There is one confirmed problem with electronic voting machines in Ohio. See page 23 near "Gahanna" -- 260 votes for Kerry, 4,258 for Bush. That's way out of line with other precincts: http://www.franklincountyohio.gov/boe/04UnofficialResults/Unofficial%20Abstract%20of%20Votes%20General%202004.pdf The Columbus Dispatch quoted election officials as saying it was an isolated glitch that would have been found in a routine review before the election was officially certified: http://www.dispatch.com/election/election-president.php?story=dispatch/2004/11/05/20041105-A6-01.html -Declan -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Clear-headed review of computer voting fraud issues Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 06:51:54 -0600 From: Jules Siegel <siegel@private> To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> <http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/4/224812/643> Ohio Provisional Ballots, Recounts, and Fraud [Excerpts] The possibility of fraud has been raised primarily because the results from Ohio are not what people were expecting to see. Republican turnout was very large, and Democrats seemed to vote for Bush in surprising numbers. That is indeed curious, and needs to be analyzed. Note, however, that it may be entirely explainable. It is entirely probable that Republicans came out in record numbers; it is also not outside the realm of logic that many Midwestern Democrats, swayed by the We Hate Gays initiative on the Ohio ballot or by "values" or "terrorism" or other factors, really did vote for Bush in surprising numbers. It is possible. Keep in mind that rural Democrats and urban Democrats are, in some ways, not exactly the same species -- we tend to forget that, sometimes. Again, to repeat: Unusual numbers in individual counties in Florida and Ohio are potentially explainable by demographic and other factors; they do not, in and of themselves, constitute "proof" of fraud. But it is also possible to explain the discrepancies from fraud or error. Intentional fraud, or unintentional error, would in this case consist of misreporting of the numbers from each precinct. Note that few of these Ohio precincts use anything other than the punch-card systems; fraud would be present in the central machines that sum the votes, not from in-precinct shenanigans. Nationwide, these machines are manufactured by Diebold and other vendors; longtime readers will remember Diebold as the heavily-Republican-leaning company (Diebold executives are heavy Bush contributers) whose chief officer announced in a Republican fund-raising letter that the company was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year." Let's explain what these "central vote-counting" machines are. Basically, it's a machine running Microsoft Windows with a Microsoft Access database attached. (Note to the computer-savvy among you: Yes, I sh*t you not. MS Access. Jeez.) The database keeps track of the votes in each precinct, county, etc., much like an Excel spreadsheet. The software is deemed secret and proprietary; previous lawsuits to examine the code that tabulates the votes have been denied. Sizable mistakes have been found before in Diebold-run elections. More notably, the machines are easily hacked in such a way as to change the vote totals in not-readily-detectable ways. There is a "second set of books" built in to Diebold machines, which can be accessed remotely if necessary. Voting "solutions" by other companies have similar reported problems; look at http://www.blackboxvoting.org for horror stories about known miscounted election results in actual elections across the country. So the question of whether the machines in Ohio are working properly is hardly a "tinfoil-hat" concern. It is a legitimate question. Note, however, that as of yet evidence of miscounts or tampering is speculative; the only available evidence is statistical analysis of the counties which points to "unusual" results in certain precincts and counties. Florida, perhaps, is the bigger question. Voting there is almost entirely electronic now, through a combination of touchscreen and optical-scan systems. And, to be quite honest, the vote totals there are far more suspicious than in Ohio. While both states are exhibiting results that are reasonable, they are also exhibiting, in some counties, results that are highly unusual, though not outside the realms of possibility, compared to past elections. Bottom Line So the question becomes, are the curious numbers in Ohio (and Florida) due to the way the electorate voted, or due to the way those votes were summed up in the central office? It is entirely possible that errors might exist which do not affect the outcome of the election, but which are still serious enough to require a serious review. This is why I, for one believe it is our national interests to have a manual recount of some of the Ohio counties with the most unusual results. But this is not a Kerry issue; this is a democracy issue. Can these machines be trusted? Recounts in selected counties would resolve this: it needs to be done. Bev Harris and other activists are filing Freedom of Information Act requests and taking other steps to start analyzing the data. What we can do is put weight behind their efforts, without looking like tinfoil-hat loonies. We have to understand, the possibility that a miscount, even if discovered, will be great enough to change the outcome of the election is remote. These FOIA requests and other investigations are happening so that these machines can be validated, not because any of the parties have any actual evidence of willful fraud. Update [2004-11-5 2:57:13 by Hunter]: From this diary <http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/4/132449/017>, we find at least one county with a very egregious vote counting error. Franklin County, OH: Gahanna 1-B Precinct 638 TOTAL BALLOTS CAST US Senator: Fingerhut (D) - 167 votes Voinovich (R) - 300 votes US President: Kerry (D) - 260 votes Bush (R) - 4,258 votes -- JULES SIEGEL Apdo. 1764 77501-Cancun Q. Roo Mexico http://www.cafecancun.com/portfolio Newsroom-l, news and issues for journalists http://www.newsroom-l.net/blog _______________________________________________ Politech mailing list Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Mon Nov 08 2004 - 00:58:45 PST