In a letter to the editor of the New York Times, Sen. Diane Feinstein tries to defend her "Bipartisan Electronic Voting Reform Act" against the editorial accusation that her bill is just "A Bad Electronic Voting Bill". The Senator tries to make the point that no other voting systems legislation will pass in this Congress. She forgets, "First, do no harm". Her bill allows software verification schemes which will allow the proliferation of DRE voting systems. This bill is a huge step back and she knows it. As a friend pointed out, Feinstein essentially is saying that the best they could do was to make matters worse, and they are still demanding praise for taking action. Before going on summer break the Senator's Committee on Administration and Rules held a hearing on the bill. No one from the Election Integrity Community was invited to give testimony; only supporters of the vendors and a few chosen for their known pro-DRE positions. No matter how the Senator colors this bill it is still BAD LEGISLATION....

As Steven Rosenfeld says in his Alternet article, and this evenings "Featured" article, "The first large block of voters to be disenfranchised in 2008 are the wounded warriors from recent wars and homeless veterans living at hundreds of Department of Veterans Affairs facilities across the country, according to veterans and voting rights activists."

While the state Department of Veterans Affairs in Connecticut has allowed the Secretary of State to register voters in one facility, the national office has not budged off of their insistence that no voter registration drives can happen on their property. The House and Senate must pass their legislation to instruct the DVA to allow voter registration drives when they return from their August vacation. ...

For over two years Election Integrity attorneys have been urging the state of Ohio to file suit against Diebold/Premier, ES&S, and Hart for failure to meet their contractual obligations with the state. The Secretary of State ignored that urging. It was only after Diebold/Premier filed suit against the state that the state took action in a countersuit. Rather than being courageous plaintiffs in this case, the state is a defendant and Diebold/Premier chose the most favorable court to hear the case. If the state had done the right thing two years ago they very well may have had the funds to have gotten rid of all Diebold DREs in the state for this November. Instead counties are still at the mercy of Diebold and their flawed voting systems. And remember, it may be Diebold/Premier in this case but the other vendors play the same game in different ball parks. They are all complicit. For more on this issue see HERE....

Today we are going to have a change of pace and introduce a new word to the vocabulary of some. This is actually a word that I heard for the first time a couple days ago and I like learning new words. Today's word is "obscurantism". What does obscurantism have to do with voting issues you ask? Obscurantism ('tist) is defined as the practice of deliberately preventing the facts or full details of something from becoming known. There are two common senses of this: (1)opposition to the spread of knowledge"”a policy of withholding knowledge from the general public; and (2) a style (as in literature or art) characterized by deliberate vagueness or abstruseness. It seems to me that the voting machine vendors are an excellent example of both definitions of obscurantist....

Today we have two "Featured" articles. The Connecticut Office of Veterans Affairs, under threat of a lawsuit, has allowed Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz to enter the Veterans Hospital in West Haven to register voters and to do voter education. Let's hope this is a small hole that will finally cause the wall between the DVA and veteran's rights to vote to crumble into dust.

More good news from the US Election Assistance Commission where computer scientist and election integrity advocate Dr Barbara Simons has been selected to fill a seat on the EAC Board of Advisors. This is a good addition as Dr. Simons will add a voice of reason to combat the voices of the vendor's surrogates who are on that committee....

Today Jennifer Brunner, the Ohio Secretary of State, announced that she has filed a counterclaim in a lawsuit with Premier (Diebold) Election Solutions. The counterclaim asks for damages, including punitive damages, against the vendor for voting machine malfunctions and for the company's claims that warranties on equipment have expired. Brunner is arguing that problems with the voting systems caused votes to be "dropped" when memory cards were uploaded to the server. There is evidence that this happened in at least 11 of the 43 counties that used Diebold DREs in past elections. The company, apparently, agrees there was a problem, as they issued a product advisory on this problem in May. One question is outstanding now: How many counties in how many states had the same problem and never realized it? It's time to cut our loses and get rid of those damn machines....

In Kansas it appears that poll workers are not responsible to ensure a voter is voting on the correct ballot. Today's featured article relates an issue that happened in the polls today. At least 4 voters checked-in at their poll site and were assigned a machine. The voters went to the open machine and selected the WRONG ballot which kept them from voting on an important bond issue. County election officials blame the voters. However, in most states the poll workers ensure the voter will vote on the correct ballot. What the reporter doesn't tell us, probably because she didn't ask, is how many voters chose the wrong ballot and voted, incorrectly, on the bond issue....

Today's featured article begins: "Although the United States prides itself on its commitment to democracy, its electoral system hardly qualifies as world-class. Putting aside the well-documented problems with electronic voting, hanging chads, and inept ballot designs"”we are a country that does not even ensure that its polling places have sufficient ballots, adequate staff or enough space to avoid lengthy lines on election day. During this past Democratic primary season, state after state was "surprised" by larger than expected voter turnouts; it was as if the only people who were not aware of heightened interest in the elections were those in charge of ensuring enough ballots. We are now three months from the November elections. Have cash-strapped states further consolidated precincts so as to virtually guarantee long waits to vote? Is anyone ensuring that enough ballots will be printed to address a likely historically large turnout? If past experience is a guide, unless focus is placed on these issues now, expect what happened in Ohio in 2004 to be replicated across the nation this November." ...

Our featured article today is an editorial from the New York Times who have correctly labeled the Feinstein-Bennett Bill, S.3212, as a BAD electronic voting bill. In their opening graf the Times Editorial Board says, "Congress has stood idly by while states have done the hard work of trying to make electronic voting more reliable. Now the Senate is taking up a dangerous bill introduced by Senators Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, and Robert Bennett, Republican of Utah that would make things worse in the name of reform. If Congress will not pass a strong bill, it should apply the medical maxim: first, do no harm." Do no harm indeed. This bill is bad legislation and will do a lot of harm. It needs to be plowed under. Read more about the bill HERE And then call your Senators and demand they say NO to this BAD legislation....

I've added a new suggestion to this reminder so I am going to send it a second day in a row. [Thank you for the timely suggestion Jody] Voter registrations and voter registration data bases have been a huge problem during the primary elections. There is no reason to believe that they will not be a huge problem in November. One of the only ways to ensure a voter is registered is for that voter to check their registration. We recommend every voter check now and then check again just before the voter's state registration closes before November. We urge voters who find themselves purged from the registration roles to write a letter of complaint to their local Board of Supervisors, especially their own representative, with a CC to their SoS, the local newspaper Editor, and their congressional members. If those responsible for representing the citizenry start receiving such letters they might act to eliminate the cause. You can find out the date that your state is closing registration and who to check to ensure your registration is still HERE: ...

It has been a couple weeks since we reminded all of our subscribers that voter registrations and voter registration data bases have been a huge problem during the primary elections. There is no reason to believe that they will not be a huge problem in November. One of the only ways to ensure a voter is registered is for that voter to check their registration. We recommend every voter check now and then check again just before the voter's state registration closes before November. You can find out the date that your state is closing registration and who to check to ensure your registration is still HERE: ...

In today's "Featured" article, Voter Action had this to say in opposition to S.3212, "The United States Congress should be investigating, not financing, the private companies that have sold the DRE systems to states and counties throughout the country. With more than 3 billion dollars at stake, the American people have the right to know whether these companies knowingly marketed a defective product, as some evidence now reveals. If, in fact, any of these companies engaged in deceptive practices in accessing public funds, they should be held accountable and states and counties should get their money back. Just as Congress needed to apply scrutiny to Big Tobacco, it is time for Congress to investigate the elections industry." We agree with Voter Action and call on Congress to defeat S.3212 and any other legislation that "funds and encourages the continued use of this faulty voting equipment"....

S.3212 is BAD legislation. The bill will be heard by the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration tomorrow at 10AM Eastern. Rather than ensure a paper ballot, or even a paper trail, this bill will allow more software or other verification schemes. This bill was clearly written with assistance from the voting machine industry and not the election integrity community. This bill must be stopped before it gets to the floor for a vote. Please call your Senators, especially if they are on the Rules Committee, and tell them NO on S.3212. See VerifiedVoting.Org for more detail on this BAD legislation....

As reported in today's "Featured" article problems encountered during New York State's tough certification testing have caused the timeline for the 2009 rollout of state's new voting machines to slip. Now the State Board of Elections has notified the Court that it will not be possible to complete testing on schedule and deploy the new machines in time for the September 2009 primary, as the Court has ordered. Why has this happened? Bo Lipari, the author of the blog, reports that the State Board of Elections has stated, "In the July 24, 2008 weekly status meeting SysTest announced that the vendors were not ready for testing at this point in time due to various issues, among them: documentation issues, testing machines supplied which did not function, lacked hard drives and or USB ports and therefore could not be tested." Is it any surprise that the vendors, ES&S and Sequoia, are not ready for testing? In what other industry would a contractor come to a state, in hopes of making hundreds of millions of dollars in sales, with a product that was not ready to be tested? ...

"On June 26, 2008, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Senator Robert Bennett (R-UT) introduced the Bipartisan Electronic Voting Reform Act (S. 3212). The press release accompanying the introduction of S. 3212 observes "the ability to ensure there is an accurate, reliable and transparent method for Americans to cast and count votes is fundamental to our democratic process." Unfortunately, S.3212 falls far short of ensuring accuracy, reliability, and transparency in our elections and is likely to do more harm than good.

"The bill contains some generally commendable provisions relating to election security (Section 4), voting system testing and certification (Section 5), and ballot layout design (Section 10), but the positive aspects of these provisions are outweighed by the problems created by many of the other sections of this bill. Despite its worthy motivations, the bill fails to carry out its objective."

Thus begins the review of S.3212 by VerifiedVoting. We agree with these statements and the conclusions of VerifiedVoting. This bill gets a hearing this Wed., 30 July in the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration. It needs to be defeated....