Jim March - look what you started!!


August 11, 2004, 01:11 PM
They say from a small spark come big fires. Looks like this one is taking off pretty good.

PC World - Maryland Group fights E-voting (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1093&e=4&u=/pcworld/20040810/tc_pcworld/117320)

Grant Gross, IDG News Service

Eight Maryland voters have asked an appeals court to force the State Board of Elections to address alleged security risks in an electronic voting machine system and provide a voter-verified paper trail during elections.

The voters, some representing advocacy group TrueVoteMD.org, filed motions Monday asking the Court of Appeals of Maryland to force the elections board to fix alleged problems with an e-voting system the state bought from Diebold. The plaintiffs also asked the Court of Appeals to tell a circuit court judge to move faster on their request for a preliminary injunction against the elections board.

Procedural Struggle

The plaintiffs accuse the state of ignoring scientific and government studies that question the security of the Diebold e-voting machines. They also say the elections board has ignored a Maryland legislative requirement to include a voter-verified paper trail with an e-voting system. Such a paper trail would allow voters to check their electronic votes against paper print-outs, which then can be used to audit the election results, says Linda Schade, director and cofounder of TrueVoteMD.org.

"What we're saying is if these machines are used without a paper trail, it would be an illegal election," says Schade, a plaintiff in the case.

Representatives of the SBE and Diebold didn't immediately return phone calls seeking comments on the new motions. Both the state election board's administrator, Linda Lamone, and Diebold have defended the e-voting systems in the past, saying that the electronic systems are more accurate and just as secure as paper balloting.

TrueVoteMD.org has protested the e-voting systems in Maryland since late 2003. In November 2003, the group, also called the Campaign for Verifiable Voting in Maryland, filed a complaint with the elections board over the use of the Diebold machines. In April, the group and other plaintiffs filed a lawsuit and a request for a preliminary injunction against the use of the e-voting machines in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County.

But the judge in the case didn't schedule a hearing on the injunction until August 25, leaving the plaintiffs little time before the November general election to make their case in court, Schade says.

"We are saying that by the reality of the scheduling, the injunction had already been ruled upon," Schade says.

Skeptical of Security

TrueVoteMD.org and other e-voting critics complain of numerous problems that could arise from using e-voting machines without a verified paper trail. The potential problems range from programming mistakes to hackers intentionally changing votes.

"It's time-sensitive and of significant concern to the public," Schade says. "There are random computer glitches. We've all had our computers crash."

Schade and other plaintiffs point to the state of California, which banned similar e-voting machines earlier this year because of concerns about security.

On Tuesday, in a court-ordered mediation session, the two sides didn't make progress, Schade says. "I was disappointed because the voters of Maryland were not served," she adds.

If you enjoyed reading about "Jim March - look what you started!!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
August 11, 2004, 04:19 PM
:) :) :) :) :)

Jim March
August 11, 2004, 05:03 PM
It's an overstatement to say I *started* anything here.

Bev Harris made the initial important discovery. I followed her work, lab-duplicated her findings, made a few additional findings of my own, documented some things, and still support her efforts.

Bev has done MORE in this field than myself.

Period, end of discussion.

When attorney Lowell Finley decided a lawsuit under California law was warranted, he knew he needed at least one California plaintiff. HE decided that I was the number one candidate, the top activist, *in California*.

I said I wouldn't do it unless Bev was a co-plaintiff set up to get as much out of it as myself. And that's exactly what we did.

I spoke at the California SecState Voting Systems and Procedures Panel. I don't usually speak from notes, and I didn't this time, but I did run a draft of what I intended to say past Lowell and Bev and I stuck pretty close to this:

"A famous incident in Galileo's life was when he set up a telescope clearly showing the moons of Jupiter orbiting something OTHER THAN the Earth, and asked an Italian prince to take a look. The prince's advisors wouldn't let him, as it would be politically dangerous to know for a certainty that the Catholic cosmology of the time was in error.

Last year, Bev Harris pointed a "telescope" at Diebold's "GEMS" application, courtesy of some google searches. She reported what she saw. I was in disbelief myself, but I looked through her telescope and whoa, she was right. GEMS stinks. Any security review of GEMS, no matter how sketchy, shows that it's not possible to run a confirmed-honest election with it.

Avi Ruben looked through the telescope. So did many others - even Ben Cohen of Ben'n'Jerry's ice cream took a look, they're about to release a new flavor: "Fudged Election Confection". Throughout last year, nobody at the VSPP or the California Secretary of State's office chose to personally review Bev Harris' findings. To my knowledge, none of you did until Governor Howard Dean "looked through the telescope" on national TV and then turned around, looked over his shoulder and specifically asked whether or not Kevin Shelley had looked.

So, Mr. Kyle [undersecretary of state and panel chair], you contacted Bev Harris to arrange a private viewing of the same "view" Dean recieved. That hasn't yet happened - how about RIGHT NOW? Bev has her laptop right over there.

You're our watchdogs. What are you going to do?

For over a year, you refused to review data critical to your jobs and sorry, but that doesn't speak well of your professionalism. You could have ordered up a GEMS box or reviewed the installation as it functioned in Alameda County or any other California Diebold installation. You didn't. Human nature doesn't change; you didn't want to look at critical data because it was politically inconvenient to do so. Now you've been forced.

I don't know what your response will be. I do know this: the courts will soon be looking through the same telescope, at GEMS. Do you really think it'll survive that scrutiny?

August 11, 2004, 11:41 PM
An overstatement perhaps, and no slight was intended towards Bev Lewis.

The main point of my post was to draw attention to the fact that your collective efforts had inspired grassroots organizations elsewhere to not lie down and take what comes, but to stand up and fight for their rights.

You might not have started the BBQ, but you did your share to put wood on the fire. And the pig's startin' to roast real good now. :)

August 12, 2004, 12:50 PM
Unfortuneatly, I don't have a link right now, but the Ohio Scretary of State recently (within the last 3 weeks) has DE-CERTIFIED [read: not going to allow] the use of Diebold e-vote machines in at least 3 Ohio counties.

I'll see if I can find an archive or link somewhere to the articles on this.

Keep roastin' them good, Mr. March ! ! ! !

Justin Moore
August 13, 2004, 03:31 AM
I saw Bev on TV showing Howard Dean exactly how to hack the vote. Most instructive to say the least.

August 14, 2004, 09:26 PM
I can picture it now.:rolleyes:

An area where Bush gets a lot of vote on the Diebold machine, the Dems will be screaming "The machine is crooked."

An area where Kerry gets a lot of votes on the Diebold machine, the Republians will be screaming "The machine is crooked."

Thank God, I get to vote with an optical scanning machine.:D

I guess if you are in an area where they have the Diebold machines you can vote by Absentee Ballot

Jim March
August 15, 2004, 03:17 AM
If that's a Diebold optical scan system, it's only barely more trustworthy than touchscreen...it's only an improvement because it's possible to recount the actual paper. And you'd have to count ALL the paper to make sure.

It's because the central tabulator software (at the county election HQ) is rigged for fraud :fire:.

The same central tabulator stuff ("GEMS") that's used in ALL Diebold systems, touchscreen and optical scan.

GEMS ("Global Election Management Software") is a Windows application...actually a front end for MS-Access :barf:.

It's not like they were trying real hard to hide what they were up to.

Here's the actual Windows program icon for GEMS:


That's right.

A fist holding a globe.



If you enjoyed reading about "Jim March - look what you started!!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!