The image “” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.


The nation's clearinghouse for election audit information!


Guess Who's Going to Hollywood? PDF  | Print |  Email
By John Gideon, VotersUnite! and VoteTrustUSA   
June 18, 2005
Here is something you can send out to your lists and to others. Ask them to call their counties and warn them that they are being watched. Just a gentle reminder that the tax payer is watching them may be enough to discourage some from attending this function. I think I will send it out to the Washington Secretary of State and Attorney General as well as my county auditor.

This summer county, state, and national elections officials will be heading to Hollywood and Beverly Hills to enjoy four days of fun and sun sponsored, in part, by their friends at Diebold, Sequoia and ES&S. Yes, that's right. Diebold is co-sponsoring the "Welcome Reception"; ES&S is co-sponsoring the "Graduation Luncheon and Awards Ceremony" and Sequoia is co-sponsoring a Thursday evening dinner and dance. 
The Election Center: The Fox Guarding the Hen House PDF  | Print |  Email
By Joyce McCloy, Coordinator, N.C. Coalition for Verifiable Voting   
August 26, 2005
Editor's Note: The Election Center influences the actions and decisions of state election directors across the country.  In this article, originally published on in June, 2005, Joyce McCloy takes a close look at the organization.  New photos supplied by John Gideon.

How long will "The Election Center" be allowed to act as an educator, trainer and advisor of election officials? How long will it continue to give bad advice to North Carolina election officials?
The Election Center viewed from the East
The Election Center from the East
Testimony in Support of Bill To Allow Manual Recounts In Nebraska PDF  | Print |  Email
By Don Eret, former Nebraska State Senator   
February 08, 2006
On January 19, 2006, the Nebraska Legislature’s Government, Military, and Veterans Affairs Committee held a hearing on LB 1013, a bill that would allow for a manual recount. Currently manual recounts are effectively prohibited in the state’s election code. The committee in a 6-0-2 vote indefinitely postponed action on the bill.

I have an understanding of the elective franchise that is guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution to every citizen of good standing. The elective franchise was granted to women in the United States in 1920. That franchise as more clearly defined by the Voting Rights Act of 1965 requires that all votes must be counted and properly tabulated and be subject to a ballot audit in a contested election or in an election recount.

Some states have an election statute that provides a candidate the right to request a manual recount of ballots. Nebraska statute 32-1121, to provide a recount to a losing candidate, allows only for an electronic recount of the ballots.

The bill before us today, LB 1013, would provide the option for a candidate to request a manual recount. This would then provide a true audit as intended by the elective franchise and as further required by the Voting Rights Act.

The Help America vote Act (HAVA) of 2002 still further emphasizes the requirement that ballot audit provision be made for a manual recount. This requirement under Section 301 of the Act states this to be mandatory for federal elections starting in 2006.
No News Is Good News In North Dakota PDF  | Print |  Email
By Warren Stewart, VoteTrustUSA   
February 11, 2006
Across the country, many states and jurisdictions are scrambling to prepare for primary elections that are just months away. Help America Vote Act (HAVA) mandates, together with new laws and regulations in some states, have presented many election officials with daunting challenges and uncomfortably short timetables to implement changes in voting systems. For a variety of reasons some states are not panicking – like North Dakota.

Recognizing the magnitude of the HAVA requirements and the exigencies of a state legislature that only meets in odd numbered years, North Dakota adopted an accelerated HAVA implementation process and a state plan was drafted and passed through the legislature in 2003. In the fall of that year public hearings and voting machine demonstrations were held, an RFP was drafted, and Secretary of State Al Jaeger (pictured at right) finalized a contract for voting system upgrades with Election Service and software (ES&S) in January 9, 2004. Anticipating developments in voting technology, the state’s RFP, which formed the basis of the eventual contract, included a clause requiring the vendor to upgrade systems to meet new federal guidelines.

In a recent conversation, Jaeger admitted to me that at this point he has to stop and think to remember the whole process because it was completed so long ago. “All the equipment was delivered to the counties at the end of last year and they're all busy with training and preparation for our June primaries”, he noted. This, when some states haven’t even certified any voting systems. "We're going to be in good shape, and it's because of everybody working together and planning ahead," Jaeger said.
Former Voting Machine Vendor CEO Speaks Out Against The Industry PDF  | Print |  Email
By John Gideon, and VoteTrustUSA   
April 11, 2006
Warns That 'None of the Vendors Have a System That Voters Can Trust'


ALSO: Paper Ballot Printing Problems Stop Early Voting In Several States

On April 6, our friends at OpEdNews.Com featured an article that includes an interview with the former CEO of AccuPoll, a voting machine vendor that recently went bankrupt. In the article by Sean Greene of the CEO, Dennis Vadura is quoted as saying:

"I am not happy about the outcome, or the state of the industry. I think that something needs to be done. I'm not sure what it is, it probably doesn't include AccuPoll at this point, but I do not feel that any of the vendors has a system that voters can trust. I think that vendors outright misrepresent the robustness, stability, and security of their systems. You just have to look at the litany of problems and it points at one thing, bad fundamental design, and not enough checks and balances. I also wonder why the other vendors were so adamant in fighting a VVPAT system requirement. They spent much more in fighting it than in implementing it."
Now, finally, an industry insider and 'mover-and-shaker' has stepped forward to echo what many of us have been saying for the past two or three years. The remaining vendors are doing all they can to prove that Mr. Vadura is right. That fact is borne out by the following two stories:
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Results 1 - 9 of 1641