: "It was an extremely informative session" even though Secretary of State McPherson and the voting machine manufacturers all boycotted the session." Bowen now wants to subpoena McPherson and the machine manufacturers to compel them to appear before the Elections, Reapportionment and Constitutional Amendments Committee, which Bowen Chairs. To get the subpoena, she needs a majority vote from the Senate Rules Committee, of which she is one of five members.

Action #1 (mostly copied from e-mail circulating heavily over the past 48 hours):

On the state level, call Rules Committee members. What to say:

Be quick, be polite, be professional. Here's your message: ask for "Rules Committee support for subpoenas of election industry and certification insiders who won't otherwise inform the Elections Committee as to what's going on".

The key people: Diebold head programmers, federal testing labs (Ciber, Wyle) that repeatedly certified this stuff, voting system examiners who took taxpayer money, spent hours on "security exams" on systems your 12-year old sister can hack, then repeatedly recommended for certification.

This is about volume of calls logged/emails received. Not only should YOU make calls, but this needs to go out to your list.

Polite, professional, short clear message, FIRM is what works. Read background info above.

Senator Don Perata (Chair) - D (916) 651-4009
email: Senator.Perata@sen.ca.gov

Senator Jim Battin (Vice-Chair) - R (916) 651-4037
email: Jim.Battin@sen.ca.gov

Senator Roy Ashburn - R (916) 651-4018
email: senator.ashburn@sen.ca.gov

Senator Debra Bowen - D - (Senator Bowen requested emails only)
email: Debra@debrabowen.com

Senator Gilbert Cedillo - D (916) 651-4022

Action #2 (Humboldt specific but appropriate and easily adapted everywhere in CA)

No Deal With Diebold! (.pdf)

Let County Supervisors know that it is unacceptable to spend more of our money on more equipment that is illegal and not secure. Let them know we will not accept the results of future elections held on our current illegal machines. If you are willing, tell them you will be a party to the legal action that is coming against Humboldt's election machines. Supervisors' credibility and legitimacy, going forward, can only come from their dedication to restoring a basis for voter confidence.

Let City Councilmembers know that you are concerned about the status of our voting system and the possibility that the City could get in a jam because of the County. Ask Councilmembers to contact Supervisors with the same message we have above.

Humboldt County Board of Supervisors: http://www.co.humboldt.ca.us/board

Jimmy Smith, District 1: jrsmith@co.humboldt.ca.us, (707) 476-2391
Roger Rodoni, District 2: roger.rodoni@co.humboldt.ca.us, (707) 476-2392
John Woolley, District 3: jwoolley@co.humboldt.ca.us, (707) 476-2393
Bonnie Neely, District 4: bonnie.neely@co.humboldt.ca.us, (707) 476-2394
Jill Geist, District 5: jill.geist@co.humboldt.ca.us, (707) 476-2395

Eureka City Council: http://www.eurekawebs.com/cityhall

Peter La Vallee, Mayor: plavallee@ci.eureka.ca.gov, 707-441-4172
Mary Beth Wolford, Ward 1: mbwolford@ci.eureka.ca.gov, 707-441-4169
Virginia Bass-Jackson. Ward 2: virginia@ci.eureka.ca.gov, 707-441-4168
Jeff Leonard, Ward 3: jleonard@ci.eureka.ca.gov, 707-441-4170
Chris Kerrigan, Ward 4: kerrigan@ci.eureka.ca.gov, 707-441-4167
Mike Jones, Ward 5: mjones@ci.eureka.ca.gov, 707-441-4171

Arcata City Council: http://www.arcatacityhall.org/gov.html

Michael Machi, Mayor: mmmp@htan.org, 707-269-0394
Dave Meserve: greenarcata@hotmail.com, 707-441-9846
Paul Pitino: ppitino@arcatacityhall.org, 707-522-0387
Mark Wheetley: mwheetley@arcatacityhall.org, 707-269-0332
Harmony Groves: harmony@harmonyinarcata.com, 707-522-0463

Action #3:

Of course we need to be the media...

Local Media Contacts:

Arcata Eye: news@arcataeye.com, 707-826-7000
Eureka Reporter: editor@eurekareporter.com, 707-476-8000
Eureka Times-Standard: editor@times-standard.com, 707-441-0500
HSU Lumberjack: thejack@humboldt.edu, 707-826-3271
Humboldt Advocate: news@humboldtadvocate.com, 707-825-9400
Humboldt Beacon: beacon@humboldt1.com 707-725-6166
Humboldt Sentinel: editor@humboldtsentinel.com, 707-407-9212
KHUM: info@khum.com, 707-786-5104
KMUD: news@kmud.org, 707-923-2513
Mainstream Media Project: info@mainstream-media.net, 707-826-9111
North Coast Journal: ncjournal@northcoastjournal.com, 707-826-2000
Redwood Times: rovincent@redwoodtimes.com(707) 923-1396
The Independent: indie@asis.com, 707-923-4205

Finally, public notice has been served (why can't I find this at the Secretary's website?) that a hearing will be held in Sacremento on 3/1/06 concerning certification of machines from several other vendors.

Note: media list updated 3/9/06 with thanks to anonymous comment poster #1.

Despite Illegalities, Diebold Election Machines Certified In CA

2006-02-18T09:58:00.000-08:00

CA Secretary of State Bruce McPherson issued a press release (.pdf) Friday afternoon, buried at the start of the long holiday weekend, announcing conditional certification of Diebold OS and TSX voting machines.

SACRAMENTO, CA - Secretary of State Bruce McPherson today announced his decision to certify with conditions the Diebold TSX and Optical Scan (OS) voting systems for use in California's 2006 elections. The decision comes after months of thorough review of both voting systems, their compliance with both state and federal laws and the completion of an additional security analysis by independent testers from computer labs at the University of California, Berkeley.

That's only the first paragraph and we have several problems. In the first sentence we learn that this certification is conditional. We'll get to the conditions later. First consider this summary statement of Diebold's certification efforts published in an April 2004 CA Secretary of State Staff Report (.pdf).

1. marketed and sold the TSx system before it was fully functional, and before it was federally qualified;

2. misrepresented the status of the TSx system in federal testing in order to obtain state certification;

3. failed to obtain federal qualification of the TSx system despite assurances that it would;

4. failed even to pursue testing of the firmware installed on its TSx machines in California until only weeks before the election, choosing instead to pursue testing of newer firmware that was even further behind in the ITA testing process and that, in some cases, required the use of other software that also was not approved in California;

5. installed uncertified software on election machines in 17 counties;

6. sought last-minute certification of allegedly essential hardware, software and firmware that had not completed federal testing; and

7. in doing so, jeopardized the conduct of the March [2004] Primary.

We've been down this path before. Once again unqualified equipment is given provisional approval, this time despite a clearly documented track record showing Diebold's brazen disregard for such arrangements. They do not genuinely strive to comply with federal laws, and in fact, are currently out of compliance with federal law by inclusion of interpreter code. In his 12/20/05 letter to Diebold (.pdf), Secretary McPherson wrote:

It is the Secretary of State's position that the source code for the AccuBasic code on these cards, as well as for the AccuBasic interpreter that interprets this code, should have been federally reviewed.

So less than two months ago the Secretary recognized the illegal component is present, though without acknowledging that interpreter code is prohibited by both federal guidelines (.doc) and McPherson's own edict (.pdf) requiring compliance with those standards as a condition of state certification. And now he just pretends the equipment is compliant, a fantasy asserted twice in Friday's press release. Let's be clear - the determination of the interpreter code's existence in December and continued presence today should be all that is necessary to reject Diebold's bid for certification.

Furthermore, McPherson's December letter referred Diebold's equipment to the federal Independent Testing Authority (ITA), not the Voting Systems Technology Assessment Advisory Board (VSTAAB). Never mind the conflicts of interest Dr. Avi Rubin recently described between the ITA and the election machine manufacturers who fund them.

So we already had reason to be suspect of McPherson's December maneuver even before he broke his word and stealthily tapped VSTAAB, a newish body that seems to have risen from the ashes of the Voting Systems and Procedures Panel which was hastily disbanded late last year. The VSTAAB, in conjunction with UC Berkeley grad students, issued a 38 page report called "Security Analysis of the Diebold AccuBasic Interpreter" (.pdf) - again confirming the existence of the interpreter code.

While the analysis is too long to fully dissect here and now, GuvWurld will surely pull more detailed quotes in future reports. For now, a "Security Analysis..." summary:

We did not do a comprehensive code review of the whole codebase, nor look at a very broad range of potential security issues. Instead, we concentrated attention to the AccuBasic scripting language, its compiler, its interpreter, and other code related to potential security vulnerabilities associated with the memory cards.

We found a number of security vulnerabilities, detailed below. Although the vulnerabilities are serious, they are all easily fixable. Moreover, until the bugs are fixed, the risks can be mitigated through appropriate use procedures. Therefore, we believe the problems as a whole are manageable.

Memory card attacks are a real threat: We determined that anyone who has access to a memory card of the AV-OS, and can tamper it (i.e. modify its contents), and can have the modified cards used in a voting machine during election, can indeed modify the election results from that machine in a number of ways. The fact that the the results are incorrect cannot be detected except by a recount of the original paper ballots.

Harri Hursti's attack does work: Mr. Hursti's attack on the AV-OS is definitely real. He was indeed able to change the election results by doing nothing more than modifying the contents of a memory card. He needed no passwords, no cryptographic keys, and no access to any other part of the voting system, including the GEMS election management server.

Interpreter bugs lead to another, more dangerous family of vulnerabilities: However, there is another category of more serious vulnerabilities we discovered that go well beyond what Mr. Hursti demonstrated, and yet require no more access to the voting system than he had. These vulnerabilities are consequences of bugs--16 in all--in the implementation of the AccuBasic interpreter for the AV-OS. These bugs would have no effect at all in the absence of deliberate tampering, and would not be discovered by any amount of functionality testing; but they could allow an attacker to completely control the behavior of the AV-OS. An attacker could change vote totals, modify reports, change the names of candidates, change the races being voted on, or insert his own code into the running firmware of the machine.

Successful attacks can only be detected by examining the paper ballots: There would be no way to know that any of these attacks occurred; the canvass procedure would not detect any anomalies, and would just produce incorrect results. The only way to detect and correct the problem would be by recount of the original paper ballots, e.g. during the 1 percent manual recount.

Interpreted code is contrary to standards: Interpreted code in general is prohibited by the 2002 FEC Voluntary Voting System Standards, and also by the successor standard, the EAC's Voluntary Voting System Guidelines due to take effect in two years. In order for the Diebold software architecture to be in compliance, it would appear that either the AccuBasic language and interpreter have to be removed, or the standard will have to be changed.

This is devastatingly stupid. If not these problems, what findings would have caused the analysts to withhold their recommendation? McPherson's decision to conditionally certify based on this security analysis would seem to be an invitation for a legal showdown, not to mention a competency hearing and a criminal investigation.

Gee, this report is getting awfully long and I've still only commented on the first paragraph of the certification announcement. I'm not going to take this too much further today but I do want to comment a little on the second paragraph:

"As the State's chief elections official, the decision to certify voting systems is a very serious responsibility, and a number of factors must be carefully weighed before I determine whether to grant certification," said Secretary McPherson. "This is precisely why I created 10 strict standards that must be met for a voting system to be certified, making California's process the most stringent in the nation. We have applied these standards and after rigorous scrutiny, I have determined that these Diebold systems can be used for the 2006 elections."

The Secretary of State's website has the "10 strict standards" here (.pdf). Check out step 3:

State certification testing does not begin until the federal qualification testing is successfully completed.

That is not the only part of the process developing out of order. Public comment and a hearing are the last two steps before Step 10: "Final review of system and decision by Secretary of State." That would suggest the public will yet still have its chance to be heard. Instead, it would seem McPherson is providing his rubber stamp with disregard for the public forums--held last year, out of the "strict standards" sequence--that ran overwhelmingly in opposition to certification for Diebold.

Battles now seem primed to ensue on at least two levels. There will surely be a response on the state level, likely from a host of election integrity organizations banding together. And there must be county level resistance anywhere Boards of Supervisors appear willing to allow their Registrars to accept the path of least resistance. At a minimum, it would be foolish for counties to begin spending money knowing that major modifications must still be undertaken, and that even then, Diebold's track record leaves no basis for confidence that the equipment will be made secure, transparent, and accurate, let alone "compliant" with optional laws. Perhaps the silver lining is this, from Friday's press release (.pdf):

Diebold will be required to make all recommended long-term programming modifications contained in the report and submit the modified product to the Federal Independent Testing Authority (ITA) for requalification and state certification.

So not only is the certification provisional, apparently it is going to be completely up for review again if/when Diebold ever complies with the law. So why certify it now? Notice that the press release only mentions California's 2006 elections.

For broader perspective, Diebold is like the hotshot quarterback whose teachers give him passing grades just so he can play ball. The more potent analogy here is Mr. Bush saying unconstitutional spying on Americans is legal - because he is already doing it. If we are not a people beholden to laws, what inhibits our potential responses? Election reform is not a goal unto itself but rather a tactic in the peaceful revolution. Here's a Blueprint.

www.HumboldtRevolution.org
Non-violent revolution is necessary, NOW!

NM Requires Paper Ballots; More Setbacks For Diebold

2006-02-17T09:27:00.000-08:00

The Albuquerque Journal on Wednesday published an AP report (archive) that the New Mexico House passed a measure requiring counties to use paper ballots. No compliance deadline was set and the counting methods still appear to be dubious. Governor Bill Richardson supports the bill that must still pass the (state) Senate.

In Maryland, Governor Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr. made waves Thursday with this letter (.pdf) obtained by BradBlog.com. Ehrlich wrote the letter to the MD State Board of Elections, stating:

"I no longer have confidence in the State Board of Elections' ability to conduct fair and accurate elections in 2006."

Ouch. And all because the Board wants to plow ahead with Diebold despite the mountain of evidence indicting the manufacturer's equipment. Ehrlich cites not only the well known security flaws that have been exposed, but also the partisan connections and the enormous increase in maintenance costs. All of which are arguments that have thus far fallen on deaf and willfully ignorant ears here in Humboldt.

This really isn't too different from my calling for the resignation of local elections officials who have denied these problems and defended our indefensible election conditions. That is, by claiming "no confidence" (a beloved GuvWurld refrain), Ehrlich is helping to establish a zero tolerance policy for the bullshit up-is-down mentality of those advocating voting systems that are already debunked.

Worse still, Raw Story also on Thursday reported:

The Maryland State Board of Elections allowed Diebold Election Systems to operate its touch-screen voting machines during the state's 2002 gubernatorial election and the 2004 presidential primaries before the state agency actually certified the controversial machines, according to recently disclosed documents.

That is a violation of state law, according to Linda Schade, executive director of TrueVoteMD.org, an election integrity group.

GuvWurld has repeatedly addressed Diebold's acknowledged California crime of installing uncertified software. Diebold's problems continue to mount.

In Pennsylvania, activists joined by State Senator Jim Ferlo successfully sued to stop the transition of election systems until voters are given a say via a referendum vote

Meanwhile, Iowa Voters For Open and Transparent Elections reports that Diebold is cutting prices in its attempt to sell more voting machines, even as they have to extend the deadline for "bargains" they've already offered.

And last week, Diebold's new CEO suggested that the company may look to sell off its elections division. Do you think maybe it has something to do with various class action suits filed by investors?

As I wrote two weeks ago, mail-in voting is being given serious consideration in the California State Assembly, an obvious reflection of the lack of confidence in the electronic options. Earlier this week AB 707 was converted to an "urgent" bill that could pave the way for mail-in voting to be used for this June's primary.

At a time when local news has repeatedly reported on vandalism, robbery, identify theft, slow/lost mail and improperly secured mail stored outdoors, who is really convinced that this is going to create a basis for voter confidence? Certainly not Ed Stoner, former Eureka Postmaster put on administrative leave for "undisclosed reasons." As if that lack of transparency weren't enough, consider that mail-in voting will still be subject to the same secret vote counting (scanning) method currently provided by Diebold and other partisan corporate creators of election stealing machines. Mail-in voting in CA right now would be like re-arranging the proverbial deck chairs of the Titanic.

For a set of conditions likely to ensure conclusive election outcomes and create a basis for confidence in the results reported, see the Voter Confidence Resolution.

Humboldt Revolution (.org)

2006-02-13T09:05:00.000-08:00

The town hall forum on non-violent revolution was held this past Saturday at Eureka's Veterans Hall. The energy in the room was something I believed could exist though I think this was my first direct encounter with it. I estimate about 120 people attended, making for standing room only in the basement room adorned by banners from more than a dozen progressive community groups including the Voter Confidence Committee (VCC), Veterans For Peace, Women In Black, Food Not Bombs, Democracy Unlimited, and Earth First.

The event was the most according-to-plan gathering I've ever helped to organize, including the crowd. During the event planning, it took several conversations ultimately to determine the target audience should be "the choir." Typically we lament preaching to the choir as delivering a message to familiar ears who learn nothing new. In this case, targeting the choir was meant to be a distinction from watering down the message for mass media, and honing the message to be a call to a new level of action.

"Non-violent revolution is necessary, NOW"

The event started with a video clip from peace activist and author Arhundati Roy. Then followed seven or so speakers, each touching on different aspects of our current collective condition, all speaking to the need for drastic change. Highlights included:

Carol Brannan reading from her new Declaration of Autonomy, inspiring harmonized calls of "I Do Not Consent" between stanzas;

Bill Verick, an environmental attorney, describing the unequal legal treatment given to citizen activists and polluting corporations, concluding with a quote from Bob Dylan's "A Hard Rain's A-Gonna Fall";

Four members of Food Not Bombs together describing their work and reminding us of the need for a more open and less controlled and structured community dialog.

I also spoke briefly about elections, emphasizing the guarantee of inconclusive outcomes and no basis for confidence in the results reported from federal elections using paperless electronic voting machines. I also mentioned known problems with Humboldt's election equipment, as well as the Volunteer Strike, an idea I first mentioned here and have adapted to traditional GuvWurld language here (.pdf).

When the speakers has concluded, the crowd split up into round table discussions on sustainability, fighting corporate power, the upcoming Eureka peace march (March 18), militarism, a few more I'm forgetting, and a dozen people who came to my table on election reform. We talked about ongoing projects described throughout the GuvWurld Blog, including the outreach program supporting the Voter Confidence Resolution, the CA unity campaign, and the Volunteer Strike.

Some speakers had gone longer than intended and so table discussions were necessarily abbreviated. Fortunately I had leaflets to promote the VCC meeting this Wednesday, 2/15, starting at 7pm at the Redwood Peace and Justice Center. The time allocation was about the only deviation from the "as planned" comment above. Getting people interested in solutions being pursued, and offering a follow-up event for them to plug into these actions, was exactly how the day was planned.

We watched another clip from Arhundati Roy, received some Native American wisdom from Jeannie Covey (sp?), and then the 50 or so people still remaining formed one big circle. Holding hands, each person took a turn saying his or her name and either their reason for attending or what they had gotten from the event. It was hearing this feedback that made me so certain we had really achieved our aims as organizers. Many people said they are ready for more, and I know that I sure am.

Though the ideas were present, next time I'd like to see more continuity throughout the various presentations to build more focus on discovering the many diverse acts of exactly how we can withdraw our Consent and complicity in the broken system. Nonetheless, I believe we made the right call in offering a new lyric sheet to the choir. I believe we hit our goal of wanting everyone to leave with the straightforward thought that "non-violent revolution is necessary, NOW!"

With this event behind us, many new features have been unveiled at www.HumboldtRevolution.org. Others are yet to come, but thanks to Noel Adamson we have an excellent start on a collaborative online organizing tool kit.

Oh, what’ll you do now, my blue-eyed son?
Oh, what’ll you do now, my darling young one?
I’m a-goin’ back out ’fore the rain starts a-fallin’,
I’ll walk to the depths of the deepest black forest,
Where the people are many and their hands are all empty,
Where the pellets of poison are flooding their waters,
Where the home in the valley meets the damp dirty prison,
Where the executioner’s face is always well hidden,
Where hunger is ugly, where souls are forgotten,
Where black is the color, where none is the number,
And I’ll tell it and think it and speak it and breathe it,
And reflect it from the mountain so all souls can see it,
Then I’ll stand on the ocean until I start sinkin’,
But I’ll know my song well before I start singin’,
And it’s a hard, it’s a hard, it’s a hard, it’s a hard,
It’s a hard rain’s a-gonna fall.
Maybe we could start singing about a corrupt fascist regime that's a-gonna fall too? Keep your mind open, the future's coming...

Human Relations Commission of Palo Alto Unanimously Adopts Voter Confidence Resolution

2006-02-10T09:30:00.000-08:00

In the heart of Silicon Valley last night the Human Relations Commission of Palo Alto, CA voted unanimously to adopt the Voter Confidence Resolution (VCR) based on the declaration first developed here in the GuvWurld Blog. Commission Chair Shauna Wilson said that "since the Federal Government does not appear to be taking the lead on Voter Confidence, local initiatives are necessary in order to encourage a participatory democracy."

GuvWurld has been promoting the VCR since April 2004. The first major success came on July 20, 2005 when the City Council of Arcata, CA became the first in the nation to adopt this groundbreaking statement. The strategy behind the VCR has always called for a growing number of communities to adopt their own customized version based on the original template. See the Guide to the Voter Confidence Resolution for more details on the vision for collectively withdrawing the Consent of the Governed.

Wilson says Palo Alto's City Council is now likely to consider adopting the VCR though there is no date set yet and consideration does not guarantee passage. Bay Area readers are strongly encouraged to exert their influence on the Council by whatever means available. For contact info click here.

Diebold Opens Secret Code in Alaska; Reminder Palo Alto Tonight

2006-02-09T01:52:00.000-08:00

Both BradBlog and BlackBoxVoting.org are reporting that Diebold has made a serious information disclosure concession in Alaska. Citing their proprietary claim, Diebold in January refused to make 2004 election data available to the Alaska Democratic Party. BBV.org has more recently posted correspondence between Diebold and the Elections Director of Alaska, and the Director and the Dem chairman. Begrudgingly and with conditions, to satisfy the Democrats' election data request Diebold is making available the code to its GEMS central tabulator software.

While this is big news that raises many possibilities, another aspect of the story deserves equal billing. In the letter to Dem Chair Jake Metcalfe, Alaska Elections Director Whitney Brewster wrote: "the Division will charge for its costs incurred in manipulating the data to provide the records you seek." WTF? It's not so much the fee that gets me since quality data manipulation is almost always worth what you pay. The whole problem with elections these days is that we have no basis for confidence in the absence of this manipulation. I bet you didn't think you needed another reason to come to that conclusion.

* * *

And a quick reminder for Bay Area readers: tonight (Thurs), 7pm at Palo Alto City Hall (250 Hamilton), Palo Alto's Human Relations Commission will be voting on the Voter Confidence Resolution. I heard from Commission Chair Shauna Wilson via e-mail yesterday and she remains optimistic that it will pass. She also reaffirmed her intention to send the Resolution to the Palo Alto City Council. Attendance from supporters always helps.

The Volunteer Strike

2006-02-07T00:22:00.000-08:00

This is an excellent idea that I found tonight at OpEdNews.com. The Volunteer Strike, by its nature, epitomizes using election reform as a tactic toward peaceful revolution. It is a tangible way to withdraw our complicity and Consent.

February 5, 2006

The Volunteer Strike: Taking the Iniative [sic] back from our political 'leaders'

Power to the People!

By Mary Kiraly

ABOUT THE VOLUNTEER STRIKE

As volunteers, we possess a valuable commodity- our time and our effort. Because this is a political year, our combined contributions provide us with powerful leverage to effect change. Our work is crucial to the success of political candidates and political parties. We man phone banks; raise funds; organize, register, and turn out voters; and serve on election day as judges, poll workers, election observers, and precinct officials. We have more power to change the system RIGHT NOW than we have ever imagined.

Why Strike?

We are gearing up for another very important election. As Volunteers, we are being asked to work harder and donate more than we have in the past. We are being told that we need to be better organized, to have a clearer message, and to reach out to more citizens.

But no one is telling us what will happen if this November we witness a repeat of the voting irregularities that have occurred in the past two elections. We know that we have a voting system that is in crisis. Our political leaders are refusing to address this issue. Our national elected officials are failing to act.

All across the United States, activists, just like us, are challenging their state's election system. We have a responsibility to the voters that we organize, register, and encourage to vote. When voters go to the polls, they have a right to expect that they will have their ballots recorded and counted as they intended.

We have done our job well. More voters have participated in the political process, and donated to candidates, than at any time in our history. Now it is time to force our political leaders and elected officials to do their job!

We will demand that we have a secure, reliable, accessible voting system in this country. Such a system is not a legislative nicety. It is the Fundamental institution of our Democracy.

So we are going to change the debate. We are no longer willing to go to our elected officials and Party leaders, "cap in hand," pleading with them to speak out, and to reform our election system. It is their responsibility, inherent in elected office, to provide American citizens with a secure, accurate, accessible system of voting.

Until such time as we are confident that the election system, in the United States, will accurately (1) record, (2) count, and (3) preserve the ballots of American citizens, we will be withholding our valuable volunteer efforts to organize, recruit, and turnout voters.

____________________________________________________
Please sign and copy this petition. Send copies to: your county party Central Committee, the state chair of your Party, state legislators, your members of Congress, and to Howard Dean (DNC Chair) and Ken Mehlman (RNC Chair). Send faxes when possible. Fax numbers for elected officials can be found by going to www.congress.org, which will also provide links to state officials. Share this petition with other volunteers and friends.

You may wish to add the following phrase: If you are unaware of the threats to our voting systems, I would be happy to provide a briefing and sources for your consideration.

National Volunteer Strike and Petition

I am participating in a national campaign by volunteer activists. American citizens have a right to expect that their elected officials and leaders will provide them with a secure voting system.
A secure, accurate, accessible voting system is not just a legislative priority.

IT IS THE CENTRAL INSTITUTION OF THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SYSTEM.
__________________________________________________
As a member of __________________________________, it is essential that I have confidence that the work I do- to organize, register, and turn out voters- will be productive. For these efforts to be productive, we must have a secure voting system. It is, therefore, essential that we have confidence (1) that our voting machines are recording and counting votes accurately, and producing an audit-able paper trail; and (2) that the tabulators, into which the accumulated voting data is fed, are certified as secured against the possibility of tampering, or manipulation of the voting outcome. Until such time as I have been assured that these criteria are being meet, it is inappropriate for me to dedicate my time and my effort to recruiting and turning out voters.
Signed___________________________________________ Date______________
Address:_________________________________________

In the past, I have contributed my volunteer efforts in the following ways:

____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________
Volunteer Petition
The Honorable Howard Dean, MD
Democratic National Committee
430 S. Capitol St. SE _Washington, DC 20003
Fax: 202-863-8063

Mary Kiraly is a painter who, in addition to a degree in art and graduate work in studio art, has an M.A. in International Relations (in Strategic Studies). She has devoted much of her time and effort, over the past 3 years, to attemting [sic] to call attention to the suppression of the vote in this country. She can be reached at mhowekiraly@yahoo.com

Authors Website: www.CountEveryVote.BlogSpot.com

I think this sends a good message to "activists" (the real public servants) about prioritization of time and energy. The suggestion is to withdraw complicity from a broken system, to shatter the assumption of the Consent of the Governed. Rather than working to win in a bogus election, work to make sure the elections aren't bogus.

This pledge is a practical way to plant that seed even without taking on the more direct language typically used here at GuvWurld. Here are a few small tweaks I propose, and of course people can ultimately choose to write whatever they want in order to get the point across.

Both places mentioning confidence would be strengthened by saying it is essential that there is a basis for confidence.

In the first numbered item, the audit-able paper trail would be more definitive as audit-able paper ballot of record.

I'm having a little trouble with the second numbered item, mainly because I don't want to perpetuate the need for tabulators. However, putting that aside because I want to give a big, "YES, AND..." to this overall idea, this item would be stronger if it said "tabulators are publicly transparent and certified..."

"I have been assured" needs to be a higher standard: "Until such time as it is proven these criteria are being met..." Else I assure you, we could be lied to.

I will definitely have some printouts of this on Saturday at the community forum on non-violent revolution. This really fits perfectly with one of the key themes of the event, getting people to consider how to use their volunteer energies more effectively. For anyone who decided to free up some volunteer time while reading this, I will have plenty of other projects you might consider plugging into at the forum. Learn more.

Election News and Event Announcements

2006-02-02T18:38:00.000-08:00

I'm two for two with submitting letters to the editor of the Eureka Reporter. This was published today:

Election results should be a reflection of accuracy rather than expediency
2/2/2006

Dear Editor,

Thank you for your recent reporting on voting machines. I have to wonder, though, if your Jan. 29 article (“Bruce McPherson requests voting system contingency plans”) accurately reflects the views and priorities of Humboldt County Registrar of Voters Carolyn Crnich.

According to The Eureka Reporter, Crnich said, “There’s always hand counts, but I don’t see that, (considering) the time involved, as a desirable alternative at all.”

Also: “That would be very late reporting,” Crnich said. “It would mean that we’d have to get the ballots in from Shelter Cove, Orleans and the farthest reaches of the county. The results that normally we have in between 9 p.m. and 9:30 p.m. would probably not be available until morning or midday on Wednesday.”

Is Crnich suggesting that expediency is more important than verifiably accurate results? We shouldn’t sacrifice accuracy for anything. Any other attitude is inappropriate in the elections department.

The truth is, hand-counting paper ballots is a practical and cost-effective way for Humboldt County to conduct elections that will be transparent and verifiably accurate. We should happily trade a few extra hours of uncertainty for a provable outcome, as opposed to earlier returns coming from equipment with proprietary (secret) software that ensures permanent uncertainty about the true outcome.

Creating a basis for voter confidence and establishing proof of an election’s outcome must trump the expediency of rapid returns. Anyone charged with the responsibility of conducting elections should be very clear about this. If The Eureka Reporter has misrepresented Crnich’s position then she is owed an apology. On the other hand, if The Eureka Reporter has it right, Crnich’s priorities as registrar call into question her fitness for that office.

Dave Berman
Eureka

(Editor’s note: We stand by the information reflected in the story, but thank you for writing about this important subject.)

VoteTrustUSA has the contingency plan Memo And Questionaire To Registrars of Voters, circulated not by McPherson but rather Bruce McDannold, Interim Director, Office of Voting Systems Technology Assessment. The meat and potatoes:

As of Friday, January 20, 2006, the following applications for certification have been received by the Secretary of State’s Office:
DIEBOLD – GEMS/AV-OS/AV-TSX w/ AVPM

ES&S - Unisyn/InkaVote PBC

HART INTERCIVIC - System 6

SEQUOIA VOTING SYSTEMS - AVC Edge Voting System Version 5.0

POPULEX – Digital Paper Ballot Voting System
The current status of the above applications is as follows:
SEQUOIA VOTING SYSTEMS - AVC Edge Voting System Version 5.0

Sequoia has not completed federal testing. Sequoia has advised the Secretary of State’s Office that they anticipate federal testing will be completed on or about January 31, 2006. Based upon this representation, we have tentatively scheduled Sequoia’s state and volume testing to begin February 6, 2006.

DIEBOLD – GEMS/AV-OS/AV-TSX w/ AVPM

As you are aware, Diebold has successfully completed both state and volume testing, the public hearing has occurred, and public comment has been taken. However, we have required the memory card to be sent back to the ITA to review the AccuBasic code. We are also conducting our own independent source code review, with the assistance of the Voting Systems Technical Assistance Advisory Board. A determination on certification will be made once the reviews have been completed and the reports issued.

ES&S - Unisyn/InkaVote PBC

The ES&S InkaVote system began state testing this week.

HART INTERCIVIC - System 6

The HART system is currently scheduled to resume state testing on February 1, 2006, and volume testing to occur on February 20-21, 2006.

POPULEX – Digital Paper Ballot Voting System

Populex has been asked for additional information to complete their application.

Today's Oakland Tribune has more on these options, including some fairly ridiculous comments from a few county Registrars. Have they suddenly gone cold on the big push for all mail-in elections? Such an arrangement would fall far short of the standards set in the election reform platform of the Voter Confidence Resolution. And with timing that would be laughable if it weren't so serious, yesterday both the Eureka Reporter and Eureka Times-Standard reported on the recent identity theft outbreak that has involved mail fraud. The T-S also had this story three weeks ago about Eureka's Clark St. post office being remodeled following vandalism and burglary. I think the thieves may have absconded with our basis for confidence in mail-in election results. Ironically, some of the election integrity movement's language crept into the article:

Dino Marsango, officer in charge at the Clark Street Post Office, said remodeling the lobby is a “top priority.” Security issues and accessibility is still being looked at before remodeling can begin. (emphasis added)

* * *I've previously mentioned the community forum on non-violent revolution coming up on Feb. 11. I will be one of the speakers at this event though the plan is for very brief presentations to be followed by round-table discussions on the topics addressed by the speakers. That means we'll have a dialog on election reform as a tactic toward peaceful revolution (see Blueprint For Peaceful Revolution). The Voter Confidence Committee will return to the scene, bursting at the seams with ongoing projects. Thinking ahead to how we can get new volunteers immediately plugged in, the VCC will also be holding its own event on Feb. 15 at 7pm at the Redwood Peace and Justice Center in Arcata.* * *Last week's edition of the North Coast Journal had a cover story about Humboldt blogs including the following:

Eureka resident Dave Berman keeps track of national news about potential electronic election-rigging on his Guvworld [sic] blog (guvwurld.blogspot.com). Berman is gaining some stature in the larger blogosphere, but local residents may want to stop by to check up on his long-running spat with county Elections Manager Lindsey McWilliams over the security and tamperability of Humboldt County's electoral infrastructure.

Progress Report on CA Unity Campaign

2006-01-26T18:30:00.000-08:00

About six weeks ago, GuvWurld launched a campaign to unite California election reformers. Earlier this week, VelvetRevolution.us posted this endorsement of the effort. I've also teamed up with VR co-founder Brad Friedman at BradBlog.com to present this exclusive footage (Video in Windows Media format...) of a press conference held this past Monday when CA Secretary of State Bruce McPherson visited the office of Humboldt County Clerk/Recorder Carolyn Crnich. McPherson's appearance walked, smelled and shat like a re-appointment campaign, despite assertions to the contrary by his handlers.

There are no major revelations in the video though we did get confirmation that the hack test tentatively scheduled last month did NOT actually take place. This lays to rest a controversy spurred by this erroneous Wired article. According to McPherson, the hack test was not performed because Diebold's equipment was instead referred back to the federal testing labs. That referral came in this letter from McPherson to Diebold citing the presence of interpreter code.

If there is anything worth seeing in this video it may just be McPherson's eyes as I asked him how previously certified machines could still be usable if we now know they contain the interpreter code forbidden by the 2002 Voting System Standards/Guidelines. McPherson easily squirmed out of the obviously loaded question leaving me wishing I had asked it differently.

Perhaps I should have said: Will you inspect Humboldt's election machines today and enforce the state election code by decertifying them when you find interpreter code? That would have been a better way to establish the frame. Still, the message came out clear enough that the Eureka Reporter printed it as a quote. The Eureka Times-Standard (archive) also covered the event.

As I've written on this topic previously, I have been talking with several lawyers about making a direct attempt to prevent continued use of previously certified Diebold machines. There is an interest and an appetite for using this particular issue and angle. The point of the campaign to unite California election reformers is to use the same tactics in each of the 17 CA counties using Diebold equipment. This would include calling for investigations of local election departments to determine how Diebold was able to install uncertified software.

As a result of my complaint, the Humboldt Grand Jury interviewed me earlier this week. I am not permitted to discuss or write about the meeting but I want to encourage you to submit your own complaint in your county on these same grounds. Is it possible Diebold installed uncertified software in your county's election machines without the knowledge of anyone in your election department? Was there complicity or negligence or what?

I believe, at this time, that it is even more important for us to require and obtain personal accountability from our local government than from our federal government. At least consider for a moment, which is it even feasible to strive for? To resist an illegitimate and out of control federal government, local government is going to come increasingly upon a hot seat. For how much longer can city and county officials cooperate with the feds, so often at the expense of the community? Non-violent revolution is necessary, NOW! If you are ready for a serious conversation about how we will do this, come to the town hall forum on Saturday Feb. 11, 2pm, at the Eureka Veterans Hall on 10th/H St. If you are revolted, revolt!

www.HumboldtRevolution.org

My Speech to the NAACP Today, MLK Day

2006-01-16T16:25:00.000-08:00

There were probably about 200-300 people at Eureka's Adorni Center today for the NAACP's annual remembrance of Martin Luther King, Jr. I was asked to speak about voting but felt that I didn't know enough about the audience, other speakers, or the event in general to prepare a fully written presentation. I went in with a few notes and improvised something along the following lines...

When the Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965 I was not yet born. I do remember last August when the NAACP put on a big event in Atlanta to commemorate the 40th anniversary of this landmark legislation. I remember Barbara Lee, Cynthia McKinney and John Conyers. They all spoke about stolen elections. The Black Caucus has shown the country's greatest leadership since our constitutional crisis began during the 2000 election.

I remember a year ago last week when the Congresswoman from Ohio, Stephanie Tubbs Jones, along with California's own Barbara Boxer, stood up and made the unprecedented challenge to the 2004 election.

When we hear about the problems with our elections, we learn that 30% of the votes cast around the country in November 2004 were cast on paperless electronic machines. Those votes are unverifiable. They cannot be recounted. No matter what, we can't really know how those votes were truly cast, or what the election's outcome rightfully ought to be.

We hear about private corporations that make these election machines. The machines run on software considered "proprietary," and it is kept secret from the public. Not even our local elections officials know how it works.

Of course we hear a lot about disenfranchisement too. But that's not just for the poor, or African Americans. It isn't even limited to Democratic strongholds. Let me tell you something. Disenfranchisement is universal. And it is guaranteed. If we can't recount the votes, nobody's vote counts and we are all disenfranchised. When we hold elections under these conditions, the Consent of the Governed is not being sought.

Where does this phrase come from, Consent of the Governed? I see a lot of children here today and I know that the Declaration of Independence is still taught in school. Parents, is it enough for your kids to hear the words, or do you think the spirit of Dr. King says they must grasp the meaning too? For some context, the Declaration says:
Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive to these Ends--the self-evident truths that we are created equal with unalienable Rights to Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness--it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such principles and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness
And so we must say, to such unacceptable election conditions: WE DO NOT CONSENT. And to the destruction of the environment: WE DO NOT CONSENT. Can I hear you say it with me now: WE DO NOT CONSENT. Spying on Americans: WE DO NOT CONSENT. War, war, and more war on phony scapegoats: WE DO NOT CONSENT. Peaceful demonstrators labeled as terrorists: WE DO NOT CONSENT. No more innocent until proven guilty: WE DO NOT CONSENT.

How long are we going to continue to allow our citizens to be jailed without charges, detained indefinitely without access to an attorney? We must understand, in the greatest spirit of Dr. King, that non-violent revolution has become necessary, NOW!

I want to invite you all to attend a community forum on Saturday, February 11, starting at 2pm at the Vets Hall. We will be working on what each of us can do, and what we can all do together to take responsibility for turning our words into deeds and truly beginning the peaceful revolution.

Dr. King spoke of Freedom, of being In the Light, and of Every Person Counting. Of this responsibility we each have to the Dream. That Each of us can stand up in a NON-violent way, Oppose the wrongness in our ill society. That only by each of us standing up, being responsible, and demanding that responsibility from our leaders, will we be a Free People. Without a vote, we have no voice, and without a voice, how can we demand this responsibility? Without a voice, we are not a Free People.

WE DO NOT CONSENT.

Thank you.

Special thanks to Ian Blei.

Updates on Palo Alto, Diebold and Much More

2006-01-14T04:35:00.000-08:00

Palo Alto's Human Relations Commission (HRC) discussed but did not vote up or down on the Voter Confidence Resolution (VCR) on Thursday night. According to Commissioner Winifred Lew, "more wordsmithing" is in order. Lew will be working with Commissioners Jeffrey Blum and Shauna Wilson on the revisions. Wilson, the Commission Chair, assures me the resolution will appear again on the next HRC agenda for a Feb. 9 meeting.

Changes we might expect to see could include more localized context for Palo Alto and Santa Clara County, additional details about uniform standards (perhaps audit protocols or enforcement mechanisms), and maybe a nod towards a public forum on open source solutions. The version of the VCR considered by the HRC was almost identical to that adopted by the City Council of Arcata, CA. Actually, it included every single word, also adding four points to the election reform platform and tacking on a call for a Voter Confidence Task Force. The proposed new verbiage comes from a resolution adopted by Berkeley, CA in the aftermath of the 2004 "election":

A requirement that the top elected official responsible for overseeing elections in each jurisdiction be elected in a non-partisan race, and may not serve in any capacity in any political campaign other than her or his own.

Consistent national standards for security, including physical and electronic security, of election systems, including tallying systems.

Uniform and inclusive voter registration standards and accurate and transparent voting roll purges, based on fair and consistent national standards.

Consistent national standards for the number of voting machines and poll workers per 100 voters in each precinct, to ensure reasonable and uniform waiting times for all voters.
In passing this resolution, the City of Palo Alto, California will take concrete action to increase, protect, and ensure Voter Confidence through the formation of a City Voter Confidence Task Force or the appointment of a City liaison to an existing County Voter Confidence Task Force, whichever is appropriate.

* * *

What is happening with voting systems in CA? Santa Rosa's Press Democrat is one of many publications to report the apparently increasing interest held by County Registrars toward all mail-in elections.

Mail-only vote in primary possible
Sonoma, Mendocino, other counties join Alameda's request to Legislature

By BLEYS W. ROSE
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Friday, January 13, 2006

The June primary in Sonoma, Mendocino and other counties could be conducted entirely by mail - with no polling places open - if the Legislature approves a plan gathering steam across the state.

The idea for emergency legislation allowing counties to conduct absentee-only balloting stems from Alameda County, where officials are concerned their new electronic voting machines aren't working well enough to use in June.

[snip]

[Sonoma County Clerk Eeve] Lewis said Alameda County's proposal for emergency legislation went out this week over an intranet system that connects election officials.

She said it quickly attracted messages of support from at least a dozen counties, including Marin, Humboldt and Solano.

It is very interesting to note such widespread support for this drastic change as it represents an admission of the inadequate election conditions currently in place. If Humboldt really is one of the Counties looking to jump under this bus, you wouldn't know it from reading Friday's Eureka Reporter, which notes that CA Secretary of State Bruce McPherson is tentatively scheduled to meet with Humboldt County elections officials on January 23. Without addressing the mail-in scenario, the Reporter published some very revealing quotes from Humboldt Elections Manager Lindsey McWilliams:

“We had what I thought were reasonable expectations that Diebold’s touch screens were going to be certified before the end of the year,” McWilliams said. “We had a contract with Diebold that we were ready to take to the board and then things got put off to the point that there are not a lot of choices.”

[snip]

“To change things midstream when Diebold could be certified shortly just didn’t seem like a prudent thing to do,” McWilliams said.

Reality check: HUMBOLDT'S DIEBOLD MACHINES ARE OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL GUIDELINES AND THE ONES MCWILLIAMS WANTS TO BUY CAN'T BE CERTIFIED FOR THE SAME REASON.

Next week I will call McPherson's office and see if I can get five minutes of his time while he is here. I don't know that anyone has directly asked him to comment on the status of previously certified Diebold machines but it would be great to get him on the record affirming that interpreter code is prohibited by federal standards that must be met as a condition of approval for use in CA.

I really wish there wasn't so much to harp on here but I have to cite one more McWilliams quote from the Reporter:

“We do not have accessible voting systems and we do not have an inventory of what polling places are accessible,” Humboldt County Elections Manager Lindsey McWilliams said.

According to McWilliams, these two issues are among the biggest problems that cannot be fixed soon even though McWilliams said he plans to attend a seminar on how to identify polling places that meet accessibility requirements in San Rafael next week.

These accessibility requirements pertain to the Help America Vote Act, ostensibly in effect as of the first of this year though Humboldt and many other Counties are not yet in compliance due to the machine certification boondoggle. Not having the equipment to comply is one thing, and certainly understandable. But not having an inventory of accessible polling places, and requiring training on how to identify such locations, that is the very definition of incompetence. McWilliams prepared a report for the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors, dated February 22, 2005, that said in part:

"...we have just started reviewing polling places so we
do not have an estimate of costs or storage needs related to accessibility."

[snip]

"Our schedule for initial polling place reviews targets May 2, 2005, as a goal for identifying site remediation needs and funding requirements . At that time we will better understand what we need in terms of costs, storage space, and delivery logistics."

What has happened in the past 11 months? Why is McWilliams going for training next week, to begin preparing to meet requirements in effect two weeks ago, when he told his superiors the polling place review had begun early last year? More to the point, why is Lindsey McWilliams still the Humboldt County Elections Manager?

* * *

Courtesy of Steve A. Play at Democratic Underground, a collection of links to seven class action suits against Diebold:

12/13/05 Federman & Sherwood Announces That a Securities Class Action Lawsuit Was Filed Against Diebold, Inc.

12/13/05 Scott + Scott LLC Law firm says filed suit against Diebold

12/16/05 Schatz & Nobel, P.C. Announces Class Action Lawsuit against Diebold Inc. and the Investigation of Diebold, Inc. 401k Plans

12/17/05 Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. Announces Class Action Lawsuit Against Diebold Inc.

12/20/05 Wechsler Harwood Announces an Investigation of ERISA Violations Relating to the Diebold, Incorporated 401(k) Savings Plan

12/28/05 Smith & Smith LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit Against Diebold, Incorporated

12/30/05 Shareholder Class Action Filed Against Diebold, Inc. by the Law Firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP

* * *

Attention musicians: Solar Bus is accepting submissions for a compilation CD of election justice related songs. Check out this great song from Victoria Parks, "My Vote Don't Matter Anymore."
http://www.victoriaparks.com/mp3/MyVoteDontMatterAnymore.mp3.

* * *

One of the only people I think of as a hero is GuvWurld correspondent Dennis Kyne. Dennis just announced his candidacy for a vacant seat on the San Jose, CA City Council. Rock on! We need more people in local government who are prepared to run their city with an understanding of the need to stand up to the federal government. It is the most important platform that anyone can campaign on today.

Voter Confidence Headed For Palo Alto, CA

2006-01-11T00:20:00.000-08:00

According to this agenda (.pdf) the Human Relations Commission of Palo Alto, CA will be considering the Voter Confidence Resolution (VCR) this Thursday night. I found out about this from Commission member Shauna Wilson.

Back in September I linked to a previous HRC agenda (.pdf) that included discussion of a Voter Confidence Resolution. I wrote that I found the Commission members' contact info and would be following up. I did that but never reported further because the story went cold. I had found Wilson and she said the previous agenda item was tabled and the resolution still needed work. It looked like she was writing something entirely separate from the VCR created at GuvWurld and adopted (.pdf) by the City Council of Arcata, CA.

Well this past Sunday Wilson called to thank me for providing such a useful template. We discussed some potential additions to the election reform platform, but otherwise she said it would be the model language coming forward. She was optimistic about passing it, sending it to Palo Alto's City Council in February, and watching the 3-2 progressive majority do the right thing.

Bay Area readers, if it is the least you can do, please go to Palo Alto this Thursday night. The meeting starts at 7pm and the VCR is first on the agenda. The meeting is in the Council Conference Room at the Palo Alto Civic Center, 250 Hamilton Avenue.

* * *

Almost a month ago the GuvWurld Blog launched a campaign to unite California election reformers. The local Humboldt media has noticed. At least six recent pieces can be found in the GuvWurld News Archive, plus a couple of new references at the Humboldt Sentinel.

New Zealand's Scoop ran a story and I also got to do this New Year's Day radio interview (.mp3) on KPFT in Houston. You can hear the whole show here (.mp3), featuring a lengthy discussion with Mark Crispin Miller. Also see his blog about the censorship he has encountered trying to promote his latest book "Fooled Again - how the Right stole the 2004 election, and why they'll steal the next one, too (unless we stop them)".

I'd also like to thank the election reform discussion board crowd at Democratic Underground for putting this story at number nine in a top 10 stories of 2005 list. I have talked with various DU members about coordinated actions in other parts of California. That is, after all, the whole point of this campaign. Diebold installed uncertified software (.pdf) in voting machines in 17 counties. Voters in those counties also have common cause around the interpreter code (.pdf) that is prohibited by federal standards. As I explained in Previously Certified Diebold Machines Approved Erroneously, it would seem all Diebold machines are currently out of compliance with the federal requirements and susceptible to an injunction against their continued use.

I have been doing some legal research and networking. For the most part I have been encouraged to continue this pursuit. The only thing I want to reveal right now is that my complaint to the Humboldt Grand Jury was received and I was asked to come in for an interview. I suppose I need to learn the implications my upcoming appearance will have on my ability to write. At any rate, I hope this shows election reformers in the other 16 counties that this can easily be done.

Listen to GuvWurld Interview on KPFT

2006-01-04T02:39:00.000-08:00

The full hour long program is archived HERE. It starts with headline news then a long chunk of time with Mark Crispin Miller before concluding with my six minutes. I have archived just that excerpt HERE.

Listen Online New Year's Day GuvWurld Interview on KPFT

2005-12-31T19:49:00.000-08:00

Houston's award winning Pacifica station is www.kpft.org. Visit the site and listen online, especially New Year's Day at 4pm PT when host Pokey Anderson (profile) will be interviewing me on her show Sunday Monitor. We will be discussing the impending demise of Diebold and how the election integrity community is working to euthanize this corporate person who has outlived usefulness to democracy and society.

Also scheduled to be on the show is Mark Crispin Miller (blog), author of such books as: "Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election & Why They'll Steal The Next One Too," "Boxed In: The Culture of TV," "The Bush Dyslexicon: Observations on a National Disorder," and "Cruel and Unusual: Bush/Cheney's New World Order."

For the happy, safe and peaceful new year, remember to keep your mind open, the future's coming.

More Action Against Diebold's Illegal Programming Code

2005-12-30T09:42:00.000-08:00

Response to my last post, Previously Certified Diebold Machines Approved Erroneously, has been quite good. I like that reader comments are finally starting to appear on this site, though several people who sent me e-mail yesterday have not followed up by posting their remarks. Anyway, Democratic Underground members voted the report onto the "Greatest Threads" page and VoteTrustUSA has republished the piece here. VoteTrustUSA has also recently republished two other GuvWurld posts, Further Humboldt Implications of the GAO Elections Report and A Campaign To Unite California Election Reformers (which is also here).

On Thursday, VoteTrustUSA launched an important new campaign:

VoteTrustUSA Launches Action Alert to Election Assistance Commission

By VoteTrustUSA
December 29, 2005

VoteTrustUSA has launched a campaign to hold the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) accountable for ensuring that all Diebold software is re-inspected and decertified until it can be shown that all prohibited code has been removed. We also urge the EAC to initiate the re-inspection of the election software of other vendors, which may also include software that is expressly forbidden in the FEC Voting System Standards. Please go to our action page and send an email to the EAC voicing your concern about the use of prohibited software on voting machines.

Read the rest of the campaign announcement. The action page is here and the suggested action is signing on to an open letter found here:

ITA Letter

By VoteTrustUSA
December 29, 2005

The following letter will be sent to the Election Assistance Commission and Brian Hancock, ITA Secretariat on January 3, 2006. To add your organization to the list of signers write to contact@votetrustusa.org.

Commissioners, Election Assistance Commission and
Brian Hancock, ITA Secretariat
United States Election Assistance Commission
1225 New York Avenue N.W. Suite - 1100
Washington, DC 20005

We the undersigned request that the Federal Independent Testing Authority (ITA) who inspected, for federal qualification, the software used on Diebold Optical Scan and Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines be ordered to reinspect all source code, including any code used on memory cards, looking in particular for 'interpreted' code.

Read the rest of the letter here. Expanding far beyond what I wrote about interpreted code, on Thursday VoteTrustUSA published John Washburn's excellent explanation of what interpreter code is and how it leaves voting technology vulnerable. I strongly recommend reading it for anyone interested in or concerned about election integrity. The better your understanding, the more compelling and persuasive you can be.

Finally, check out Brad Blog for the story of CA Secretary of State McPherson waving his magic wang to disappear concerns over ES&S voting equipment, also not worthy of state certification. First the company was threatened with this loss of status, but now they are again inexplicably back in the good graces of the good, good government.

Previously Certified Diebold Machines Approved Erroneously

2005-12-29T01:32:00.000-08:00

While Diebold is engaged in a controversial and protracted effort to regain certification for its voting systems in California, it now appears to some in the election integrity community that previously certified Diebold machines were approved erroneously.

Diebold elections machines employ something called interpreter code which is expressly forbidden in the specs for federal qualification and CA state certification. This needs to become another angle worked in the campaign to unite California election reformers. I'm in the midst of gathering some legal opinions so this piece will have to get held over before I can issue a specific call to action.

However, I will share my thinking which is that people in each of the 17 Diebold client counties should be attempting to get an injunction or restraining order against any further use of the clearly out of compliance yet previously certified Diebold machines. To make it easier to discuss this possibility and feel out your own legal possibilities, the rest of this post covers related background.

As reported last week, the office of CA Secretary of State Bruce McPherson sent a letter to Diebold explaining that their voting systems could not be certified without further federal review of the source code.

It is the Secretary of State's position that the source code for the AccuBasic code on these cards, as well as for the AccuBasic interpreter that interprets this code, should have been federally reviewed.

Actually, even if you don't know what AccuBasic is or what AccuBasic interpreter does (I'll tell you later), it is simple to understand that interpreters are expressly forbidden by the 2002 Voting System Standards/Guidelines, which are required for federal qualification and California certification.

Volume 1, Section 4
4.2.2 Software Integrity

Self-modifying, dynamically loaded, or interpreted code is prohibited, except under the security provisions outlined in section 6.4.e.
Volume 1, Section 6
6.4.1 Software and Firmware Installation

The system shall meet the following requirements for installation of software, including hardware with embedded firmware:

e. After initiation of election day testing, no source code or compilers or assemblers shall be resident or accessible.

So it makes no sense for McPherson to demand "more" federal testing since the system will fail on its face and could only have "passed" previously in error.

For more context here, AccuBasic is Diebold's proprietary code. On December 23, the Electronic Frontier Foundation announced that Diebold had demonstrated its commitment to keeping the code a secret by taking its machines out of consideration in North Carolina's certification process. Diebold could only be considered for certification if they revealed the code and they chose to walk away. McPherson has created a juicy new pickle for Diebold in California.

As far as what the interpreter code actually does, it is about translating data between programming languages in the counting/tabulation process. Imagine trying to convert currency but without a published exchange rate. Here is a more technical explanation provided by Harri Hursti in his 7/4/05 report filed for BlackBoxVoting.org based on Hursti's May 2005 hack testing in Leon County, FL:

Accu-Basic programming is a two phase process. First the Accu-Basic program source code needs to be pre-compiled with a compiler, converting it from a human readable source code form into token based pseudo-code. The pseudo-code is still a non-binary, ascii file. This first phase programming is normally done on a standard PC running Windows or *ix-variant operating system. The author used the FreeBSD platform. Then this pseudo-code is transferred to the final execution environment (that is, to the voting machine), where the pseudo-code is executed by an interpreter.

Note: The interpreter, built into the optical scan firmware, will execute the code following the instructions on the memory card. No information has been provided about the interpreter.

Hursti's words are clearer in the context of his more recent hack test in Leon County. That demonstration was very widely reported and resulted in Elections Supervisor Ion Soncho resolving not to use Diebold for future elections. The following day Volusia County, FL followed suit.

So to review, some old information has come to be viewed in a new light. Diebold machines currently certified for use in CA contain illegal programming that should have precluded their certification in the first place. The suggestion is exploring legal means to prevent their future use and the promise is to come back with specifics on this in a near future posting. In addition, it may be useful to throw this line to elections officials and County Supervisors who should be looking for a way to abandon the sinking Diebold ship.

Monroe County, PA Refuses To Buy Election Machines

2005-12-27T13:44:00.000-08:00

This is a great example of the municipal civil disobedience that I have been calling for, happening in Monroe County, PA.

December 26, 2005

Monroe won't pay for voting machines
U.S. wants county to fund half of $1.2 million. So far, the answer is no.

By Matt Birkbeck
Of The Morning Call

It was a year ago when the Monroe County commissioners drew a line in the sand and announced they would not allocate county funds to help pay for new voting machines mandated by the Help America Vote Act.

Last week the commissioners made good on their promise, approving a $75 million county budget for 2006 but deciding against raising taxes to pay the estimated $600,000 to cover their share of the $1.2 million needed to replace 120 lever voting machines.

''We've budgeted no county money and we're not kicking in any cash,'' said Commissioner Chairwoman Donna Asure. ''We are looking at meeting the HAVA requirements by any other means other than costing local taxpayers.''

With a Jan. 1 deadline days away and no local funds in place, the commissioners know they are treading on dangerous ground, opening themselves up to a fight with the federal government. It is the only county in Pennsylvania to refuse to use local funding to pay for voting machines.

(snip)

Asure said she will support any plan that doesn't call for spending county funds, leasing or otherwise, and also took issue with other elected officials for failing to take as strong a stand.

''Unfortunately there are a lot of elected officials that will scream for unfunded mandates but not stand up,'' Asure said. ''I'm extremely disappointed that more elected officials have not hollered about how much money this is costing local taxpayers.''

The article's emphasis is entirely on money, never mentioning election integrity issues. Still, taking a stand like this, "drawing a line in the sand," as the article calls it, is exactly what GuvWurld has advocated for since day one.

As local governments increasingly recognize their untenable situation, caused by the federal government, We The People must insist on an approach of "win-win or no deal." Implicit in this approach is the fact that any deal is not really between the federal and local governments, but rather between the federal government and We The People, with our local representatives authorized to negotiate on our behalf.

If local government does not negotiate, and simply accepts federal mandates, no deal has actually been made anyway. When We The People stand up, and insist that our local representatives actually represent our views, only then are we looking at making a deal, one which We would pursue to the benefit of everyone, or from which we would completely withdraw (no deal = municipal civil disobedience).

Message to Humboldt County Supervisors: No Deal With Diebold!

New Zealand's Scoop Covers GuvWurld CA Unity Campaign

2005-12-26T00:52:00.000-08:00

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/print.html?path=HL0512/S00246.htm

California Activists Call the Cops on Diebold
Sunday, 25 December 2005, 8:07 am
Opinion: Michael Collins

California Activists Call the Cops on Diebold:
The Campaign to Unite California Election Reformers

Humboldt Co., CA. A major challenge to election equipment maker Diebold Corporation began in California last week. Dave Berman is a nationally known internet activist who blogs under the name GuvWurld. He is calling on all Californians to ensure election integrity by holding public officials accountable for what he argues are gaping security holes and illegal alterations of Diebold voting machines. One part of the plan asks local activists to demand investigations of unauthorized changes to voting machines by the beleaguered election systems company.

Read the rest...

Area Voting Machines Discredited By Government Reports

2005-12-23T09:45:00.000-08:00

I like that title. In a letter to the editor of the Eureka Reporter, shown below, I suggested using it for their next article on election integrity.

I haven't used the term "election integrity" much until recently but I think it has a good ring. It clearly delineates from the likes of Diebold, voting machine maker cum snake oil salesmen. As Brad Blog has reported, on Thursday Diebold pulled out of North Carolina, and endured rejection by St. Louis.

Another Diebold note, omitted from my last post (Diebold Denied California Once Again), debunks the claims made by Dave Byrd, vice president of business operations for Diebold. An AP article I cited quoted Byrd saying:

"So far, we have complied with every certification test the Secretary's office has requested of us," Byrd said. "We have always complied with what the state has requested of us, and will treat this new request in the same spirit of cooperation."

This is strongly in contrast with the April 2004 CA Secretary of State Staff Report I've referenced heavily in recent weeks:

At the same time this office was seeking to ensure compliance with state certification requirements for the March Primary, the Secretary of State’s office was also working to verify the vendor’s [Diebold's] previous record of compliance with state law. The result of that investigation showed the record to be very poor.

Another point left over from Wednesday comes from the Eureka Times-Standard article, "County to miss federal election deadline." Though I have recently been critical of Humboldt Clerk-Recorder Carolyn Crnich for defending current election conditions and seemingly remaining in denial about their problems, on Wednesday the T-S made clear that Crnich has heard at least some of the community's concerns:

...many of the concerns people currently have with the Diebold system would still apply to almost any other system. They all have proprietary software, Crnich said.

A good portion of the rest of the article is concerned with the January 1 deadline for compliance with the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), which Crnich says no CA county is likely to meet due to the handicapped accessibilty requirements and the lack of available certified equipment. As pointed out in the letter below, previously at GuvWurld, in Blueprint For Peaceful Revolution, and in a recent meeting I had with Crnich, the artificial and arbitrary deadline decreed by HAVA works directly counter to the People's concern for creating improved election conditions. We need local leaders who will resist being used by federal mandates against the interests of the local community. As inspiration, consider the good example set by Utah in resisting the No Child Left Behind Act:

New York Times
Utah Vote Rejects Parts of Education Law
By SAM DILLON
Published: April 20, 2005

SALT LAKE CITY, April 19 - In a stinging rebuke of President Bush's signature education law, the Republican-dominated Utah Legislature on Tuesday passed a bill that orders state officials to ignore provisions of the federal law that conflict with Utah's education goals or that require state financing.

Finally, the Times-Standard article from Wednesday closes with an announcement for the long awaited inaugural meeting of Humboldt's election advisory task force, first proposed by Voter Confidence Committee member Mark Konkler in April:

To discuss these issues, a task force on elections and voting will have its first meeting on Jan. 5, Crnich said. The public is invited to help decide who should be on the committee, and what it will discuss. She said it will center on the voting system, rather than on political issues.

It will be held at 6:30 p.m. in Conference Room A in the Humboldt County Courthouse.

* * *
http://www.eurekareporter.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?ArticleID=6653

Report on voting machines worthy of some follow-ups
12/23/2005

Dear Editor,

Thanks for tackling the crucial topic of election integrity (“Area voting machines could have flaws,” Dec. 16). We simply must come to terms with the subversion of our democracy. As you investigate this subject further, please consider a follow-up called “area voting machines discredited by government reports.” Some suggested sources:

1. The official nonpartisan watchdog arm of Congress, the Government Accountability Office, in October released a 107-page report condemning the security and reliability of U.S. elections. See: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05956.pdf

2. An April 2004 California Secretary of State staff report revealed Diebold had illegally installed uncertified software in voting machines in Humboldt and 16 other California counties. See: www.ss.ca.gov/elections/ks_dre_papers/diebold_report_april20_final.pdf

3. A report prepared for the Maryland General Assembly explains how GEMS, Humboldt County’s vote-counting software (“central tabulator”), can be compromised. See: http://www.raba.com/press/TA_Report_AccuVote.pdf

4. The Department of Homeland Security’s cyber-threat division, U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team, included GEMS in this Sept. 2004 bulletin: http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB04-252.html

While not a government report like the others, visit www.votergate.tv for the free download of “Votergate,” the movie. Watch footage originally aired on CNBC featuring Bev Harris demonstrating for Howard Dean how to hack GEMS and alter vote totals without a trace in under two minutes.

Some hack demonstrations may test the access from an outsider’s reach. Others, such as the one you reported on in Leon County, Fla., grant the hacker the same access as an election official or machine vendor. Mr. McWilliams’ dumbfoundedness at this procedure notwithstanding, the software has proven unsecure.

In light of the fine example set by both Leon and Volusia Counties in Florida, it is time that the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors declare its intention to do no further business with Diebold, a company now facing multiple class action lawsuits from its shareholders.

The looming deadline of the Help America Vote Act is inconsequential compared to the restoration of voter confidence and a basis for such.

The Supes should also start considering how else to have us vote in June, because no way should they expect us to use area voting machines discredited by government reports.

Dave Berman
Eureka

Diebold Denied California Once Again

2005-12-21T01:15:00.000-08:00

California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson has denied Diebold's request for voting machine certification. In a letter sent to Diebold on Tuesday, McPherson's office cited "unresolved significant security concerns" related to Diebold's memory cards. As reported by the Associated Press:

The problems were discovered during routine testing of the machines by state employees and independent consultants, said Secretary of State spokeswoman Jennifer Kerns. She said each system approved for use in California must meet 10 security requirements, and the Diebold machines did not meet one of those standards.

"This is a unique case in which we discovered that the source code had never, ever been reviewed," said Kerns. "There were potential security risks with it."

It might seem, on its face, like it is inexcusable for the code to have evaded review. Yet that is the norm across the country as voting machine vendors have sought to protect their "proprietary" intellectual property. This makes it even more significant that McPherson's response included a demand for Diebold to submit their code to federal investigators before being eligible for further certification consideration in CA. In response to the move, State Senator and Secretary of State candidate Debra Bowen (D-Redondo Beach) said McPherson punted:

"The Secretary of State shouldn't punt the decision about whether Diebold machines should be used to count ballots in California to the federal government and an 'independent' testing authority that's financed by the voting machine vendors," Bowen said in a statement. "That decision needs to be made in the open, right here in California."

For more background on the Independent Testing Authorities (ITAs), see this piece posted last Thursday at Huffington Post by computer science professor and widely recognized election security expert Dr. Avi Rubin:

The ITAs are hired by and paid by -- the vendors. That is, when a vendor has a voting machine that they want certified, they find an ITA who is willing to certify the voting machine. Any memos about flaws that are discovered remain confidential. There is no requirement to disclose any problems that are found with the machines. In fact, the entire ITA report is considered proprietary information of the voting machine vendor. After all, they paid for it. This provides an incentive for ITAs to certify machines, to satisfy their clients.

For perspective on what McPherson's deferral really means, see BlackBoxVoting.org:

And herein lies the trap. Federal testing authorities are supposed to rely on standards set by the Federal Election Commission. The FEC standards prohibit "Interpreted code" - thus, the AccuBasic "interpreter" is illegal. (The entire AccuBasic source code tree is written in a home-brewed language that Diebold programmers made up themselves, making it more difficult for certifiers to examine.)

The Hursti memory card attack demonstrated in Leon County Florida manipulated the voting system by passing code through -- drum roll please -- the Diebold interpreter, using a set of programs called AccuBasic which was written in a concocted computer language and (now it is revealed) was never examined at all by federal testing labs.

The ITA dilemma: ITAs have the choice of either recommending code that explicitly violates FEC standards (placing an unsupportable liability burden on them) or admitting that the original certification was defective. If the ITAs retract their recommendation, it will effectively strip Diebold of its federal certification, and may also affect its older products.

The Diebold dilemma: Diebold can refuse to submit its code to the ITAs, but that will lose the state of California, continuing a pattern initiated last week when two Florida counties dumped their Diebold machines. Alternatively, Diebold can submit its code and watch as the federal authorities sever their product line from the U.S. market.

The position is made more unstable because Diebold is now fending off stockholder suits by an armload of attorneys piling on to solicit clients for a voting machine-related securities fraud lawsuit.

Diebold divestiture has been an activist strategy for quite a while, most notably organized by VelvetRevolution.us. Also circulating through various listserves today courtesy of Phyllis at CountPaperBallots.com was a list of mutual funds with Diebold as a Top 10 holding:

Symbol	Name	% Assets
AVEDX	Ave Maria Rising Dividend Fund	3.07
CDGCX	CRAFWORD DIVIDEND GROWTH FUND C	3.51
CDGIX	CRAWFORD DIVIDEND GROWTH FUND C	3.51
RSEAX	REGIONS MORGAN KEEGAN SELECT MI	3.29
RSECX	REGIONS MORGAN KEEGAN SELECT MI	3.29
TGVKX	TCW GALILEO VALUE OPPS FUND K C	2.36
TGVNX	TCW GALILEO VALUE OPPORTUNITIES	2.36
TGVOX	TCW GALILEO VALUE OPPORTUNITIES	2.36

So as the saying goes, vote with your dollars. They're like paper ballots and you can typically get a receipt. And as Diebold continues to self-destruct, it should get easier for election reform advocates to move local officials to drop Diebold.

In the meantime, it seems that counties such as Humboldt will find their previously certified equipment grandfathered in for continued approved use. As citizens and voters it behooves us to state clearly that these machines do not meet OUR standards. Every single person in a position to make a decision about this must answer to us, We The People. Our line in the sand has been drawn. We will not accept the inherently inconclusive results of elections held under these conditions, nor will we accept public officials who defend and excuse these conditions. See GuvWurld's Campaign to Unite California Election Reformers.

GuvWurld Roundup: A Tumultuous Week For Election News

2005-12-17T15:25:00.000-08:00

We are off to a fast start in our campaign to unite California election reformers. For the second consecutive day, yesterday, local Humboldt County media addressed Diebold's week from hell, including unsupportable claims from Humboldt County Elections Manager Lindsey McWilliams, and my response calling for him to resign. From Friday's Eureka Reporter:

Area voting machines could have flaws
by Shane Mizer, 12/16/2005

AccuVote machines used in Humboldt County elections may be vulnerable to hacking, according to a recent test in Florida.

The machines succumbed to security expert tampering in a Leon County, Fla., test observed by elections supervisor Ion Sancho.

(snip)

"I don't know why any election official would allow anyone to have access to their voting system," Humboldt County Elections Manager Lindsey McWilliams said, criticizing the Leon County test.

(snip)

Dave Berman, a member of the local electoral reform watchdog group the Voter Confidence Committee and author of guvwurld.blogspot.com, has recently called for McWilliams' resignation due to his failure to properly safeguard Humboldt County's elections.

"The conditions for our elections right now guarantee that we are going to have an inconclusive outcome because we've got paperless electronic voting machines across the country," Berman said. "If we can't verify the vote with a recount, how can we know what the true outcome is? Therefore there is no reason for confidence in the results that are given, just blind trust."

Diebold spokesman David Bear claimed Sancho's test was not conducted in a real environment and therefore does not reflect a realistic outcome.

"At no time has he ever included us in his test or followed any industry standards or his own policies and procedures on how to properly conduct an election," Bear said. "It's somewhat foolish to be providing people with the ability to bypass securities by supplying passwords and unfettered access. It's sort of analogous that if I give you the keys to my house and the password to my alarm of course you can get into my house."

Also see Thursday's Eureka-Times Standard (original/archive). Both pieces demonstrate the same flawed response from McWilliams, namely the assumption that a hacker would only be working externally. It is not hard to find questionable insiders. Think of Katherine Harris as Florida Secretary of State in 2000 while also serving as the Bush/Cheney campaign chair. Also consider Ken Blackwell coordinating the "re-election" campaign of 2004 while also serving as Ohio's Secretary of State.

Insiders don't have to be elected (or appointed either, as in McWilliams's case) but could instead work for one of the vendors. Remember the Triad technician involved with the 2004 recount in Hocking County, OH? Click here to read testimony and a sworn affidavit from, respectively, Green Party presidential candidate David Cobb, and whistleblower Sherole Eaton, who was the Hocking County deputy director of elections. Maybe you'd also like to read about the felons employed by Diebold, or the class action suits brought this week by its shareholders.

In criminal jury trials in America, we require a standard of "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt." A great deal of incriminating circumstantial evidence could amount to nothing if jurors aren't quite convinced the accused was at the scene. With elections, there seems to be a standard that says voting equipment is flawless until proven flawed, but we don't accept as proof the GAO report, the Conyers report, hack tests, tens of thousands of reported irregularities, the absence of ballots to be recounted, a Homeland Security cyber alert (bulletin #SB04-252) or anything else that might indicate Democracy in America is a myth.

Of course it should be the other way around, viewing voting methods with caution unless and until they can be proven secure. Following the Leon County, FL hack test this week, elections Supervisor Soncho announced he would no longer use Diebold election machines. Less than 24 hours later, Volusia County, FL also swore off Diebold. Soncho also appeared on television (video - click picture to play) stating his belief that vote totals were tampered with in the 2000 presidential election.

So this is what it is coming down to, on a weekend when even the corporate media is discussing Mr. Bush's personal approval of secret wiretappings in America, without court approval: some people are waking up and drawing their line in the sand. It is not just two FL counties dropping Diebold, or the Senate refusing to renew provisions of the Patriot Act. This is a time when communities, such as Humboldt County, because there is no other choice, will stand up and say what we absolutely will not tolerate anymore. It is not a personal thing to call for the resignation of McWilliams. His boss, County Clerk-Recorder Carolyn Crnich also exhibits the same defense and denial of unacceptable election conditions. Anyone who defends them is defending elections guaranteed to be inconclusive. It is this to which we say no. And it is to all who would insist on keeping such conditions that we say it is time for a different attitude, or a different job.

Goodnight Manchuria, wherever you are.

Eureka Times-Standard Prints Call For Election Manager's Resignation

2005-12-15T08:05:00.000-08:00

Based on the campaign launched Monday night in the GuvWurld blog, today's Eureka Times-Standard (original/archive) carries comments from Humboldt County Elections Manager Lindsey McWilliams defending Diebold, followed by a call for his resignation.

A few days after a Florida county election official swore off the use of Diebold voting machines for alleged security problems, Humboldt County Elections Officer Lindsey McWilliams said he still believes the system is safe from real-world tampering.

[snip]

McWilliams said the tests prove nothing, because the hackers in Florida had special access that real-life tamperers would not have.

[snip]

Dave Berman, a local advocate for election system reform, spoke critically of Diebold and praised the Florida county for its decision.

"I think the decision in Florida is long overdue and I think that there should be a complete product recall so that no county or voter in the country should have to use a Diebold voting machine and no voters should have to vote on a machine that uses proprietary technology at all because that amounts to a secret counting of the votes," Berman said.

He pointed to a recent report by the Government Accountability Office, which he said meticulously outlines problems with a variety of voting technologies.

"Lindsey McWilliams is in denial," Berman said. "He's defending technology that has been documented over and over again as being flawed."

He said McWilliams may need to step down.

"Frankly, if he is resigned to the status quo for voting systems, he should resign his office and make way for someone who is willing to work to improve the elections system," he said.

This message should be cited and repeated throughout the country, but especially in the 17 CA counties where Diebold installed uncertified software in its voting machines (see page 3 of this CA Secretary of State Staff Report).

This campaign has already received significant recognition and participation through Democratic Underground, VoteTrustUSA, Craigslist, and several prominent listserves including the California Election Protection Network.

Link back to the original campaign launch announcement for more details, official contacts, and recommended action steps.

While you blinked...

2005-12-13T19:54:00.000-08:00

Walden O'Dell, paragon of non-partisan virtue ("I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president"), has resigned as CEO of election machine manufacturer Diebold.

BradBlog.com was quick to post that story yesterday, along with an accurate prediction of its scoop today: shareholders have brought a securities fraud class action suit against Diebold. Here is a press release from the legal team representing the class. Reuters also published this brief.

Late Tuesday afternoon, BlackBoxVoting.org announced even more bad news for Diebold:

Due to security design issues and contractual non-performance, Leon County (Florida) supervisor of elections Ion Sancho told Black Box Voting that he will never use Diebold in an election again. He has requested funds to replace the Diebold system from the county. He will issue a formal announcement to this effect shortly.

Leon County, FL has been on election reformers' radars since the BBV crew performed a successful test hack there last summer. The promised forthcoming announcement is not yet on the County's website though it does include this special report attesting to the successful hacking.

Amid all of this, the Eureka Times-Standard joins the Humboldt Advocate and the Humboldt Sentinel in breaking the silence about the GAO report. Here is the brilliant conclusion to the T-S piece:

The GAO report covers concerns for the worst that could happen in U.S. elections, and provides evidence of the discrepancies that have happened. It goes on to say: "Nevertheless, there is evidence that some of these concerns -- including weak controls and inadequate testing -- have caused problems with recent elections, resulting in the loss and miscount of votes."

So, with government-verified facts like this, how are voters like you and I supposed to believe in the official results announced each election day? Do we put blind faith in our existing voting technology, go on about our daily lives and hope for the best in a so-called "democracy" with unverifiably elected leaders? Or, shall we care enough about ensuring the foundations of our democracy, by looking deeper into our broken voting system, asking our officials to ensure conclusive election outcomes, and working to establish an accountable government that genuinely represents us?

To learn more about Diebold and GEMS software, other voting technology discrepancies and possible solutions, please visit: www.voterconfidencecommittee.org, guvwurld.blogspot.com, or www.blackboxvoting.org

And all of this is simply superbly timed to coincide with the GuvWurld campaign launched Monday night, aimed at bringing pressure on and possibly producing resignations from elections officials in the 17 counties where Diebold admitted (p.3) to installing uncertified software in voting machines. Discussion site Democratic Underground has taken notice of the campaign and various election reform groups and coalitions are expected to be on board shortly.

A Campaign To Unite California Election Reformers

2005-12-12T20:15:00.000-08:00

A recently released report by the non-partisan watchdog arm of Congress, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), has laid bare the unsecure and unreliable conditions of U.S. elections. Beyond just what could happen, the GAO has meticulously documented what has happened in the past few years, concluding:

Nevertheless, there is evidence that some of these concerns—including weak controls and inadequate testing—have caused problems with recent elections, resulting in the loss and miscount of votes. (p.38)

When votes are lost and miscounted, there is no way to be certain what the true outcome should be from an election. We can thus say that current election conditions ensure inconclusive outcomes, and provide no basis for confidence in the results reported. Among the many citations, the GAO report refers to an April 20, 2004, Staff Report from the California Secretary of State's office which reported that Diebold had admitted to violating state law in each of its 17 client counties (listed below):

[T]he VSPP [Voting Systems and Procedures Panel] initiated an audit of all 17 California counties using Diebold voting systems. The audit discovered that Diebold had, in fact, installed uncertified software in all its client counties without notifying the Secretary of State as required by law, and that the software was not federally qualified in three client counties. Diebold eventually acknowledged that it had failed to notify the Secretary of State of its proposed system modifications, and that its failure to obtain certification for those modifications violated state law. (p.3)

In response to that revelation, GuvWurld recently pondered:

Who allowed Humboldt's voting machines to have uncertified software installed in them? Was someone in the Humboldt County elections department complicit in this crime or merely negligent? Is this person still employed by the elections department, and if so, why?

These questions have been referred to the Humboldt County District Attorney and Grand Jury. These same questions are valid in each of the 16 other California counties using Diebold touch screens and/or scanners. GuvWurld hereby calls for a coordinated effort among election reformers to make this an issue throughout the state. Why? Look what appeared on page four of the same CA SoS report:

Diebold's conduct has created an untenable situation for both county and state elections officials. Some county officials have felt compelled to defend untested, unqualified and uncertified Diebold voting systems, having authorized large capital outlays only to find out on the eve of or during an election that the systems do not function as promised. Before the March [2004] Primary, county officials repeatedly warned that, without certification of particular voting system components, the election could not be conducted because it was too late to devise and implement back-up plans.

If elections officials were or are in an "untenable situation," then voters are in an even worse position. We are trying to draw a line in the sand demonstrating our refusal to accept election conditions that will continue to guarantee inconclusive outcomes. Necessary to this goal is a similar line in the sand laid down by elections officials. After all, if they say elections "could not be conducted" under certain circumstances, why have we not seen a cancelled election? Where will elections officials draw their line in the sand?

Many elections officials will never do that. Such people do not warrant the trust of the public and must be the first to resign or be removed from office. Try this line: "If you are resigned to the status quo, you must resign your office and make way for someone determined to improve election conditions." Anyone who continues defending, excusing or apologizing for current election conditions has no business in election administration or in any other public office.

Action Steps:

Forward this message to District Attorneys, Grand Juries, County Supervisors, City Councilmembers, and local media in each of Diebold's 17 CA client Counties (listed below), requesting investigation of Diebold's crimes and any possible involvement of local elections officials.

Follow up with phone calls requesting:
- Election department officials be asked to acknowledge and affirm their understanding of the GAO's findings, or submit their resignation;
- Diebold be declared an unfit business partner, ruling out any further use of Diebold voting equipment, any future contracts with Diebold, and all privately owned, proprietary voting systems;
- City Councils and County Boards of Supervisors adopt the Voter Confidence Resolution outlining conditions necessary to ensure conclusive election outcomes and create a basis for confidence in the results reported.
Turn to those around you and discuss how else to draw a line in the sand. In particular, we greatly need the leadership of California's many established election reform groups acting in solidarity with this call to action.

CA Counties Using Diebold:

Alameda
Fresno
Humboldt
Kern
Lassen
Marin
Mendocino
Modoc
Placer
Plumas
San Diego
San Joaquin
San Luis Obispo
Santa Barbara
Siskiyou
Trinity
Tulare

Click HERE to see which CA counties use which voting systems.

Resources:

CA election code: http://www.election-reform.us/laws/

CA voter complaint form: http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/elections_fraud.htm

CA newspaper contacts: http://newsdirectory.com/news.php?co=USA&p=ca

CA Grand Jurors Association: http://www.nvo.com/cgja

CA District Attorneys: http://doju.tripod.com/california.html

CA Boards of Supervisors: http://www.cicg.org/search/roster.php

Further Humboldt Implications of the GAO Elections Report

2005-11-28T09:36:00.000-08:00

For the past week and a half I've been studying the GAO report condemning the conditions under which our elections are held. Last Tuesday I posted this searing analysis of the report's implications on Humboldt County, which I also circulated as a Media Advisory to Humboldt press outlets. So far the Humboldt Advocate and Eureka Reporter have expressed interest in the story and I consider this very encouraging.

On the other hand, it is perplexing to have to tell of the response from the Eureka Times-Standard. Before issuing the Advisory I contacted editor Charles Winkler with a head's up just to check out the GAO report. He always seems pleasant enough in greeting me. Then comes the confounding factor. Winkler tried to tell me the GAO report was only about Ohio. Knowing that I could show him otherwise, I let it go. After receiving the actual Advisory, Winkler e-mailed saying "we don't have these machines here, as far as I know..." He copied that fantasy to Dave Rosso. I spoke with Rosso on Friday when he repeated the delusion that "we don't have these machines here." I asked then what software counts votes in Humboldt? Silence.

I want to say that I don't know what to make of this contrary behavior. But it is strikingly similar to what I've been describing recently in more abstract terms. And it is not isolated.

Three weeks ago, on the final Saturday night before California's Special Election, the Civil Liberties Monitoring Project had a forum with five speakers including Humboldt County Clerk-Recorder Carolyn Crnich. In the closing portion of the program I had the opportunity to ask Crnich a question from the audience.

(Me, paraphrased): Given that 30% of the national vote in November 2004 could not be recounted, and that a CalVoter.org press release says nine counties will be using paperless electronic voting machines in Tuesday's special election, I say in both cases there is no basis for confidence in the results reported. Humboldt notwithstanding, as a voter of California, do you have confidence in the results that will come from the upcoming Special Election, and if so, what is the basis for that confidence?

(Crnich, also paraphrased): California law requires a voter verifiable paper audit trail. There will be no paperless electronic voting on Tuesday.

After the forum, I caught up with Crnich milling in the audience. I pointed out to her that she hadn't answered my question because instead she disputed my premise. She again insisted that the VVPAT requirement was in effect. I knew this would be true after January 1, 2006 and offered to bring her proof. We also agreed to verify the issue of paperless machines for this election as a separate question. I haven't had a chance to get back together with her yet, but all the evidence is linked in this post. I'll be calling her for an appointment later today.

I asked Crnich one other thing. I wondered, if she realized there really would be paperless electronic machines in use, would she still have confidence in the results reported? Conceding not quite all the way to the language of the Voter Confidence Resolution, Crnich said: "I would say there is a basis for not having confidence." I thought this had to be close enough and slinked off with a smirk.

Over the past many months, members of the Voter Confidence Committee have met several times with Crnich. She has humbly admitted being unfamiliar with many of the concerns about our current election conditions. This is in contrast to County Elections Manager Lindsey McWilliams who both stands in denial of these problems and becomes hostile and defensive when confronted with them. Following a Board of Supervisors meeting this past April, I reported about Lindsey's vulgar public outburst when challenged about election standards:

McWilliams acknowledged on the one hand that we have a "monumentally fucked up system" in this country, but in the next breath he cast doubt on the breadth of the tens of thousands of "irregularities" reported from the 2004 general "election." He seems to honestly believe that election machines are not part of the problem.

This too was not a stand-alone incident. Upon reviewing my Parallel Election Wrap Up report, written early in the morning following California's recent Special Election, McWilliams zoomed in on this excerpt:

I may have botched the procedure here, missing my chance to get the totals by officially observing the closing of the official poll. If that wouldn't have given us the numbers then I was operating on a false assumption since I waited for the results to be posted outside. After a while I finally got the attention of someone inside (not clear what they were doing but they had locked themselves in City Hall) who told me the results wouldn't be posted there (are they not required to do this?). She said I should check at the police station. At the station they said they only receive ballots for temporary safekeeping and have nothing to do with the results. The elections department website hasn't been updated and going there is just out of the question.

In an e-mail forwarded to GuvWurld, McWilliams dispatched the following vitriol to Mark Konkler, Voter Confidence Committee liaison to the elections department:

So, Dave has you for a front man because there's no way he's coming to the Elections Office? Ignorant cowardice is disappointing. He doesn't know California election procedures but he's got a fix for them?

I'll take those charges in order. First, Konkler has long been the designated VCC point-person working with McWilliams and Crnich. Second, at midnight on Parallel Election Day, some of our volunteers were exhausted from working since 6:30am. Recognizing that we could achieve nothing different by obtaining the "official" results at that late hour or the following morning, the group's consensus was to call it a night. And finally, as I puzzled in my PE wrap up report, the precinct should not be locked to bar witnessing of the counting, and results are indeed required to be posted outside the polling place according to California Election Code:

[19380] During the reading of the result of votes cast, any candidate or watcher who may desire to be present shall be admitted to the polling place.

[19384] The precinct board shall, before it adjourns, post conspicuously on the outside of the polling place a copy of the result of the votes cast at the polling place.

So this brings us full circle to my GAO report analysis, which by the way, comments on only a tiny fraction of the improprieties discussed in the 107 page official GAO report, and omits mention of this additional illegal activity. I implore you again, GuvWurld readers, demand from our local media a thorough investigation and report. Equally important, notify the Board of Supervisors that this is entirely inadequate and inappropriate performance from our elections department.

What would be better, and what we have a right to expect, is reality-based public servants who recognize and acknowledge the extent of the problems with election conditions, and who are committed to improving those conditions. The Supes simply must rise to the occasion in their oversight capacity and help to define meaningful qualification criteria for new candidates for employment at the elections department. After all, Crnich is running (currently unopposed) for re-election in 2006 and McWilliams holds his position by appointment. If you are willing to run for one of these jobs, please contact me and I will gladly interview you and publish the transcript here in the GuvWurld blog.

URGENT ACTION NEEDED - STOP DIEBOLD CERTIFICATION

2005-11-27T11:17:00.000-08:00

CA Secretary of State Bruce McPherson continues to look for a way to certify Diebold election machines, no matter the evidence proving their flaws. Supposedly, tomorrow, Monday Nov. 28 is the deadline for public comment. Here are some vital links to assist you in standing up and demanding Democracy:

BlackBoxVoting.org posting from 11/17/05 - contains detailed explanations of successful exploitation of Diebold defects, including the GEMS central tabulator software used to count votes in Humboldt County.

California Voter Foundation report on 11/21/05 Diebold "no hearing" hearing in Sacramento (McPherson disbanded the Voting Systems and Procedures Panel leaving election reform advocates to testify before a group without any authority or even advisory capacity).

California Election Protection Network (CEPN) - home page currently has report on 11/21/05 hearing, plus background on Diebold and HAVA (may be outdated because there is no archived link)

BlackBoxVoting.org posting from 11/22/05 - very interesting announcement that McPherson has set up a public "test hack" for BBV experts; postings added from 11/25 on indicate the initial date of 11/30 has been postponed to a mid-December date still to be determined.

Oakland Tribune - 11/27/05 article confirming test hack will happen but conditions still being negotiated; article also confirms Humboldt among impacted Counties.

Agenda, Voting Systems Testing Summit 2005 - the wheels will keep spinning this Monday and Tuesday in Sacramento. Among the topics of discussion:

Can States or Vendors Help Speed Up the Process and Still Protect the Integrity of the Vote?

How Can Test Processes and Results be Shared?

Are Standards Getting Increasingly Tougher? Should They?

Should Different Tests Be Applied to Different Types of Voting Systems?

Are Parallel Testing Programs a Good Idea? What Do They Prove?

Source Code -– How Much Should Be Reviewed? By Whom?

Is State Certification Necessary or Is Federal Testing Sufficient?

And one more link, from Dan Ashby, a Berkeley organizer I met in Portland at the National Summit to Save Our Elections. Dan compiled a comprehensive document full of info for opposing Diebold, including sample letters and official Sacto contact info. It is important to note that faxing comments is more impactful than e-mail, and more timely given that snail mail won't arrive in time for tomorrow's deadline on public comment.

There is lots going on here at GuvWurld. Tomorrow morning I will release a follow-up on last week's GAO report analysis. Some local media have responded well and I expect some coverage this week. However, your insistence on thorough investigative reporting is essential. This community should not accept those who refuse to reveal or seek to hide the truth about the state of our elections. Revisit that post for a list of local media and government contacts. I'll be doing outreach to Humboldt County Supervisors tomorrow too, calling for support of both the GAO report investigation and the Diebold resistance.

And a final note on the overall election reform movement. Yesterday I posted about the Eureka Greens adopting the Voter Confidence Resolution (VCR). This happened without my involvement or knowledge. I believe this indicates the VCR has begun to take on a life of its own. Further, the CEPN reference above contains a section called the 7 Reasons Not To Certify Diebold. The first reason is the GEMS defect and it quotes (without permission or credit) two paragraphs from my GAO report analysis. Going a step further, Dan Ashby included the 7 reasons in the piece linked above, and he kept the two paragraphs with some minor word tweaks. This is in no way a complaint about plagiarism. Quite the opposite. What I see is that the election reform movement is alive and evolving, taking the best of what we can all contribute and repurposing where practical to achieve shared goals. Good for us!

Eureka Greens Adopt Voter Confidence Resolution

2005-11-26T11:34:00.000-08:00

Last Saturday there was a meeting of the Eureka Greens, a group I didn't know existed. As a result of that meeting, the top item currently on their website (permalink) is their adoption of the Voter Confidence Resolution. It appears they adopted the version I just linked which is what the Arcata City Council famously adopted on July 20, 2005. At the conclusion, the Greens added the following paragraph:

Resolved, The Secretary shall transmit this resolution to the GPHC General Assembly and all GPHC Locals, GPCA State Coordinating Committee and Green Issues Working Group, Emerald Region of the GPCA and constituent county organizations, Voter Confidence Committee, Velvet Revolution, President George W. Bush, Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, Congressman Mike Thompson, Senator Wes Chesbro, Assemblymember Patty Berg and the media.

That's awesome that they feel so motivated to do all that outreach. It fits perfectly with the strategy brainstorming I've been involved with recently and so I would like to put out a call for volunteers now, to the Eureka Greens and all GuvWurld readers.

We need to expand the direct contact with Mayors and Councilmembers beyond Humboldt, as we did back in August. If you can contribute to a little internet research, e-mail and phone campaign, please contact me or come to the next meeting of the Voter Confidence Committee, every Monday at 6pm, at the Liquid Cafe in Eureka's Burre Center (map).

Humboldt Election Problems Seen In GAO Report

2005-11-22T14:19:00.000-08:00

Last Thursday I wrote about a report released by the official Congressional watchdog body, the non-partisan Government Accountability Office (GAO). The corporate media has mostly blacked out this story which should otherwise reveal to every American that there is no basis for confidence in the results reported from U.S. federal elections. Let's see if the Humboldt implications, and your provocations, Dear GuvWurld readers, will be enough to get some local coverage. Consider this a call to action.

Almost at the very beginning, on page 5, the GAO report says:

We also note that there is a lack of consensus on the pervasiveness of the problems, due in part to a lack of comprehensive information on what system makes and models are used in jurisdictions throughout the country.

We are being asked to believe that nationwide vote tallies are counted entirely accurately but we can't account for what type of machine recorded and counted each vote. Does this defy logic or is it just me? Also, this mention of a "lack of consensus" should be obvious. Inherent uncertainty (such as unverifiable votes) is created all the time to keep us divided about what constitutes reality. Please send me ANY examples of national consensus, if you can find one. This is the Intentionally Divided States of America.

On page 23, the authors make GuvWurld's case for media coverage:

In light of the recently demonstrated voting system problems; the differing views on how widespread these problems are; and the complexity of assuring the accuracy, integrity, confidentiality, and availability of voting systems throughout their life cycles, the security and reliability concerns raised in recent reports merit the focused attention of federal, state, and local authorities responsible for election administration.

And with a few Humboldt-related items, the focused attention of our election officials will surely warrant the focused attention of our local media:

--p.24-25: Weak system security controls
The Humboldt County website has a memo to the Board of Supervisors dated 2/22/05. It is from Carolyn Wilson Crnich, Clerk-Recorder. It is also signed by the preparer, Lindsey McWilliams, County Elections Manager. Regarding storage of voting equipment, they wrote:
Since Public Works has unfettered access to our equipment at present, there is little reason to seek a security audit which we would undoubtedly fail.
Are security protocols inherently bad or worthless? Should audits be banned or eliminated? No, it seems we just shouldn't conduct them if we know we won't pass. Which is more easily excused, disregard for confirming the security status of election machines, or disregard for the machines' security? No apologies can be accepted for either.

Humboldt County uses modems for data transfer (vote tallies) between the precincts and the "central tabulator." The GAO report mentioned problems with modems:
In addition, one of these reports found that it was possible to gain full control of a regional vote tabulation computer—including the ability to modify the voting software—via a modem connection.
The report referenced above is a study by the Maryland General Assembly:
By successfully directing Canvas [commercial software] at the GEMS modem interface, the team was able to remotely upload, download and execute files with full system administrator privileges. All that was required was a valid phone number for the GEMS server.
Humboldt County uses GEMS which is vote counting software made by Diebold. Other problems with GEMS include:
GEMS contains trade-secret ("proprietary") programming kept private from election officials and the public at large.

While no one can explain precisely how GEMS works, it is known that GEMS operates on Microsoft's Access platform, which has long been proven to be highly unsecure by industry experts.

Votergate the Movie (www.votergate.tv), available for free download, contains footage from a national TV broadcast of Bev Harris instructing Howard Dean how to hack GEMS and untraceably alter vote tallies in under two minutes. Additional vulnerabilities have since been found and publicized at www.blackboxvoting.org.

--p.37: Poor version control of system software
The GAO report cites an April 2004 CA Secretary of State Staff Report on the investigation of Diebold Election Systems, Inc.:
[T]he VSPP [Voting Systems and Procedures Panel] initiated an audit of all 17 California counties using Diebold voting systems. The audit discovered that Diebold had, in fact, installed uncertified software in all its client counties without notifying the Secretary of State as required by law, and that the software was not federally qualified in three client counties. Diebold eventually acknowledged that it had failed to notify the Secretary of State of its proposed system modifications, and that its failure to obtain certification for those modifications violated state law.
Who allowed Humboldt's voting machines to have uncertified software installed in them? Was someone in the Humboldt County elections department complicit in this crime or merely negligent? Is this person still employed by the elections department, and if so, why? Humboldt voters deserve answers and local media that will pursue accountability.

--p.38: The GAO report is a mix of concerns for what could happen, and evidence of what has happened. The former illustrates the need for transparency and greater awareness while the latter is proof of the fallout for continued willful ignorance:
Nevertheless, there is evidence that some of these concerns—including weak controls and inadequate testing—have caused problems with recent elections, resulting in the loss and miscount of votes.

Since day one of the GuvWurld blog, the premise has been that our elections are held under conditions which ensure inconclusive outcomes. Clearly, when votes are lost and miscounted, as reported by the GAO, the world cannot be sure of the true results from U.S. elections. This has been demonstrated time and again, and yet we still face reticent media and apologist community members sticking up for election officials out of misplaced and misguided loyalty. It doesn't matter who you are, your friends are not more important than our Democracy.

GuvWurld readers, your call to action is to make all local media aware of the GAO report and its implications for Humboldt County; and to encourage the Board of Supervisors to consider whether our elections department is staffed by people committed to election reforms that will ensure conclusive outcomes, create a basis for confidence in the results reported, and establish accountable government representing We The People with the Consent of the Governed. This is what Democracy looks like.

Local Media Contacts:

Arcata Eye: news@arcataeye.com, 707-826-7000
Eureka Reporter: editor@eurekareporter.com, 707-476-8000
Eureka Times-Standard: editor@times-standard.com, 707-441-0500
HSU Lumberjack: thejack@humboldt.edu, 707-826-3271
Humboldt Advocate: news@humboldtadvocate.com, 707-825-9400
KHUM: info@khum.com, 707-786-5104
KMUD: news@kmud.org, 707-923-2513
Life & Times of Southern Humboldt: 707-923-2824
Mainstream Media Project: info@mainstream-media.net, 707-826-9111
North Coast Journal: ncjournal@northcoastjournal.com, 707-826-2000
The Independent: indie@asis.com, 707-923-4205

Local Government:

Humboldt County Board of Supervisors: http://www.co.humboldt.ca.us/board

Jimmy Smith, District 1: jrsmith@co.humboldt.ca.us, (707) 476-2391
Roger Rodoni, District 2: roger.rodoni@co.humboldt.ca.us, (707) 476-2392
John Woolley, District 3: jwoolley@co.humboldt.ca.us, (707) 476-2393
Bonnie Neely, District 4: bonnie.neely@co.humboldt.ca.us, (707) 476-2394
Jill Geist, District 5: jill.geist@co.humboldt.ca.us, (707) 476-2395

Eureka City Council: http://www.eurekawebs.com/cityhall

Peter La Vallee, Mayor: plavallee@ci.eureka.ca.gov, 707-441-4172
Mary Beth Wolford, Ward 1: mbwolford@ci.eureka.ca.gov, 707-441-4169
Virginia Bass-Jackson. Ward 2: virginia@ci.eureka.ca.gov, 707-441-4168
Jeff Leonard, Ward 3: jleonard@ci.eureka.ca.gov, 707-441-4170
Chris Kerrigan, Ward 4: kerrigan@ci.eureka.ca.gov, 707-441-4167
Mike Jones, Ward 5: mjones@ci.eureka.ca.gov, 707-441-4171

Arcata City Council: http://www.arcatacityhall.org/gov.html

Michael Machi, Mayor: mmmp@htan.org, 707-269-0394
Dave Meserve: greenarcata@hotmail.com, 707-441-9846
Paul Pitino: ppitino@arcatacityhall.org, 707-522-0387
Mark Wheetley: mwheetley@arcatacityhall.org, 707-269-0332
Harmony Groves: harmony@harmonyinarcata.com, 707-522-0463

McPherson Springs Bogus Diebold Hearing - TODAY!!!

2005-11-21T01:52:00.000-08:00

CALIFORNIA ELECTION PROTECTION NETWORK
A non-partisan organization of over 25 groups across California
coming together to achieve their mutual election integrity goals
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Saturday, November 19, 2005

Contact: Karen 916/812-1793 or Dagmar Zakim 415/389.0250

ATTN: DAYBOOK /Assignment Desk for Monday

Rally, confrontation with Secretary of State over inadequate Diebold certification review process

SACRAMENTO – The non-partisan California Election Protection Network and other like organizations – concerned about the integrity of California elections--will hold a rally Monday to protest the decision by the Secretary of State to hold a near-secret certification hearing that appears foreordained to recertify the notorious Diebold TSx DRE voting machines and associated revisions to the trade-secret software of the Diebold voting systems used in 17 California counties.

A news conference and rally is scheduled for 9:30 a.m. MONDAY at the Secretary of State's Office (11th & O Streets).

The hearing by the Secretary of State is set for 10 a.m. Members of the public are allotted two minutes for verbal comments.

Demonstrators will attend the hearing and then may confront Sec. of State Bruce McPherson in his office.

Among those expected to attend the news conference are experts in voting systems from throughout California, several candidates for Secretary of State, and talk-show host Christine Craft.

Citizens opposing Diebold cite numerous academic, technical and investigative studies that have demonstrated known security holes that could allow undetectable vote-counting manipulation to defraud elections.

The CEPN is also concerned because McPherson has not held a Voting Systems Panel meeting since June, and has now completely disbanded the panel – to be replaced with a hearing officer, stenographer and tape recorder. This virtually non-publicized meeting has been scheduled for Thanksgiving week, when the genral public is least likely to be aware or participate in this critical decision affecting the security and verifiability of elections.

GuvWurld Joins Call For Media Coverage of Month-Old GAO Report

2005-11-17T12:35:00.000-08:00

On Oct. 20 a report condemning the security of U.S. elections was issued by the non-partisan Government Accountability Office (GAO). The report was added to the GuvWurld News Archive but I did not blog about it. It is unfortunate, but I do not have time to write about everything I see as important. Instead, GuvWurld is and always has been a vehicle for advocacy journalism where I write about the things I am DOING to bring about change, and writing in order to contribute to achieving that change. And so it is a reaffirmation of this blog's mission, today, to join the call for all media to end the blackout of the GAO report.

As is often the case lately, BradBlog.com was the first place I saw writing about the GAO report. About 10 days later, Brad lamented the lack of coverage the report had received (giving due credit to the few links to be found). Brad tagged his column with a specific appeal to Editor and Publisher, who promptly took note of the call without doing the substantive reporting suggested. I should point out that upon release of the GAO report, a bi-partisan group of six Congressmembers issued a statement in support of its findings. It is just all the more absurd that this continues to be ignored. Today the Green Party of the United States has issued a press release calling for the GAO report to be covered.

Now consider for a moment, what would be the impact of a media industry that routinely kept such important information from the public? Why, under such circumstances, we might be lead to war by a false threat; we could conceivably fail to investigate a deadly attack despite contradictory and scientifically impossible elements of the "official story"; and the possibility would have to exist that election conditions designed to produce inconclusive results would also produce something short of unanimous consensus about the outcome.

Both by what is reported and not reported, the corporate media contribute greatly to defining reality. Don't miss the pattern here. The reality being defined is quite often one of inherent uncertainty. Thus, instead of investigative reporting, often we see information surface, an attack smearing the messenger, and then a report on the he said-she said without determination of the validity of the original charge. Inherent uncertainty then remains to cause public disagreement about what constitutes reality.

In Blueprint For Peaceful Revolution I argue that this rift in the perception of reality is one example of the intentional divisiveness that has launched a Cold Civil War between the reality-based community (so-named by the administration in the NYTimes) and the faith-based community (not necessarily the religious but the unquestioning citizens who accept the official line, on faith).

More recently in the GuvWurld blog I wrote We Are Being Set Up: The Manchurian Nation. This commentary described some of the innocent ways that many pillars of our society are indoctrinated into believing their harmful actions actually serve the greater good. That includes local law enforcement trained to regard peaceful protest as terrorist activity; schools where it is assumed student information should be available to military recruiters; elections officials placing expediency over transparency and verifiability; and media no longer interested in being watch dogs over the powerful.

These actions reinforce the foundation of the faith-based community. To reality-based citizens it is like watching a Trojan Horse, inside duped public figures carry out their implanted missions like the movie about that Candidate. The infrastructure of the faith-based community is populated by the Manchurian Nation. No longer should we apologize for the nice folks we know who run the local paper or work at the elections office. They have to hear loud and clear: STOP SELLING US OUT. Stop right now. Today. Immediately. Cover the GAO report and stop impeding election reform.

Press Release: VCC Calls Humboldt's First Parallel Election a Success

2005-11-13T14:35:00.000-08:00

Voter Confidence Committee Holds First Parallel Election
Media Contact: Dave Berman, Voter Confidence Committee
blog@guvwurld.org; 707-845-3749

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Voter Confidence Committee Calls Humboldt’s First Parallel Election a Success
Over 55% of Voters Participate in Citizen-Run Exit Poll at Arcata City Hall Precinct

Friday, November 11, 2005 – On Election Day, over 55% of all voters who placed their official ballot at the Arcata City Hall precinct also chose to participate in the region’s first “Parallel Election,” staffed by the volunteers of local citizens group the Voter Confidence Committee of Humboldt County (VCC). The VCC undertook this important project to compare the results and verify the accuracy of the official vote tally performed on electronic machines with secret programming code.

VCC co-founder Dave Berman was optimistic about results of the Parallel Election, saying, “Participation was much greater than expected.” He added, “Moving forward, voters can expect the VCC to remain vigilant about monitoring election results, and we will conduct this same experiment in the 2006 Primaries.”

The VCC and other election reform advocates have raised serious concerns about Humboldt County’s vote counting program called GEMS, manufactured by Diebold. On the whole, this software contains trade-secret (“proprietary”) programming kept private from election officials and the public at large. While no one can explain precisely how the program works, it is known that GEMS operates on Microsoft’s Access platform that has been proven unsecure by industry experts. The citizen-run Parallel Election was conducted largely to increase awareness of this with Humboldt’s voting public.

Election Day Experiment Determined Successful

From 7 am to 8 pm on Election Day, VCC volunteers invited voters exiting City Hall to participate in the Parallel Election by replicating their votes on a second, secret, parallel ballot that duplicated what was on the official ballot.

Official poll results provided by the Humboldt County Elections Department indicate 473 voters cast official ballots inside City Hall, and there were 261 people (55.2%) who participated in the VCC project. A comparison of the two sets of voting results can be found at: http://tinyurl.com/af8go.

Voters Grateful for VCC’s Watchdog Role

Throughout election day, many Parallel Election participants expressed gratitude for the VCC’s watchdog role. “Even though we were located across the street, calling out to voters as they exited the polling place,” said VCC co-founder Scott Menzies, “most voters were eager to participate and supportive of our efforts.”

Results Not Comparable Yet Experiment Raises Important Questions

Dr. Josh Meisel from HSU's Department of Sociology, oversaw the hand count of parallel votes conducted in the open public space of the HSU library lobby. Meisel determined that it was not possible to compare the Parallel Election results to the Official Election results. Meisel identified two critical issues with the Parallel Election: the questionable representativeness of the voters who participated and uncertainty regarding reported and actual voting behavior.

"We don't know how those who didn't participate in the PE would have voted," Meisel cautioned. "We cannot assume that the 261 Parallel Election voters are representative of all 473 precinct voters." Meisel also raised concerns about whether the Parallel Election results accurately measure official voting behavior. "We do not know whether people voted exactly the same way in the PE as they voted in the official election," he said. Nevertheless, Meisel said the VCC's experiment made "an excellent point about the functional utility of the Parallel Election -- the questions raised about making such (voting behavior) comparisons is analogous to the uncertainty surrounding voting systems that eliminate paper trails for vote verification."

“Despite some of the inconclusive results mentioned by Dr. Meisel, the VCC’s concerns about election conditions remain unchanged,” said Berman. “Our trial run Parallel Election is proof positive that voters are wary of electronic voting machines, and looking to ensure the verifiability of official results.”
# # #
Media contact:
Dave Berman. 707-845-3749 / blog@guvwurld.org.

For more information on the VCC, visit www.voterconfidencecommittee.org or attend the group’s weekly open meetings, Mondays at 6pm, at the Liquid Café in Eureka’s Burre Center (map).

Edited: 11/13/05 9:55pm

Hypothetical Occupation of America

2005-11-09T10:52:00.000-08:00

Lots of new readers have been finding GuvWurld since I wrote We Are Being Set Up: The Manchurian Nation (many thanks to Angry Girl for the link). This is a commentary on Michel Chossudovsky's analysis of a leaked report from the Homeland Security Council.

The report lends weight to the idea that the government is intentionally dividing Americans, largely by creating a rift in the common perception of reality. Much of this revolves around creating fear, and planning to evade or overcome something traumatic. With such great influence over corporate owned media, the government's propaganda reinforces scenarios and paradigms presented for the purposes of disaster training and emergency preparedness.

The "scenarios" and anti-terrorist exercises develop observance and compliance by public officials, law enforcement, intelligence, military and civilian federal and State employees, etc.

This is the breeding ground of the Manchurian Nation, inhabited by many people superficially appearing as upstanding members of the establishment while simultaneously oppressing the ideals and values for which the establishment supposedly stands.

In trying to think like it seems the Homeland Security Council does, I found myself wondering what a sustained foreign attack on America might do. Not listed in the leaked report is a hypothetical occupation of America by a liberating force that comes to defeat fascism and free the American people. Well of course Homeland Security won't plan, or at least not publicly plan, a response to that. But what about us? Aiding and abetting the enemy is a serious thing. Many people, and I think I'd be one of them, would consider this hypothetical to contain two sets of enemies of America, each at war with the other and both likely looking to use as pawns.

Perhaps, just maybe, this might be a place from which we could possibly come close to beginning to imagine the plight of Iraqis today. I don't suggest we ask John Kerry for his help but we might think about what it will take to develop a "smarter, tougher, more effective" insurgency to drive out the invaders and take control over own affairs.

"We're not waiting for another attack. We can't wait for another attack to employ the full power of America in this cause. We're acting now to protect the American people and to shape a future of peace."

Parallel Election Wrap Up...To Be Continued

2005-11-09T01:46:00.000-08:00

Doing the Parallel Election today was one of the best experiences I have had working with a group or doing any kind of public service (this was NOT activism, it was public service). In Portland, at the National Summit to Save Our Elections, one of the big buzz phrases was civic engagement. The PE is like injecting civic engagement directly into your spine.

We had a team of about 16 working in shifts from 6:30am to 11pm. There were always at least three people and sometimes as many as six calling out to the voters across the street. "Can you help us with a citizen exit poll? We're trying to double check the accuracy of the secret vote counting machines." This was the line that worked well for me.

It took a lot of energy but that came back to me multiplied by the people so thankful for our work. We were often asked how many other polling places had the PE. And even though this was the first time and we were only doing one polling place, it was as if the idea was so obvious and easily accepted that next June we will be ready to cover at least half of Humboldt County (perhaps a fatigue induced exaggeration...or not).

At a couple of points throughout the day we caught updates from an official poll worker. The only number was the total voters but this was what we needed to estimate our participation rate. I'm going to guess about 60% is where it will end up. Unfortunately, we don't yet have the results from the official polling place, Arcata City Hall.

I may have botched the procedure here, missing my chance to get the totals by officially observing the closing of the official poll. If that wouldn't have given us the numbers then I was operating on a false assumption since I waited for the results to be posted outside. After a while I finally got the attention of someone inside (not clear what they were doing but they had locked themselves in City Hall) who told me the results wouldn't be posted there (are they not required to do this?). She said I should check at the police station. At the station they said they only receive ballots for temporary safekeeping and have nothing to do with the results. The elections department website hasn't been updated and going there is just out of the question.

So without the official results for comparison, we still counted our paper parallel ballots, by hand, in the open public lobby of the Humboldt State University library. One of the professors helped us count and will lead the comparative data analysis. I'll be getting back in touch with him mid morning tomorrow after I get the official vote totals.

Meanwhile, I have gotten a taste for carrying out something I wrote about in Blueprint For Peaceful Revolution. Not just PE, we need to be creating parallel institutions of all sorts. We need to get out from behind the keyboard more often and put our energy into collaborations and coalitions that allow us to supplant ALL that is wrong with the unstoppable will of We The People. Spectemur agendo.

World Can't Wait (Re-Cap)

2005-11-07T03:50:00.000-08:00

This past Wednesday was the first anniversary of the last presidential "election." Over 180 protests occurred around the U.S., affiliated under the notion that the World Can't Wait another three years for regime change in America.

I started my day early, arriving at Humboldt State University around 8am. I was in a small but gradually increasing circle of people passing around a microphone and hand-held amp. I spoke for perhaps three minutes, concluding with a plug for Tuesday's parallel election.

Arcata City Councilmember Dave Meserve gave an excellent speech, one I've been wanting to give for a while myself. Taking a page straight out of the Blueprint For Peaceful Revolution, Meserve said he had come across a list that morning, a list that reminded him a lot of America. He then proceeded to mention each item on the list followed by a few current examples of each. Naturally, Meserve's list was the 14 characteristics of fascism identified by Laurence W. Britt based on studying the commonalities of seven fascist regimes throughout history.

I cut away from the protest for about an hour and then rejoined around 11:15am at the Federal building (post office) at 5th/H in Eureka. Peaceful demonstrators occupied all four corners of the intersection. Police presence was heavy and noticeable to all. We were being watched very closely, even photographed and video taped. At one point I observed a cop in riot gear standing outside the post office. I learned later that the entire post office lobby was full of such intimidating figures standing by for their excuse to attack.

Fortunately, our dissent at the post office that day fit within the narrow band of acceptability and the harassment we endured was limited to jaywalking citations. If all of this sounds hum-drum, perhaps it is the result of another demonstration organized without a plan or goal to produce tangible change.

"1-2-3, what are we fighting for? Well I don't give a damn, the next stop is the County Slam."

The big news of the day occurred as 37 people rode bicycles in a critical mass from HSU to Eureka. I wasn't at the post office for long before I started hearing about a road block that had been set up and several students who had been taken down. The police allegedly got pretty physical with some of the students who were then taken to jail. The Eureka Times-Standard covered the story here and here. The Eureka Reporter also had coverage here and here.

I've seen some pictures, and I've heard that video exists. Nobody should be surprised if this becomes another in a series of multi-year Humboldt lawsuits between law enforcement and peaceful demonstrators. For insight into how the police can villainize unarmed bicycle riding college coeds en route to a peace rally, read We Are Being Set Up: The Manchurian Nation. That is my commentary on Michel Chossudovsky's analysis of a leaked report from the Homeland Security Council. This supports and expands upon the description of the faith-based community as depicted in the Blueprint For Peaceful Revolution.

Likewise, see this Media Matters column from Friday which provides a long list of newspaper quotes citing falling and "new low" poll numbers for Mr. Bush, interspersed with quotes from TV news repeatedly citing Bush's improvement and "rebound." See it for what it is: obvious contradictions that create inherent uncertainty and are intentionally divisive along the fault line that is the rift in the perception of reality between the faith-based and reality-based communities. This is what fuels the Cold Civil War.

KHUM Radio Interview re Parallel Election

2005-11-03T13:52:00.000-08:00

Listen

Parallel Poll Worker Training Session, Fri 5:30pm

2005-11-02T16:43:00.000-08:00

The Voter Confidence Committee will be conducting a Parallel Election training session this Friday, 11/4, at 5:30pm at the Liquid Cafe in Eureka's Burre Center (map).

Volunteers will be trained for conducting the Parallel Election next Tuesday, 11/8, when Californians also vote in the special election. Volunteering means serving as a parallel poll worker, encouraging voters to cast a second, secret, parallel ballot that goes in the parallel ballot box until we count the votes by hand, in public, after the polls close.

The parallel election is a way to double-check the accuracy of the official votes counted on trade-secret Diebold software. Please see this press release for more details.

Also listen for my interview with Mike Dronkers on KHUM, Thursday at 1pm. If you're outside of Humboldt tune in at KHUM.com.

If you are in Humboldt, and you missed it on Monday, I'll be on TV again Thursday night for Seeking Solutions with Eileen McGee. That's ch. 12 @ 6pm, though I come on at about 6:45. I've got this on DVD and will make it available online soon.

Press Release: Voter Confidence Committee To Conduct Parallel Election on Nov. 8

2005-11-01T08:43:00.000-08:00

Media Contact:
Dave Berman, Voter Confidence Committee
707-845-3749
blog@guvwurld.org

Nov. 1, 2005

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:Local Citizens' Group To Monitor Special Election
The Voter Confidence Committee of Humboldt County (VCC) will be conducting a "Parallel Election" on November 8th to help verify the tally of official votes cast on electronic voting machines containing trade-secret ("proprietary") software that is kept hidden from election officials and the public at large.

"Voters in some precincts may be asked to cast a second unofficial vote outside their official voting places immediately after casting their vote on Diebold election machines," explained VCC principal Dave Berman. "This will allow for statistical comparisons between the second set of vote totals and the official count."

Diebold has been under heavy scrutiny for alleged employment of felons, internal memos discussing programming loopholes, partisan fundraising activities of executives and dozens of examples of vote tally discrepancies. On July 29, 2005, California refused to certify Diebold's TSx machines. Humboldt County elections use Diebold's Accu-Vote machines and GEMS software.

Although California did pass a law requiring a verified paper trail for all electronic voting machines, it will not go into effect until 2006. According to an October 28, 2005 press release at www.calvoter.org, voters in nine California counties will vote on paperless electronic voting machines in the Nov. 8th Special Election. Such conditions ensure an inconclusive outcome by eliminating the ability to recount ballots to verify that they are counted as voters intended.

The VCC has become part of a rapidly developing network of election reform and watchdog groups through the U.S. In the past six months, Parallel Elections have been held in Florida, Ohio and San Diego, CA.

"We've been making some amazing contacts and the cooperation has been great," Berman said. "You can learn everything you need to know about how to run a Parallel Election by visiting www.studycaliforniaballots.org."

The VCC is looking for volunteers to enable the Parallel Election to cover more polling places (contact Dave Berman at 707-845-3749 or blog@guvwurld.org). Selected poll sites will be announced on Election Day. After the polls close, Parallel ballots will be counted by hand, in public, at a location also announced on Election Day. Participation rates in recent Parallel Elections have exceeded 50%. Voter participation is voluntary.

# # #

Media contact:
Dave Berman
707-845-3749
blog@guvwurld.org.

For more information on the VCC, visit www.voterconfidencecommittee.org or attend the group's weekly open meetings, Mondays at 6pm, at the Liquid Cafe in Eureka's Burre Center.

Update on Parallel Election, Portland, and More...

2005-10-31T05:13:00.000-08:00

On Friday I posted an announcement that the Voter Confidence Committee (VCC) is organizing a Parallel Election to coincide with California's special election on Nov. 8. Download the full page flier here and the 1/4 leaflet here. Volunteer recruitment is going well, but we still need more help. We are looking for a legal adviser, a statistics expert, and since it looks like we may be able to cover multiple polling places, we'll need additional videographers to ensure we capture footage of each parallel poll opening and closing. Contact me if you can assist in any of these ways, or if you would like to work at one of our parallel polls encouraging voter participation.

Last night I was interviewed by Eileen McGee for her TV show Seeking Solutions. This episode of Seeking Solutions will air in Eureka on channel 12 at 6pm on Monday (tonight!) and again on Thursday. The first 40 minutes or so is a compilation of interviews Eileen did with random members of the community discussing the issues on the 11/8 ballot. The remainder of the show is devoted to the Parallel Election, ranked choice voting, and other broader themes of election reform.

Another note about tonight - it looks like the VCC won't have its regular Monday meeting due to Halloween. However, we will be having a special meeting this Friday, November 4 in order to train volunteers for the Parallel Election. This will likely be a 6pm gathering at the Liquid Cafe but I will confirm this later in the week. Meanwhile, recruitment will be in high gear on Wednesday. HSU students have called for a general strike in solidarity with the World Can't Wait campaign being executed all over the country. I'll be speaking at the HSU quad that morning, and perhaps at the Eureka Courthouse later in the day.

* * *

I need to add this long overdue post-script to my recent trip to Portland, OR for the National Summit To Save Our Elections. When I returned, I posted a report called Peaceful Revolution Is The Elephant In The Room. That was a combined reference to the white paper I had recently posted called Blueprint For Peaceful Revolution, and also the experience I had in Portland where the elephant metaphor was applied to the issue of whether verifiable voting must absolutely require only hand counted paper ballots. As I have said, election reform should now be viewed as a tactic, not a goal in itself. The paper ballot issue, while important, is more a red herring than an elephant. I realize not everyone agrees with this assessment.

I'm still thinking and writing about this because in Portland, in a group strategy session attended by over 30 leading election reform advocates, I was not able to make the case that we were improperly defining the elephant. As a result, a subset of the group, led by Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com, began working on a document that has come to be called the Declaration of Democracy (DoD). I am not able to directly quote from the still-private and developing document just yet, though I can say it was partly inspired by and includes references to the three goals identified in the Blueprint as a way to identify the existence of Democracy: conclusive election outcomes, a basis for confidence in the results reported, and an accountable government representing We The People with our Consent.

I had hoped to leave Portland with a coalition of reformers willing to work for adoption of the Voter Confidence Resolution (VCR) in their respective communities. Instead, in the coming weeks I will be working with Brad to develop a joint strategy for the VCR and DoD, likely to be promoted through VelvetRevolution.us (which Brad co-founded). GuvWurld is a Velvet Revolution affiliate and VR has endorsed the VCR. I'm optimistic to be working with Brad who has proven himself as one of, if not THE most important independent investigative journalist of this time.

* * *

Finally, a plug for a great article ("Orwellian "Scenarios": Emergency Preparedness against the "Universal Adversary"") that I commented on in a separate post a few hours ago ("We Are Being Set Up: The Manchurian Nation").

We Are Being Set Up: The Manchurian Nation

2005-10-31T03:25:00.000-08:00

I recently read Michel Chossudovsky's 6/7/05 article for the Center For Research on Globalization called "Orwellian "Scenarios": Emergency Preparedness against the "Universal Adversary"." This is an analysis of a leaked report by the Homeland Security Council:

A recent Report of the Homeland Security Council entitled Planning Scenarios describes in minute detail, the Bush administration's preparations in the case of a terrorist attack by an outside enemy called the Universal Adversary (UA).

The Universal Adversary, is identified in the scenarios as an abstract entity used for the purposes of simulation. Yet upon more careful examination, this Universal Adversary is by no means illusory. It includes the following categories of potential "conspirators":
*"foreign [Islamic] terrorists",
*"domestic radical groups", [antiwar and civil rights groups]
*"state sponsored adversaries" ["rogue states", "unstable nations"]
*"disgruntled employees" [labor and union activists].
According to the Planning Scenarios Report:
"Because the attacks could be caused by foreign terrorists; domestic radical groups; state sponsored adversaries; or in some cases, disgruntled employees, the perpetrator has been named, the Universal Adversary (UA). The focus of the scenarios is on response capabilities and needs, not threat-based prevention activities." (See Planning Scenarios)
The domestic radical groups and labor activists, which visibly constitute a threat to the established political order, are now conveniently lumped together with foreign Islamic terrorists, suggesting that the PATRIOT anti-terror laws together with the Big Brother law enforcement apparatus are eventually intended to be used against potential domestic "adversaries".

While the Universal Adversary is "make-believe", the simulations constitute a dress rehearsal of a real life emergency situation:
"The scenarios have been developed in a way that allows them to be adapted to local conditions throughout the country."

Chossudovsky describes who is involved in the conduct of these exercises and what are some of the implications:

These fabricated realities penetrate the inner-consciousness of key decision makers. The reality model script molds the behavior of public officials, it builds a "knowledge" and "understanding", namely a shared ignorance regarding the war on terrorism and the "adversaries" who oppose the administration's war and homeland security agendas.

[snip]

The "Scenarios" were developed for "Use in National, Federal, State and Local Homeland Security Preparedness". They instill in public and private sector officials and participants a sense of responsibility, duty and awareness in relation to something which is ultimately fictitious.

The "scenarios" and anti-terrorist exercises develop observance and compliance by public officials, law enforcement, intelligence, military and civilian federal and State employees, etc.

Moreover, the scenarios also envisage the circumstances under which Martial Law could be triggered in the case of a threat by the Universal Adversary. In other words, fake intelligence could indeed be used to trigger a martial law situation in America, much in the same way as (deja vu) fake intelligence was used "to fit the policy" of invading Iraq, as revealed in the controversial Downing Street Secret Memo.

Last month, just prior to attending the National Summit to Save Our Elections, I posted a white paper called Blueprint For Peaceful Revolution. The paper describes many ways that inherent uncertainty is created, resulting in a rift in the perception of reality. The government intentionally creates this divide to facilitate consolidation of power and control - as long as We The People fight amongst ourselves, we won't unite in non-violent revolution.

Rather than a culture war, or red states and blue states, I see a Cold Civil War occurring between the reality-based community and the faith-based community (where faith-based has no religious connotation, instead referring to those who accept the official line unquestioningly, on faith). Chossudovsky's analysis strongly supports this paradigm by exposing the "reality models" actually used to condition and indoctrinate many establishment members into the faith-based community.

So two powerful realizations overtook me as I read this article. The first is what I've been describing: my own analysis has even more supporting evidence than I realized. The other thought referred me back to the first-ever post in the GuvWurld Blog:

American democracy empowers leaders through the consent of the governed. Who is willing to consent to elections where the preparation consists of making sure the will of the people will be reasonably called into question? We can see the setup from a mile away - the so-called opponents are "debating" the rules of their contest. This is simulated competition, in the grand tradition of professional wrestling and the Harlem Globetrotters.

I added the emphasis because Chossudovsky's article again gave me the inescapable sense that we are being set up. It goes far beyond the dangerous and violent corruption of any powerful individuals, and even surpasses the recklessness of rogue factions such as the PNAC. As Chossudovsky describes labeling peaceful protesters as terrorists, initiating actions based on fake intelligence, and the overall brainwashing needed for mass buy-in, the wholly manufactured existence of the faith-based community reveals we have become the Manchurian Nation.

Volunteers Needed For Humboldt Parallel Election

2005-10-28T00:32:00.000-07:00

** CITIZENS' AUDIT PARALLEL ELECTION **
Volunteers Needed on Election Day, Nov. 8, 2005
Concerned citizens are needed in Humboldt County. On Election Day, our team will invite voters to duplicate their vote on a paper ballot that will be counted by hand, in public, after the polls close. The results of this parallel election will be compared to the official election results that are counted by computers out of public view.

WHY ARE WE DOING THIS?

· To demonstrate what Democracy looks like
· To ensure the Consent of the Governed is sought and given
· To make sure your vote is counted as cast!

Parallel elections enable citizens to DOUBLE-CHECK the accuracy of official election results. The official ballots and vote tallies are recorded on optical scanners, electronic voting machines, and central tabulator machines that are operated with trade-secret software not disclosed to the public--not even to public election officials! When our ballots are counted with secret software, election officials cannot demonstrate that our votes are actually counted as we cast them.

HAND-COUNTING the parallel election ballots provides a comparative set of voting results, enabling statistical analysis of the official vote count that may detect discrepancies between the reported official tally and how citizens themselves say they voted. The parallel election paper ballots may also provide legal evidence for court challenges.

HOW DOES A PARALLEL ELECTION WORK?

1. Cast your official ballot inside the polling place.
2. After voting, exit and sign the Citizens' Audit Parallel Election roster book.
3. Vote again on a Citizens' Audit Parallel Election ballot*.
4. Place your Citizens' Audit Parallel Election ballot in the sealed ballot box.

* PLEASE VOTE THE SAME WAY YOU VOTED on the OFFICIAL BALLOT.

WHERE? The parallel election poll will be outside an official polling place - specific location TBA.

**We can't do this alone. We need you.**
*We have Preparation and Election Day jobs.*
To volunteer and help ensure our Democracy works contact:

Dave: 707-845-3749 or blog@guvwurld.org
For more info: www.studycaliforniaballots.org or www.voterconfidencecommittee.org

Download this flier.
Download 1/4 page leaflet.