Make your own free website on

e-Voting Truth

Vote Fix Links
Paper Ballots, Emergency Ballots, All-Mail Voting
Investigation-less election
Voter Registration Rolls Online?
Illegal This But Not That?
Solution or Problem: Federalize Voter Registration for Federal Elections
PA Power Insight
Myth or Fact
Question Them All
"little" Fraud?
Assorted Items
PA Watch
Populism vs PA Constitution
2007 Watch: PA Constitutional Convention
Move toward PA Con-Con
Guidelines for Variety election issues and observing at the Polls
Initiatives and Referendums: Gutting Republicanism
No Voter ID = Passport to Fraud
Illegal Immigrants Voting in U.S. Elections Facts
Goals of HAVA:
Paper Ballot Make It A Voter Choice
PA SB 977 and HB 2000
Both Sides: Electronic Paperless (Selker) vs Paper (Mercuri)
Know It: Second Chance Voting
Holding Breath Will Fayette Purchase Paper Ballot eScan and Electronic eSlate?
Discussion Sites
All laws repugnant void
Activists Absent
Board Discussion
Opinion None of the Above
To Show or Not to Show State Rep. Roberts Phone Calls
Discussion PA Politics 101.2 Media Woke Up to 1 Man Agenda?
Discussion PA Politics 1000.2 PA Clean Sweep's Reform Agenda
Discussion PA Politics 102
Voter Registration Lists
PA Law Changes First Time Voter
Discussion PA Politics 101
Discussion PA Politics 1000.1 Candidates
Lawmakers Arrogance
Blogging Net the Truth Online
Voting Technology 2006
e-Voting Truth
Should taxpayers fund WW2 memorial with religious engravings?
Net the Truth Online About Election Fraud
Issue File Voting by Mail
Powerful Information
Citizen Advisory Group Proposed
Demand PA SURE used
Inspector/s of Voter Registration
Interviews of Note
Motor Voter Law and Deceased
Back to the Future?
John Fund's Political Diary
Year 2000 Highlights Palast Update
Buchanan Vote 2000 Hoax
Fraud 2000: The Confusion
Fraud 2000: Holes
Fraud 2000: The Machines Background
Fraud 2000: Quote of the Millennium
Fraud 2000: Spotlight
Fraud 2000: Undervotes Trail-less
Fraud 2000: Built on the Past
Fraud 2000: Solution in search of Problems
Fraud 2000: Recounting the Ways
Fraud 2000: Dimples
Alert: Fraud 2000
Fraud 2000 Proof
Fraud 2000: Flaws
Fraud 2000: Courts
Fraud 2000: Count and Recount
Fraud 2000: Count and Recount 2
Fraud 2000: Analysis Debate
Fraud 2000: Past to Future
Ballot Fraud of Old
1984 Florida Ballot Problems
Local, State, National Election News
Daily Developments
Voting Fraud Tale Spin
Discussion Internet Free Speech on Trial?
STOP tax reform plan Guts PA Constitution
PA Constitution Doesn't Need Makeover
About Vote Fix
Why Vote Fix Is Up
Security concerns electronic voting
Paper/Opti-scan vs Touch-screen
Voter Confidence/Increased Accessibility Act 2003
Vote Fix Guestbook
PA election reform status
Fayette County Watch
Election 2007 Watch Fayette Politics
United States a republic, not a democracy
Voter Identification (ID) Proof
Citizens Demand Security
Solutions Here
Federal Legislation Update
Testimony HAVA
Net Voting
So Little time
Useful Items
Comments on voting machines
Public Comment on voting machines
Supporting material
Link resources submitted to commishes
Vote Fix Research
Contact/Voice a View
Motor Voter Happenings
Trail of Treachery Chad-Fraud
Fraud 2000: How it went
Fraud 2000: How it Went Then
Trail of Treachery: Varied News & Opinions
Track Vote Fraud

pm ET A reporter for the Palm Beach, Florida Post reports personally witnessing voting machine irregularity in her own local precinct. An election worker was apparently explaining to voters needing help with the touch screens that they may be especially sensitive, and that you had to press a certain way. During the demonstration, though, voters could plainly see the screen recording a “Yes” on a referendum issue as a “No” vote. The reporter did not go on to say whether the vote accidentally counted...

Voting Expert: Widespread Election Fraud Again
Harris tells Alex Jones Show she has acquired software for big three companies, stories of mass voter intimidation, arrests, machine meltdowns proliferate

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Tuesday, November 7, 2006

Vote fraud crusader and rights activist Bev Harris has told the nationally syndicated Alex Jones Show that she is in possession of voting software used by the big three voting systems companies and is now in a position to completely expose the true scale of electronic vote fraud, as a cascade of stories about voter intimidation, arrests and machine meltdowns arrived on election day.

"They aren't even being sneaky about it now," said Harris in summarizing the widespread voting machine failures and election fraud that unfolded throughout the day, referring to policies whereby voting precincts have imposed complete blackouts on any indication of their results until the official confirmation from headquarters is given.

Precinct reports are now being treated as illegal and individuals are being charged for even suggesting that precincts keep tally counts of votes so comparison checks can be conducted later.

Harris also related stories of arrests of those merely trying to ensure checks and balances are taking place as voting machines fail nationwide, including an entire county blackout in Indiana.

Harris also discussed dirty tricks in Los Angeles, whereby polling precincts remain closed anything to an hour after they were supposed to open and election workers are putting green lines through ballot papers to denote the location of voting, knowing full well that this invalidates the paper during the subsequent optical scan. Pollsters were caught telling colleagues in hushed tones not to let voters know about this scam...

Harris featured in the recent blockbuster HBO documentary Hacking Democracy and said that since appearing in the program she has received death threats warning "we are going to get you," and "I hope you die a horrible awful slow death."

She has also been the target of anonymous Internet bloggers who slander voting activists. In one instance further research uncovered the fact that one of these "agent provocateurs" was a Diebold employee.

But Harris remains undeterred and is now in a position to expose the length and breadth of the fraud after acquiring the software programs for the other big three voting systems companies aside from Diebold.

Harris exclusively told the Alex Jones Show, "I have now got a hold of the software of the other three major vendors and won't be releasing it," stating she was in possession of the code used by Election Systems & Software, Sequoia and Hart Intercivics.

"We're going to be able to compare what they give us with very specific information - dates, times, and serial numbers of the machines," said Harris...

Manufacturers Defend Electronic Voting Machines

Oct. 27, 2006 — With midterm elections less than two weeks away, some critics are raising doubts about the reliability of electronic voting machines, but the machines' manufacturers say they are sound.

"The equipment has been tested by independent agencies and federal agencies," said Mark Radke, the director of marketing for Diebold, the company that makes the machines.

Radke also told "Good Morning America" that the units that didn't have paper receipts had the same encrypted software as machines that printed out receipts.

Approximately 40 percent of Americans will use these machines to vote in November.

Casting a ballot with the touch of a screen is a new system that voters in at least 33 states will use on Election Day, but some critics are skeptical about the machines' reliability...

Expert warns of voting chaos

By Jason Cato
Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Expect chaos during the May 16 primary election, a voting expert testified Tuesday during the first day of a federal court hearing that could delay Allegheny County's use of new electronic voting machines.

"You need as much time as you can get, because it's critical to carrying out an effective election without disenfranchising a bunch of people," said Frederick Voigt, 63, a Philadelphia lawyer who helped that city convert to electronic voting machines in 2002.

The problem with Pittsburgh's crossover is time. Without properly trained poll workers and properly educated voters, expect "delay, confusion, even chaos," Voigt said. ..

By Lara Brenckle
Thursday, April 20, 2006

When John Tague Jr. tried to vote in the last election, he struggled to pull the heavy lever that would validate his choices.

But on Wednesday, the 59-year-old Greenfield man cast a vote with the push of a button -- and helped county officials show the ease of the new electronic voting machines.

"They can't create a machine that will work for everybody every time, but we can maximize that," said Tague, who has muscular dystrophy and chairs a city-county Task Force on Disability. "There will be some intimidation factor -- not because it's difficult, but because it's new. Once you get past the instruction screen, it's pretty simple."

Tague's practice vote followed County Executive Dan Onorato's unveiling of a plan to educate voters about the Electronic Systems & Software iVotronic election system that will debut in the May 16 primary election....

Readiness is a concern for several groups of voters in Allegheny County. Seven people, joined by the People for the American Way, filed a federal lawsuit seeking an injunction to bar the county from using the new machines. A judge will hear the case next week.

Opponents claim the machines were "just selected days ago, (are) entirely new to the voters and election officials, inaccessible to many persons with disabilities, and have failed repeatedly in other jurisdictions," according to the lawsuit.

Others, such as the voting rights group VotePA, worry about reliability of the machines and integrity of votes.

"The very best case is we will have an election that goes smoothly, but the voters have no assurance that their vote will be counted," said David Eckhardt, a lecturer in computer science at Carnegie Mellon University and member of VotePA. "The best case is not acceptable."

Eckhardt and several other members of VotePA said they could not entirely fault the county for rushing to comply with the primary deadline, because federal and state governments "were very slow to release the standards and very slow to certify the machines."

"When the county began its process in November, there were nearly no machines certified. It was too early to start, but too late," Eckhardt said.

Whew! Voter aces first try with Allegheny County's new touch-screen machines

Thursday, April 20, 2006

By Jerome L. Sherman, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

One voter down, 877,998 to go....

...During yesterday's trial session, Mr. Tague, chairman of the City of Pittsburgh/Allegheny County Task Force on Disabilities, had little trouble using the iVotronic.

The machine stands at a height of 48 inches, low enough for a voter in a wheelchair, like Mr. Tague. His fictional ballot asked him to choose the "best ice cream flavor." He selected strawberry.

Mr. Tague expressed concern about voters who have even less limited mobility than he does. Todd Mullen, ES&S's project manager in Allegheny County, said the company is developing a "sip-and-puff" feature that will aid disabled voters who can't use their arms.

The issue is one part of a lawsuit filed last week in federal court by a group trying to block the county's use of the iVotronic. A hearing is scheduled for Tuesday....

...As a backup, the county will also print optical scan ballots during the primary. Voters at sites with long lines will have the option of using the ballots, which resemble fill-in-the-blank standardized tests. When the polls close, workers will bring the ballots to a central location for counting.

As the county makes the change from lever machines to computerized machines, security has been a major concern for many voting rights activists.

The iVotronic stores votes in three separate memory cards, Mr. Mullen said. As the election comes to an end, poll workers will use a master "personalized electronic ballot," a hand-held unit, to retrieve results from the machine.

Each machine then prints four copies of the results, one to be posted at the site, one for the minority inspector of elections, and two for a central location.

The Ballot Is Open On Electronic Voting
E-voting will play a key role in the upcoming U.S. national election, despite ongoing charges that electronic voting machines are rife with security flaws and may be susceptible to EMI.
Ron Schneiderman  ED Online ID #8879 October 18, 2004

Lawmakers in at least 14 states that use DREs are considering introducing legislation requiring voter-verified paper audits (Fig. 2). At the federal level, Congressman Rush Holt (D-NJ) last year introduced the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act (H.R. 2239.IH), which would require a voter-verified paper record for use in manual audits of DREs.

U.S. military personnel will have their own system of e-voting this year, which is also not without controversy. They can vote by faxing or e-mailing their ballots, but only after they waive their right to a secret ballot. Several independent sources have questioned the system, called the Electronic Transmission Service, and the choice of the company assigned to manage it, Omega Technologies. Omega's chief executive, Patricia Williams, has donated several thousand dollars to the National Republican Congressional Committee and serves on the committee's Business Advisory Council.

As of early September, the U.S. Department of Defense was withholding information about the service. Some editorials have criticized the service, which also was used in the 2000 and 2002 elections. Omega didn't handle the military ballots in those elections, but the Pentagon won't say who did. ...

Compuware, based in Detroit, MI, conducted a thorough technical analysis of each electronic voting device vendors’ software and hardware

Austin Chronicle  February 27, 2004

How Safe Is Your E-Vote?

Elections go digital, but experts fear a crash

By Lee Nichols

The complete article is currently (3/28/04) available on the Austin Chronicle website at-- [found through a Google search by article title on the same date]

... Hart InterCivic morphed out of Hart Graphics, a printing company founded in 1912. ...

Hart's product is called the eSlate -- a small electronic tablet, of sorts, specialized for casting ballots in elections. In the summer of 2002, Travis Co. Clerk Dana DeBeauvoir purchased several hundred eSlates and gave them a successful trial run in the early voting period of the November 2002 elections. ...

Unlike Hart's major competitors, the eSlate does not use a touch screen. ...

Instead, eSlate uses a wheel-and-button system -- the voter turns a dial until the candidate of choice is highlighted, and then presses a button to select the candidate, never touching the screen. ...

Secondly, eSlate does not use "smart cards" ...

Perhaps most important, the eSlate system has no external connections -- no hookups to phone lines, the Internet, or an intranet. ...

No harm done with glitches,  election officials say

Initial discrepancies in the primary turnout affect no voting totals

Election officials say they are "going through a learning process" as they try to combine two different voting machine systems used in this year's elections.

Last month, problems popped up in the reports of the primary election votes.

Officials double-counted some of the people voting in the Sept. 18 special and primary elections.

Miscounted were more than 6,000 voters in a report issued Sept. 21-- three days after the special and primary elections -- labeled "final printout."

Officials, however, said the additional voters were subtracted in a final tally issued Sept. 23. They added that it affected voter turnout figures only and not votes in individual races.

The double count was blamed on the state's two different voting systems, the Election Systems and Software Inc. optical scanners, which counted most of the votes, and the new eSlate electronic voting machines made by Hart Intercivic.

No election results were changed by the double count, according to elections officials.

Sort out facts

County Responds to Voting Machine Problems

Travis County election officials have responded to complaints that voters casting straight-party Democratic ballots are discovering, when performing a final check of their ballots, that their votes for president have been changed from Kerry/Edwards to Bush/Cheney. The officials say that, after trying and failing to replicate the problem on its eSlate voting machines, they have concluded the vote changes are due to voter error rather than mechanical failure.

Gail Fisher, manager of the county's Elections Division, theorizes that after selecting their straight party vote, some voters are going to the next page on the electronic ballot and pressing "enter," perhaps thinking they are pressing "cast ballot" or "next page." Since the Bush/Cheney ticket is the first thing on the page, it is highlighted when the page comes up – and thus, pressing "enter" at that moment causes the Kerry/Edwards vote to be changed to Bush/Cheney.

Fisher stressed very strongly that voters should not rush, but carefully and thoroughly examine their ballots on the final review page before pressing "cast ballot."


Noting reports of computer glitches during March 2, 2004 Super Tuesday voting around the country in states that use electronic voting machines, David Dill suggested the use of "paper ballots" over the ease of touch-screen voting machines.  Dill was a guest on CNN Lou Dobbs Tonight, Wednesday, March 3, 2004.
Transcript available at CNN site updated next day.
Dobbs touched on the subject as well on Tuesday, March 2, 2004
March 02, 2004
Is Electronic Voting a Risk to Democracy?
Meanwhile, Aaron Brown segment featured commentary from noted expert Avi Rubin.  Don't miss reading the transcript.  Very to the point material.

Aired March 1, 2004 - 22:00   ET
Excerpt of importance
BROWN: This isn't a story about fraud or theft or even incompetence, at least not yet. It's a story about confidence, confidence that, when you cast your vote, it counts.

It's bad enough that many Americans feel their individual vote doesn't count because it's overwhelmed by special interests or party politics, but what if it really isn't counted at all?


BROWN (voice-over): It wasn't supposed to happen again, the excruciating process of inspecting paper chads, hanging, dimpled or pregnant. And this year, it wasn't the same. It was worse. Once again, it happened in Florida, an election on a handful of votes, so close, the loser got an automatic recount, sort of.

ED DION, BROWARD COUNTY ATTORNEY: The results for the two main candidates were exactly the same as they were on Tuesday night.

BROWN: Most of the votes in this statehouse seat race had been cast on new electronic voting machines and only the totals were stored in the computer's memory.

AVI RUBIN, JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: The recount on a fully electronic machine is nothing more than the reprint. It will give you the exact same result that you had before. It's not going to tell you anything new.

BROWN: Something new was exactly what technology was supposed to provide when Congress voted billions of dollars to modernize the state electoral processes, increased accuracy, build voter confidence. Early public trials were a success.

LINDA LAMONE, ADMINISTRATOR, MARYLAND BOARD OF ELECTIONS: The voters who have seen the equipment out at the mock elections that we are doing as part of our voter outreach have -- 99 percent of them just adore the machines.

BROWN: And how could you not adore them? They're easy to use. They speak your language. They even enable the blind, for the first time ever, to cast a secret ballot.

COMPUTER VOICE: To cast your ballot, press nine.

BROWN: Modern, computerized, paperless, and the target of a firestorm of complaints.

The problem is that voters simply cannot be certain that the software inside the machines has accurately recorded their vote, a programming error, a hacker attack, or a dishonest technician could affect dozens, perhaps thousands of votes. And without a paper trail, the only way to check it -- you guessed it -- is to ask the computer.

RUBIN: One of things that I have noticed is that the more people know about computers and the deeper their knowledge and understanding of computer security, the more opposed they are to voting machines that don't have a voter-verifiable paper trail.

BROWN: This summer, the software for the Diebold voting machines that Maryland will use was found on the Internet and given to Rubin and other security experts. They found it filled with sloppy programming and security gaps. Maryland claims to have fixed those holes.

And then the state went a step further, giving former NSA code cracker Michael Wertheimer and his team of security pros a chance to attack the entire system, not just the terminals, but the central computers as well.

MICHAEL WERTHEIMER, DIRECTOR, RABA TECHNOLOGIES: We were able to exploit many, many security flaws and completely change the election at the state level, which means changing the database, changing the votes, pretty much having full control of the election.

BROWN: More security has since been added, but election officials and industry representatives say that keeping an election honest depends on more than software.

LAMONE: I have got a great staff and a great group of people out in the counties, all of whom are dedicated to making sure nothing like that happens. If it does, the person that does it is going to jail.

REP. RUSH HOLT (D), NEW JERSEY: Some elections officials have said to me, but we've been using these electronic machines for several years now and we have never had a problem, to which I say, how do you know?

BROWN: Congressman Holt is sponsoring a bill in Congress that would require more stringent standards. He says it's a question of trust, but trust is getting harder to find.

And it didn't help that Diebold's CEO, Walden O'Dell, sent out a fund-raising letter, saying he was committed to deliver -- quote -- "electoral votes" to the president, nor that California officials found that uncertified software and unapproved machines had been widely used in the recall election for governor. Ironically, the worst that could happen might well be that nothing will happen.

WERTHEIMER: I'm worried that complacency is going to set in. And come November, the attackers will have done their reconnaissance. They will have a better idea. And if we don't continue to improve the security, change the software, make it a better system, we're asking for trouble.


BROWN: A story just beginning.