[PAA-Discuss] Ditch DREs! Paper Ballot Campaign-Election ReformCoalition

Fri Dec 15 13:55:10 EST 2006

Ditch DREs! Paper Ballot Campaign-Election Reform CoalitioHello Bill,

Supporting a individual paper record (ballot) for each vote is a worthwhile endeavor that I cannot understand anyone opposing.

I would however really appreciate if you would explain to the uneducated among us (it may be only me) what "non-partisan enough" means.  Is it like being only a little pregnant?  Or is it an application of the word of the year, "truthiness."  

Wait wait don't tell me,............................. I know, "non partisan enough" must be today's word.

When I read a message of October 22, a portion of which is inserted below, suggesting that everyone vote straight Democratic, I certainly believe this is an example being "non partisan enough" ..............to be considered "non partisan"?.  I believe, I believe that George Orwell couldn't have said it better.

When I read an advertisement calling for the impeachment of the president sponsored by the PAA that referred to the president as a liar, torturer, criminal  and other negative judgments, while my dark side may agree with the thoughts, I  certainly don't believe it to be partisan because perhaps my dark side believes the leaders of the democratic party want to do much of the same thing,....... but the advertisement didn't say that.   

When I see the wording of the advertisement is developed by a small cabal and when the draft, that some donated input and money to, is not offered to the remainder of the PAA  prior to publication, I know this bears no resemblance to ideology and control mechanisms that drives partisan politics.

When I read a message from a member of this list serve listing progressive candidates throughout this country and they are all democrats, I believe that is "non-partisan enough".  Right?  I believe!   If it is true that all progressives are democrats and there are no republicans, no greens, no libertarians, no independents and no other party candidates considered progressive, isn't that obviously "non partisan enough"? 

When I read here republicans commonly referred to using almost every profane word adjective known to mankind, that is certain no reason to even consider the PAA as  partisan.  It is "non partisan enough."  Right?

Are these examples considered "non partisan enough"?  Why sure, even Steven Colbert when in character on the "Colbert Report" would have to agree.

I like to consider myself non partisan and just someone who has looked at the, Fox news, C-Span, CNN, network news, domestic/foreign press and more and decided that what my country is doing does not meet my needs.  

I wonder why I see the same "non partisan enough" behavior here that I see from other supporters of both the republicans and the democrats?

I really don't believe there is anything right or wrong with someone being "partisan", but why embrace today's word, "non partisan enough," when, in fact, yesterday's word is indeed "partisan," while some of "us" can only hope and pray that tomorrow's word is "non partisan"?

Paul

 ps - The quote mentioned above:

Quote "----- Original Message ----- 
From: Bill Crosier<about:blank> 
To: PAA Discussion List<about:blank> 
Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 11:07 PM
Subject: [PAA-Discuss] My Endorsements. Early Voting starts Monday.

Early voting starts Monday, Oct. 23.

My suggestions/endorsements:

1.  Vote straight Democrat.

2.  Write-in Charles Waterbury for Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice......."
Unquote 

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Bill Crosier<mailto:paa at crosierbiomed.com> 
  To: PAA Discussion List<mailto:discuss at paa-tx.org> 
  Cc: Pokey Anderson<mailto:pokeyink at aol.com> 
  Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 2:27 PM
  Subject: [PAA-Discuss] Ditch DREs! Paper Ballot Campaign-Election ReformCoalition

  Update on the open letter to Congress that I asked y'all about earlier this week.

  Thanks to Pokey Anderson for telling us about this.  (Listen to her show, "The Monitor", on KPFT each Sunday, 6-7 PM, when she talks about issues like this.)

  Note that we got PAA listed as a signer/endorser even though they initially told us they felt we were too "partisan" (even though PAA does not actually endorse candidates as we aren't a PAC).  Thanks to Kris for convincing them that we were non-partisan enough to be listed.

  Bill

    From: Pokeyink at aol.com
    Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 13:46:21 EST
    Subject: Ditch DREs!   Paper Ballot Campaign

    12/14/06: 
    Election Reform Coalition Launches Paper Ballot Campaign

    A coalition of more than 30 election reform organizations today launched a new campaign to urge the new Congress to quickly pass legislation requiring paper ballots for every vote cast. A copy of the complete letter to Congress is below. We are asking everyone to sign it and to pass it along to your friends. We have seen what problems paperless vote machines cause and want to reform our elections before the next election. Moreover, we do not want paper trails or paper records -- we want paper ballots.  Please sign the petition here<http://www.velvetrevolution.us/Campaigns/PaperBallots/PaperBallots.php>.

    http://www.velvetrevolution.us/#121406<http://www.velvetrevolution.us/#121406>

    Here is the letter.  http://www.velvetrevolution.us/Campaigns/PaperBallots/<http://www.velvetrevolution.us/Campaigns/PaperBallots/>

    December 14, 2006

    Open Letter to all Members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives:

    We, the undersigned non-partisan election integrity organizations, strongly urge you, as a first order of business in the 110th Congress, to enact new federal legislation to protect the integrity of our elections. While there are many areas of concern for any such legislation, none is more essential to the accuracy of our elections and the confidence among our electorate than for there to be a paper ballot for every vote cast. Not a paper "trail" or a paper "record," but a paper ballot.

    In light of lessons learned during the 2006 primary and general elections -- with myriad contests resulting in uncertainty and thousands of voters in state after state turned away from the polls unable to cast a vote on DRE systems which failed throughout the day -- we now hold that a paper ballot, whether counted by optical-scan system or hand, is the minimum requirement for any Election Reform legislation in which voters may have confidence. Such a requirement is needed to help ensure Americans that every legally registered voter can vote, that every vote is recorded precisely as the voter intends, and that every vote is counted and, if necessary, re-counted accurately.

    This year's elections have made crystal clear that electronic voting machines -- both those without paper ballots, such as Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) touch-screen systems, and even those with so-called "Voter Verified Paper Audit Trails" -- caused massive disruptions, undermined the results of crucial elections, and forced thousands of voters to leave the polls without being able to exercise their franchise.

    Paper trails and paper records are not sufficient to safeguard elections and restore confidence among the electorate. Unless there is a paper ballot for every vote cast, three fundamental principles of democratic elections are violated:

      1.      Observable tallies. It is impossible for citizens to observe the counting of electronic ballots and audit the results.

      2.      Equal access. Requiring voters to cast votes on computers discriminates against those who are not familiar with the technology.

      3.      Accurate results. It is impossible to ensure that the reported results are accurate. In fact, a voter-verifiable paper audit trail cannot be depended on to provide the certainty lacking in electronic tallies. Clear evidence from several recent elections reveals instances in which:

        a.. The electronic screen record did not reflect the voter's intent. 
        b.. The electronic count did not match the paper trail produced by the e-voting machine. 
        c.. The summary review screen did not match the paper trail produced by the e-voting machine. 
        d.. Voters did not know to verify the paper trail or were prevented from doing so by improper design, incorrect setup, or malfunction of the printer. 
        e.. Computer systems introduced unnecessary complexity into the entire election process and therefore increased the likelihood of errors by voters, poll workers, and election officials. 
        f.. Computerized voting relinquished control of the final outcome to the technical skills of those who programmed the software.
    While it is not easy to reconcile the money already spent on new DRE systems, it would be worse to continue using election equipment that is not accomplishing its critical task. If this were a public safety matter, no one would question the ban on the continued use of a dangerous product, even if it had been funded by billions of public dollars. Why should we act any differently when it comes to protecting the safety of our electoral process?

    Ultimately, the true price of free, fair, reliable, accurate, and transparent elections in America cannot be judged by dollars alone.

    We therefore urge you to immediately enact legislation which requires a paper ballot for every vote cast. Now is the moment for action, in time to take effect for the 2008 primaries and general election.

    Respectfully yours,

    The Undersigned

    VoterAction.org
    VotersUnite.org
    VelvetRevolution.us
    National Voting Rights Institute
    Demos
    TrueMajorityAction
    Dolores Huerta Foundation

    Broward Election Reform Coalition
    California Election Protection Network
    Citizens for Election Integrity Minnesota
    Coalition for Voting Integrity - Pennsylvania
    Coloradoans For Voting Integrity
    Commonweal Institute
    Election Defense Alliance
    Florida Fair Elections Coalition
    Gathering To Save Our Democracy - TennesseeVotePA
    Georgians for Verified Voting
    Iowans for Voting Integrity
    Mainstreet Moms (theMMOB.org)
    N.C. Coalition for Verified Voting
    Network of Citizens
    New Yorkers for Verified Voting
    Oregon Voter Rights Coalition
    ProgressiveActionAlliance.org
    Palm Beach Coalition for Election Reform
    Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections - Florida
    SAVEOurVotes.org - Maryland
    Texas Safe Voting
    TrueVoteMD
    Verifiable Voting Coalition of Virginia
    Verify The Vote Indiana
    Virginia Verified Voting
    VoteAllegheny
    VoteRescue of Texas
    Voting Integrity Alliance of Tampa Bay

-- 
Bill Crosier
  paa at crosierbiomed.com     713-641-4941
  Progressive Action Alliance         http://progressiveactionalliance.org/
  Lying, Spying, Torture... IMPEACH!  http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/
  ---------------
  Progressive Action Alliance  http://progressiveactionalliance.org/
  Discuss mailing list   Discuss at paa-tx.org
  To subscribe, unsubscribe, access the archives, or change your options on this list, go to:
  http://paa-tx.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_paa-tx.org 

  To reply only to the person posting this note, use "Reply".
  To reply so that everyone on this list receives your note, use "Reply All".
  Check the "To:" field in your message, before sending, to ensure it goes to the correct address.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://paa-tx.org/pipermail/discuss_paa-tx.org/attachments/20061215/c97dfaa2/attachment.htm>