Help America Vote, the "real" version

As a close foreign observer to the US voting system, especially after the 2000 and 2004 fraudulent presidental votes, now, I'm proud to note
the following activism to protect your vote.

These are really good signs. Make me proud of you, remember, some here think you get what you deserved by electing G.W.Bush twice.
I'm not one of those...


Video the Vote

Help stop election fraud in the US


November Victory Within Reach
Election Protection and GOTV Urgently Needed

Dear Sitting-Bull,

In 2000 and 2004, many of us believed Democrats would win the elections. Unfortunately, hundreds of thousands of voters were prevented from registering and illegally purged from voting rolls. Many faced widespread intimidation and suppression, were forced to wait in line for hours, were denied provisional ballots, and did not have their ballots counted. Voting machines broke down and irregularities abounded.

There are two things you can do to help prevent these abuses from costing us another election. First, you can join with me in helping the Democratic Voter Protection program. You can assist in early voting, poll watching, and tracking voter irregularities and complaints. We will make sure you are placed with a program in your area.


Thank you once again for your commitment to a better democracy.

Your Friend,

John Conyers, Jr.


Voter Action, a group of motivated citizens, some jumping into activism for the first time, sued the state of New Mexico in 2005 over the bad machines and the failure to count the vote. The activists ran a public campaign with their revelations about New Mexico's broken democracy. Last year, Voter Action invited our investigations team to lay out our findings to huge citizens' meetings in Albuquerque and Santa Fe. Soon, the whole horrid vote-losing game was on local community radio and TV stations. It worked.

Governor Richardson, who ducked the issue for three years, and his Secretary of State, once openly hostile to reform, had to relent in the face of the public uprising. In February of 2006, Richardson signed a model law requiring that all voting in the state take place on new paper ballot machines, with verifiable tabulating systems. Richardson now claims the mantle of leader of the voting reform campaign.

Voter Action, successful in New Mexico, is now pursuing lawsuits in seven states to stop the Secretaries of State from purchasing electronic voting systems which have records of inaccuracy, security risks, and have been proven unreliable.

In New Mexico we learned, once again, that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. To protect your right to vote, you must know what is happening in your state before, during, and after Election Day and be willing to hold your leaders accountable.

Greg Palast,


Every poll points to a Democratic victory on November 7. Yet George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Karl Rove all insist Republicans will win.

Are they planning to steal another election?

Let's start a Blue Revolution across the USA on Election Night to stop Republicans from stealing Election 2006.

When the polls close, we propose that Democrats across the country gather outside their County Election Office for a candlelight vigil to Count Every Vote, all wearing the same color: Blue.


More here:


Bonifaz Statement on Introduction of Diebold Touch-Screen Machines in MA
John Bonifaz, voting rights attorney and former Democratic candidate for Massachusetts Secretary of State, issued the following statement today on the introduction of Diebold touch-screen voting machines in Massachusetts:

"The Massachusetts Town Clerks Association is reporting in its October newsletter that the Massachusetts Secretary of State’s Office has announced that Diebold touch-screen voting machines will be tested in certain cities and towns in the upcoming November election.

"There are two major problems with this decision made by Secretary Bill Galvin.

"First, the Help America Vote Act (2002) required all states to have new voting equipment in each polling location to serve the needs of voters with disabilities by the first federal election of 2006. For Massachusetts, that meant September 19. Secretary Galvin failed to meet this requirement.

"On August 14, the Boston Globe cited Galvin as saying that he 'is near the end of a lengthy vetting process and could order the machines within days, depending upon an outside expert's evaluation of three models.' The Globe further reported that 'he hopes to have at least some of the machines for the primary but does not want to rush into purchasing a potentially flawed model.'

"There were no new machines in the primary. Two months later - and four years after the law’s passage - Galvin has decided to purchase and test the flawed TSx Diebold machine during a critical election. Massachusetts remains one of only two states (New York is the other) that have yet to comply with the federal law.

"The second problem is the technology itself. The TSx model has been at the center of controversy for several years.

"California banned the use of any Diebold machines from its elections, pending further examination. The state also sued the company because of voting problems in four counties. Diebold eventually settled with the state and paid a $2.6 million settlement.

"The Maryland House, after several problems with the TSx machines, voted unanimously this year to approve a bill that would prohibit election officials from using the Diebold equipment in this fall’s elections and use a paper-based optical scan system instead. Maryland’s Governor has called for a return to full paper ballots and, just last month, Baltimore election director Gene Raynor resigned over the use of the TSx machines.

"In September, USA Today reported that Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas and West Virginia have also reported problems with touch-screen machines.

"Yet, here in Massachusetts, Galvin has green-lighted the use of the TSx machines in select cities and towns next month.

"This issue transcends any candidacy and any campaign. It goes to the heart of whether the integrity of our elections will be safeguarded. We must guarantee the openness and transparency of our elections with paper trails, hand-recorded paper ballots, access to the source codes and data for all electronic voting machines, and public control of our vote-counting process. There is no reason, in light of the problems the nation has witnessed with touch-screen electronic voting machines - especially Diebold’s TSx model - that these machines should be introduced into our elections here in Massachusetts. Our right to vote, including our right to have our votes properly counted, must be protected."