|Want to be a .....President? Then follow this simple how-to
formula for stealing an election:
ELECTION = TECHIE + MOTIVATION
That's it. One reasonably clever techie. Period. More startling is the
realization that from a single point of infiltration, potentially
every.....every voting machine in the country can be infected...
|Truth, Lies, & Politics
When is a coincidence too much of a
coincidence to be one?
|For the Politics
Articles and Blogs
Assorted Articles 1
Fiction Stops Here
|A Closer Look at the GAO's Florida District 13. No smoking
gun.....Not if but when and how often. Could Red be next?
As Americans we the people, individually and independently can choose
to vote for our future... or not. Our vote is our power to be heard, to take
an active part in our own destiny. When that right is taken from us by
negligence, error, incompetence or an accident of technology, it is an
insult to this country and those who sacrificed their lives for our
freedoms. None of us, not red, not blue, not independent, not
indifferent should accept this chipping away at democracy.
|The "He Did It / She Did It" Business Model for Elections
Did you know that most advocates of paper ballot technology are fuddy-
duddy, itchy-witchy thinking, nervous Nelly, skittish souls over 40?
That's the gist of an article that re-circulated recently. Perhaps it was
penned by a reporter who never balanced a bank account.
Nonetheless, the resurgence of the article triggered a lively thought
provoking e-debate and introduced again the need to look at elections
and counting votes from a business perspective. The importance of the
business perspective and business model points of view cannot be
overstated. In part because, until we define the problem we're trying to
solve, we will never solve the problem. That is to reliably count votes
and prove the number of votes we count is correct today, correct
tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow. One voter --- one vote, one
count. Every time. Fraud isn't committed all the time. Mistakes aren't
rampant every election. Technological failure doesn't occur every
election. But had we followed good business practices, we never would
have bought into paperless touchscreens (to count 100 votes per
machine) as a voting method in the first place. In fact, had we followed
good business practices, Florida would have sent 2000 and 2006 back to
the voters in precincts where the voting process failed.
From a business model perspective, who owns the ultimate
responsibility? Nobody. The fox guards the henhouse. Our election
business model encourages the classic "he did it / she did it" method to
problem definition and solution.
Except in Florida, voters' voices were heard. So we rushed out to buy
new machines, a new solution. But we still haven't corrected the
problem. Our business model has not changed.
Until we develop an election business model that includes high
standards for recognizing flawed election results and insists on prompt
and consistent corrective action (such as a re-vote by hand if
necessary), we cannot ensure all votes will be counted and counted
accurately. Until we develop an election business model that requires
sound business practices, independent audits, comprehensive computer
development and testing methods, and looks rationally at the problem
we're trying to solve, we cannot guarantee that any voting technology
(DRE, optical ballot scanner, e-voting, mail, or hand counts) will
|It's Time to Run Elections the Way a Business Would. I heard
Florida Secretary of State Kurt Browning ask on NPR if the amount of
time spent in defending the voting system & trying to prove to the public
that it's accurate & secure is worth the effort when we should be
spending our time running good elections ["Diebold Flaws Pose Risks in
Oops. The voting system is not secure & until it is, you can't run a good
election. Still, his words drill to the core of Florida's voting woes. There's
time to do it over, but never time to do it right. The recent testing in
California & Florida that revealed flaws in the systems should have been
conducted prior to squandering our tax dollars - and our votes - by
buying the machines.
It's time to start thinking like a business. Let's define the problem
before we rush to another solution, implement more rigorous guidelines
for voting machine providers and election officials, and fix our election
laws to protect us from machine and human error - and human
interpretation. Until we do, our election process will continue to be
broken. Diebold Flaws Pose Risks in Fla. Computerworld.com.
|Can we borrow Secretary of State Debra Bowen in Florida? Recent studies in California and
Florida are important baby steps in providing secure, fair and honest elections. However, reaction by
vendors and some officials seems shortsighted. In computer security, there are two longstanding axioms:
Locks keep the honest people out. And if it can, it will. It's only a matter of time. More importantly, the
more certain we are that it can't happen here, the greater the risks are that it will... California Progress
|Election system prone to a breach... The more open portals a system has, the more prone it is to a
breach. We must do more, be more business wise. We must implement high-bar guidelines for voting
machine providers and elections officials to uphold. And we must fix out election laws to protect us from
machine and human error. Houston and Texas News, Chron.com
|Florida Secretary of State Kurt Browning assures us that our voting machines are fixed. This is
the same Kurt Browning who drilled to the core of our voting problems when on NPR he asked if the amount of
time spent in defending the voting system or trying to prove to the public that it's accurate and secure is worth the
effort. The irony of his words is that you can't run a good election if your machines don't work. If our vendors and
elections officials had spent the time upfront following good-business practices, we wouldn't be facing another
questionable election... The Ledger, Lakeland, Polk Country.
|Finally a common sense approach. Daily Voting News for January 17-18 reported on the discovery
of 440 uncounted ballots in Hillsborough County, FL for the Nov. 4 election. Subsequently David Penoyer,
the former city council candidate who lost the election by 84 votes announced plans to file suit against
Hillsborough County Supervisor of Elections Phyllis Busansky. Penoyer wanted those newly found votes
counted. Even so he was apologetic in the asking, saying “I do not want it to sound like sour grapes, but I
feel it's something I need to pursue."
Why? Why should any candidate have to ask, let alone file suit to have our votes counted?
However, in this one case, common sense prevailed. Elections Supervisor Busansky didn’t wait for a law
suit. Instead, Busansky allowed the votes to be counted.
In the end, Penoyer picked up an additional 31 votes, not enough to win. Nonetheless, this voter believes
Penoyer did win, as did we all. Our voices were heard and our votes were counted. And unlike Sarasota’s
2006 debacle, taxpayer dollars weren’t squandered in an attempt to prevent it.