|
|
ABOUT & CONTACT |
LYNN'S ARTICLES & VIDEOS |
LYNN'S LAWSUITS |
OPEN VOTING |
HAND COUNTS |
CITIZEN AUDITS |
DISABLED VOTERS |
EXIT POLLS |
FRAUD ETC |
DOJ
& FBI COMPLICITY |
|
Democracy Demands Transparency, Not Trust
The GOLD STANDARD for voting is in-person using paper ballots and hand counts only at your local polls under the watchful eye of election observers from all parties and the unaffiliated on Election Day only - no machines, no mail-in ballots, no early voting, no absentee voting, no ballot harvesting, and no drop boxes. In other words, election observers shall continually have "eyes on" the voting process from beginning to end. For federal elections, polls could be set up at embassies, consulates, and military bases for citizens living overseas.
ADDENDUM:
Voting is the lynchpin of democracy. And democracy demands transparency, not trust. Yet, there is no real transparency to the way Americans vote today. State and federal governments, under both Republican and Democratic leadership, have codified and legalized election fraud by allowing, if not mandating secret, non-transparent voting systems that prohibit direct access to a paper ballot and meaningful public oversight of the voting process. For the sake of 'convenience', we have destroyed the 'integrity' of our elections. It began over 160 years ago.
Under the U.S. Constitution and case law, citizens have two constitutional rights: 1) That "qualified" voters are allowed to vote, and 2) that their votes are counted properly. For that right to be enforced by federal and state authorities, the voting process must be observable by the public. Which is also why those in jail should not be allowed to vote, but once they have served their time, then they should be allowed to vote. U.S. elections are not transparent nor observable. When Congress and state governments opened the door to increased voting rights, 'convenient' access, and secret ballots, they closed the door to effective transparency and meaningful oversight of the voting process. Now we have computer voting, early and mail-in voting, drop boxes, and electronic voting for the military...taken together they have destroyed any semblance of election integrity or legitimacy. Things weren't always this way. BEFORE the Civil War, voting was a completely transparent process. It was only during the Civil War, as the right to vote expanded to African Americans, that the voting process itself began to recede from public view and meaningful oversight. It started with absentee voting for soldiers in the 1860’s, secret ballots in the 1880’s, and voting machines in the 1890’s. Today in America, more than 50% of all voting is by absentee, mail, or early, 95% of all votes are machine-processed, and 100% of all ballots are secret and anonymous. In America, less than 1% of votes are hand-counted-paper-ballots at the polls on Election Day. Neither government-controlled audits nor official recounts (both can occur days or even weeks after the election) provide sufficient transparency to detect widespread election fraud by voting machines companies and/or election officials. Making matters worse, our public voting system has been privatized and outsourced to a handful of domestic, foreign, and multi-national corporations. For the most part, our elections are counted by 3 major companies (ES&S, Dominion, and Hart Intercivic) whose owner(s) and/or technical staff could easily rig voting machines manually or wirelessly (either touchscreens or ballot readers); these companies and/or their subcontractors could also rig elections while inputting the candidates’ names for each new election, or simply write the software to tabulate more votes for one party over the other. See 2005 video: Danaher VP admits that they can rig an election Can't we detect vote fraud through exit polls? The major news networks refuse to report on vote fraud and have been implicated in it. Exit polling is conducted by one organization, currently called the National Election Pool (NEP), that is hired by the major news networks and the Associated Press. Since they first started "projecting" election night winners in 1964, at the same time computerized ballot scanners came into use, the major news networks have never provided any 'hard' evidence that they actually conducted any exit polls, at all. In other words, the major news corporations broadcast their own pre-election surveys based on anonymous sources, collect vote totals on Election Day, and back-up those results with their own exit polls based on more anonymous sources. The late authors of the book, VoteScam: The Stealing of America, James M. Collier and Kenneth E. Collier, concluded that some of the major news networks, including the polling organization that they hire for election night reporting, have been complicit in vote fraud. The 'secret ballot' is a 'blank check' for vote fraud. It was supposed to protect voters from harassment, but it has also had the biggest negative impact on our ability to truly verify election results. While our politicians are required to vote publicly and openly, we citizens are held to a different standard - a lower standard. We vote remotely, privately and anonymously by machine, mail, early, drop box, and secret ballot. It's an invitation to massive and undetectable vote fraud. That is why, there should be only one standard of voting for both our political representatives and voters. All voting should be open and public - no machines, no absentee, no early voting, and no secret ballots. Secret ballots are really anonymous ballots that corrupt election officials can count any way they want. Under current circumstances, and since the public is not ready to consider giving up the secret ballot, the only thing candidates and voters can do to find out how citizens really voted is to conduct their own Citizen Audits.
Can you
conduct Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) using paper ballots? First, I do not support IRV or proportional
voting because they are unnecessary, complicated, and cannot be easily
observed. But, yes, Britain, Ireland, and
Australia have used paper ballots to conduct Instant Run-Off Voting.
However, some advocates of IRV are aggressively promoting the idea
that voting machines are necessary. Regarding proportional voting, it
is the wrong answer to the obvious problem presented by "at-large"
elections where the winners take all. Instead, political entities
(such as townships) should be divided into voting districts (which
many already are), thereby allowing the development of Democratic,
Republican, etc. strongholds which could result in more equitable
representation.
Aren't
machines faster than a hand count and isn't that important?
They should be, but often they are not. Machines breakdown routinely,
thereby taking longer to report election results. In Maryland in the
2004 election, 9% of machines observed by a voting rights group, broke
down. Essentially, a speedy hand count is based on a sufficient
number of poll workers per number of registered voters and the length
of the ballot. Canada uses 2 election officials per approximately 500
registered voters. In addition, election officials don't need to
depend on volunteers. Citizens can be drafted to work at the polls on
Election Day, as is done routinely with jury duty. The right to
direct access to a ballot and meaningful public oversight of the
process supersedes the perceived convenience of voting machines.
What
about states that have really long ballots, including initiatives and
referendum? Most
countries keep their ballots brief. The initiative/referendum
movement is called Direct Democracy. However, it is really an end-run
around the legislature. Some activists think this is a good idea,
but others disagree. California's ballot has become a nightmare.
Clearly, those with the money get their issues on the ballot. And
consider this. The initiative/referendum movement allows those who
control the voting machines to also control which candidates win and
what legislation gets passed. Aren't voting machines more accurate than a hand count?
Which is
more expensive, voting by machine or paper? For
legitimate elections, expense can never be a consideration. That
said, paper is cheap and requires no special servicing, storage, or
trained personnel, while a single voting machines can cost thousands
of dollars and require servicing, storage, and trained personnel.
Furthermore, election officials never need to rely on volunteers to
staff the polls. Citizens can always be drafted as they are for jury
duty, at little or no cost to the tax payer.
If the voting machines are being used at my polling precinct, is it better to vote by absentee? Doesn't the federal government regulate the voting machine industry? No. There is no federal agency charged with regulatory oversight of the elections industry. There are no restrictions on who can count our votes. Anyone from anywhere can count our votes. Can a voting machine company be owned by foreigners and run by
felons? (This information may be out of
date) Yes. Sequoia is the third largest voting machine company
in America and was or is owned by a British-based company, De La Rue. Diebold
is the second largest voting machine company in the country. It counts
about 35% of all votes in America. Diebold employed 5 convicted
felons as senior managers and developers to help write the central
compiler computer code that counted 50% of the votes in 30 states.
Jeff Dean, Diebold's Senior Vice-President and senior programmer on
Diebold's central compiler code, was convicted of 23 counts of felony
theft in the first degree. Dean was convicted of planting back doors
in his software and using a "high degree of sophistication" to evade
detection over a period of 2 years.
see: fraud & irregularities Isn't that a threat to national security? Yes. What was the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) all about? It
established the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) to distribute
billions of dollars to the states to upgrade their voting systems, but
failed to mandate any meaningful standards.
http://www.eac.gov/law_ext.asp Doesn't the federal government certify the voting
machines? No. The federal government has a loose set of
technical guidelines for voting machines that are voluntary and may be
actually harmful. The Federal Voting Systems Standards (FVSS) used
by the three NASED's approved Independent Test Authorities (ITA) to
"certify" companies are outmoded guidelines and voluntary, and not all
states have adopted them. According to industry observers, the FVSS
guidelines allow one in ten machines to fail. There is no enforcement
of these guidelines, such as they are. Who, then, certifies the nation's voting machines? (This information may be out of date) The FEC coordinates with the industry-funded National Association of State Election Directors (NASED), a private non-profit group, to have machines inspected certified by industry-funded private contractors. NASED selects and approves the testing laboratories. Only prototypes of the machines and software are available for a very superficial inspection. The inspection is conducted by three private companies who are not themselves subject to any regulation. Technical Issues & Standards But, wouldn't it take a vast number of people to rig an
election? Not with today's technology. One programmer working at
either ES&S or Diebold could write code that could manipulate votes
across the country. If a voting machine has computer components, it can
be rigged or accessed through the firmware, software, wireless, modem,
telephone, and simple electricity. Main tabulating computers can be
rigged in a similar fashion. Lever voting machine are also easily
rigged, although it would be more labor intensive. Still, anyone with
the keys to the county warehouse where the machines are stored could rig
the machines. Labels can be switched, gears shaved, odometers preset, or
printouts preprinted. Can't we detect vote fraud through exit polls? Exit polling is conducted by one organization that is hired by the major news networks and the Associated Press. Since they first started "projecting" election night winners in 1964, the major news networks have never provided any 'hard' evidence that they actually conducted any exit polls, at all. The late authors of the book, VoteScam: The Stealing of America, concluded that some of the major news networks, including the polling organization that they hire for election night reporting, have been complicit in vote fraud. If someone wins by a large enough margin, isn't that a
sign that the election wasn't rigged? No. It only stands to
reason that if someone is going to rig an election, it will be done by a
sufficient number of votes to avoid triggering a recount. Otherwise,
this could happen: In August of 2002, in Clay county Kansas, Jerry Mayo
lost a close race for county commissioner, garnering 48% of the vote,
but a hand recount revealed May won by a landslide, earning 76% of the
vote. http://www.ecotalk.org/BevHarrisBook2.pdf (page 45) Aren't you just a conspiracy theorist? No. I'm a conspiracy expert. Election officials have outsourced and privatized a uniquely public function and that should be unconstitutional.
|