Oct 2005 - a 26 - page .pdf with a resume of the whole sorry tale.
November 2004: two rigged votes, two reactions:
in the USA, Democrats suck their thumbs and say sorry, while in
the Ukraine, after two weeks of protest, the Supreme Court has
ruled that the vote was flawed and must be re-run.
The Ukraine made headlines around the world, while
in the USA, the media is almost completely dumb on the subject
of electoral abuses, even though the situation is very similar
to that in the Ukraine.
The evidence is so strong, in fact, that the Greens
(together with the Libertarians) have raised $150,000 by public
subscription to get a recount in Ohio. The Democrats also have
belatedly backed the recount.
What is the evidence of a rigged election? There
is a vast literature on the web. The evidence is drawn together
in a sober and professional report (Shattering the Myth: An Initial
Snapshot of Voter Disenfranchisement in the 2004 Elections) by
the Election Protection Coalition - a wide coalition of mainstream
NGOs with an interest in electoral integrity.
They put the evidence under these headings:
o Registration Processing: quoting tens of thousands of reports
o Absentee Ballots: thousands of reports of people being denied
their voting rights.
o Machine Errors: Many reports of electronic voting machines that
registered a Republican vote when the democrat button was pushed.
o Voter Suppression : accounts of intimidation and misinformation
o Provisional Ballots : voters not on the register were denied
the ability to vote pending confirmation of their right to vote.
The results showed a strange discrepancy between
the exit polls and the official tally. Exit polls are usually
so accurate that they are used to validate the vote in situations
where rigging is expected or suspected. The exit polls gave victory
to Kerry. There is always a variance between the exit and the
tally; but the variance swung the vote to Bush in a way that is
completely inconsistent with a random variation. Efforts to explain
it in terms of polling bias are unconvincing. It is significant
that this variance was greater when electronic voting machines
were used. The design of the machines is coming under intense
criticism. It may not be insignificant that Diebold, one of the
manufacturers, is a big Republican Party supporter.
The result of these voting irregularities may
well have been simply to give Bush a larger margin of victory
than would otherwise have been the case. On the other hand, it
may be that the presidency should rightfully have gone to John
Kerry. Either way, the principles of democracy demand that the
integrity of the vote must be upheld, and that requires a full
investigation of the irregularities.
Considering that Bush is prepared to kill up
to 100,000 people in what he claims is an action to bring "democracy"
to Iraq, it is a dark irony that the democratic process in America
should have fallen into such disrepute, and it is comforting that
the Green Party of America is in the forefront of the struggle
to right this great wrong. What is at issue
is not so much whether George Bush or John Kerry was elected -
there is little to choose between their policies, although Kerry
is clearly the better man despite his "flip
flops" - but whether the electoral process, which is
the core of democracy, was correctly carried out.
It is to the lasting shame of the mainstream media
and the statutory authorities that at the time of writing (10
Dec 04) that they have taken little interest in this matter; and
it is to the everlasting credit of the volunteers and amateurs
who are working on this issue that they are carrying forward the
flag of true democracy.
Kathy Dopp is persisting in statistical
and technical studies on the flaws in the Amereican electronic
voting system. How
can we ensure the accuracy of vote counts? is her latest 9July
0 2005) contribution.
Counts Votes 31.1.2005
· voting machine shortages
· ballots counted and recounted in secret
· lost, discarded, and improperly rejected registration
forms and absentee ballots
· touch-screen machines that registered Bush
when voters pressed Kerry
· precincts in which there were more votes recorded than
· precincts in which the reported participation rate was
less than 10%
· high rates of spoiled ballots and under-votes
in which no choice for president was
· a sworn affidavit by a Florida computer programmer who
claims he was hired to
voting program with a back door mechanism to undetectably
alter vote tallies
that a Republican Congressman asked a company to create E-Vote
fraud software. Dec 7
report by the Election Protection Coalition
pay $150,000 to file for recount in Ohio Nov 17 (Follow
Dr Freeman, University of Pennsylvania: fraud
is a possibility. Nov 10
analyses of the 2004 election results
technical problems for e-vote software
This from the blue
"A statistical analysis of exit polling
conducted by a former MIT mathematics professor has found the
odds of Bush making an average gain of 4.15 percent among all
16 states included in the medias 4 p.m. exit polling is
1 in 50,000, or .002 percent...."
There are a vast number of references on the American
sites about the reliability or otherwise of electronic voting.
Have a look at Blackboxvoting.org
which is a campaigning site (not blackboxvoting.com, which is
"Black Box Voting has taken the position that fraud took
place in the 2004 election through electronic voting machines.
We base this on hard evidence, documents obtained in public records
requests, inside information, and other data indicative of manipulation
of electronic voting systems. What we do not know is the specific
scope of the fraud. We are working now to compile the proof, based
not on soft evidence -- red flags, exit polls -- but core documents
obtained by Black Box Voting in the most massive Freedom of Information
action in history."
Here are some other links:
huge collection of Bush election fraud links
County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes to
Democrat John Kerry's 260 votes in a precinct in Gahanna. Records
show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct.
W. Bushs vote tallies, especially in the key state of Florida,
are so statistically stunning that they border on the unbelievable.
Post review of e-voting Nov 3
challenges the result in New Hampshire.
mounts that the Vote may have been hacked Nov 6
of anomalous voting patterns in New Mexico
Once the voting machines counted
survey of the discrepancy in Florida.
TThe OSCE and the US elections
The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe had the
task of overseeing the correctness of the US Presidential election
on 2nd November 2004. Their preliminary report was mildly critical
of some of the access arrangements for international observers,
and commented on the long queues for voters in some precincts.
Reading between the lines, it looks as though they were not exactly
welcomed with open arms by polling officials wherever they went:
The OSCE observers were able to assess aspects of the pre-election
environment and were granted access to polling stations in a number
of states, sometimes only in specific counties. The OSCE believes
that in order to further enhance transparency and to meet U.S.
international commitments, Congress and individual states should
consider introducing legal provisions allowing unimpeded access
for international observers invited by the U.S. government.
The paragraph quoted above were to be found on the OSCE website
in November 2004, although repeated searches were unable to find
them in March 2005. No doubt this was due to a faulty search technique.
Their final report, which should examine in detail the allegations
of tampering with the electoral computers as well as other evidence
of fraud, was due to come out just before Christmas - a very good
time to bury bad news, as Jo Moore the New Labour spin doctor
said on 9/11. However, Christmas came and went, without a sign
of the final OSCE report.
I sent an email on 18th December to Urdur Gunnarsdottir ODIHR
Spokesperson, Press and Public Information Adviser, Public Affairs
Unit, OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights,
enquiring when their final report would be due out. She replied
"early January". I wrote on the 9th February, pointing
out that the OSCE report is now more than a month overdue. Is
this normal? Urdur replied "There is an backlog in election
reports from last fall. They should all be out by the end of this
I wrote again on 28th February, 13th march, 16th March and 18th
march to the new Press officer, Richard Murphy ( email@example.com
). The last letter reads:
There is still no final report on the 2/11/2004
US election by the OSCE.. It is now two and a half months overdue.
There is a tendency for the human imagination to fill in gaps
where information is missing, and there is a tendency to suppose
that the OSCE has drawn up its final report, but that the US authorities
are objecting to certain passages in the report which refer to
unsatisfactory practices and procedures in the election, and that
the OSCE, showing exemplary regard for truth, transparency and
democracy, are refusing to give way.
Am I wrong?
Nobody likes a conspiracy theory, but the best
antidote to imagination is reality. The OSCE should either publish
its final report on the US elections, or explain why they cannot
Richard Lawson 11/Nov/2004November