Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Brad Friedman Statement for the U.S. Election Assistance Commission's 'Voter Advocate' Roundtable...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
BradBlog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-25-08 12:45 PM
Original message
Brad Friedman Statement for the U.S. Election Assistance Commission's 'Voter Advocate' Roundtable...


Brad Friedman Statement for the U.S. Election Assistance Commission's 'Voter Advocate' Roundtable...

Earlier this week I posted my invitation to address the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC), on behalf of The BRAD BLOG, at a roundtable of "Voter Advocates" to discuss the proposed 2007 federal Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG).

Given the primary in PA this week and other considerations, I asked computer security expert and e-voting specialist Dr. Rebecca Mercuri to sit in for us, which she did yesterday. She will be joining Peter B. Collins and me tonight on his radio show, during my weekly Friday guest appearance (5pm PT, 8pm ET, listening link posted at the link below) to report on how things went.

I did, however, submit my own written statement to the EAC, with fairly direct thoughts on the VVSG and the nightmare such federal certification standards have wrought. The statement is now posted at the EAC website, along with some of the statements from some of the other participants

My written testimony for the EAC is also posted, in non-PDF format, in full at the link below. I'd welcome your comments...

FULL STORY / BRAD'S TESTIMONY TO THE EAC: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5920
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
KaryninMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-25-08 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
1. Excellent Work Brad-- K&R and congratulations and THANK YOU
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stevepol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-25-08 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. This statement is almost beyond thrilling to me. It reads like a document to be cherished
for many years to come.

I was going to post this if somebody else didn't. It pulls no punches, and it's fully up to the occasion. I hope, and maybe I'm deluded to hope this, that the members of this committee will truly read this submission to the EAC and get the impact of it. What it is literally saying is that our democracy is teetering on the edge of extinction and we have to have some officials with the courage to see things as they are. Actually, the situation could hardly be more obvious, but people have dilly-dallied and compromised and willfully ignored facts for so long it has become second nature and now black is white and brown is purple. Brad has put the issue in the simplest possible terms.

One of my favorite places in the document is this, and it could hardly be made plainer:

"In that light, I call for an immediate end to the dangerous path this commission continues to enable in its support of the fully faith-based, privatized, proprietary, non-transparent voting systems which have disabled and deprived us --- we, the people – from being able to ensure that elections results indeed represent the consent of the governed.

The Election Assistance Commission has overseen and enabled a federal process which, up until now, has granted a federal blessing to voting systems such as Direct Recording Electronic (DRE/touch-screen) devices for which it is literally impossible for anyone to prove that any single vote, ever cast on such a system during any actual election, for any candidate or initiative on the ballot, has ever actually been cast and recorded accurately as per the intent of any voter.

I extend the invitation --- to any vendor or official, including any member or employee of this commission --- to prove otherwise, and to demonstrate that any such vote was ever recorded accurately during any American election. Even as I well understand that that proof, the minimum citizens could ever ask for in regard to their voting system, will never come.

That such unverifiable systems are in use today --- and will be used again by millions of voters this November --- is an unmitigated disgrace, and underscores a massive collective failure of common-sense oversight and a nearly-unforgivable delinquency by those charged with that task at the federal level.

Such a failure is also the result of previous collective efforts by federal commissions and enabled bodies which have preceded this one, and of anyone who would allow or encourage the use of such systems in our democracy, be it this week, this November, or in any American election to come.

The very basis for our Constitutional system is one of checks and balances. Yet without the ability to apply such checks and balances, such as with the DRE systems used to record millions of votes in this year’s election cycle alone, the citizens have been completely blinded and robbed of their right and ability to assure the consent of the governed."

As Brad well says, "That such unverifiable systesm are in use today . . . is an unmitigated disgrace and underscores a massive collective failure of common-sense oversight and a nearly-unforgibvable delinquency by those charged with that task at the federal."

Thank God somebody is saying these things. I can't say I have much confidence that the people who are supposed to be listening to the people will actually listen and do something, but at least they are being confronted FINALLY with the TRUTH. They can dodge and rope-a-dope all they want, but they are facing the truth.

I for one am very grateful for what Brad has said and done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stevepol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-25-08 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
3. Where are the Rec's for this post?? This could hardly be more important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BradBlog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. Thanks, Stevepol (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liam_laddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-25-08 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
4. Here's a big K&R; thank you, BRAD!
In the last two days, Cincinnati's had two fortunate experiences. One, to have Richard Hayes Phillips present, discuss and sign his book "Witness to a Crime: A Citizens' Audit of an American Election" which examines in forensic-level detail the 2004 Ohio "election." Google the book title for site to purchase the book (self-published.) Also, if you want to host a book-signing, contact him via the website.

Two, yesterday Bob Edgar, CEO of Common Cause, gave an excellent speech to a local civic action group, stirring. CC has an Election Reform/Voting initiative group; contact Susanna Goodman. CC's office is 202-736-5740. They have something like 300,000 members; could use more activists in many states. Check their website http://www.commoncause.org

HCPB at the precinct!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BradBlog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. Just so ya know, liam-laddie...

Common Cause is NOT in favor of HCPB. At the precinct, or anywhere else.

They were big supports of Rush Holt's HR811 which would have institutionalized the use of unverifiable DRE (touch-screen) voting systems at the federal level, along with secret software to go with, encoded into federal law, for decades to come.

They should have stood firm for a ban on DREs, but they didn't. I'll continue to hope that they reassess their position on something as important as this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Holt's bills didn't pass while allowing the retention of DREs.
I never got the idea his bill's would pass. And the prospect of introducing legislation banning DREs seems a waste of time given zero chance of passing. :shrug: Expecting legislation to be introduced to do that seemed similarly constricted.

Audits were such that they wouldn't necessarily detect a problem in the races the audit was most depended upon. A joke.

Supporters were essentially asking paper ballot states to bail out their state.

Meanwhile, DRE's begin their own self-inflicted demise.


Holt bills are some kind of archetypal hazing ritual and blood-letting. :crazy:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-25-08 09:49 PM
Response to Original message
5. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-25-08 11:52 PM
Response to Original message
6. I'll say this much for the EAC.
I doubt NASED would have held a public discussion.

You made some wonderful points, Brad. And others, wonderfully!

Looking forward to the doctors diagnoses.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BradBlog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-26-08 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Thanks, Wilmser...

I'll get the audio from Dr. Mercuri's appearance with Peter B. Collins and myself yesterday, including her report on how things went at the EAC on Thursday, up at BRAD BLOG shortly today...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 02:15 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC