Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Moving the Ball Downfield

My June 30th OpEd in the Eureka Times-Standard now appears at OpEdNews.com and also Smirking Chimp. My other June 30th OpEd, from the Eureka Reporter, inspired this very supportive column by Joe Shermis published in Tuesday's paper.

Reflections on Independence, Volume 4 has also been picked up by OpEdNews.com. Perhaps more significantly, after reading this piece my father asked me if I had edited the version of the Declaration of Independence appended to the end of the essay. Of course it was the unadulterated original I had included and it served its intended purpose in awakening a reader to the frightening similarities between the colonists' grounds for revolting and our present situation.

Of greater consequence, BradBlog.com and VoteTrustUSA continue to feed content to corporate TV. Read about and watch this amazing segment with Catherine Crier on CourtTV. Also see this for another installment of Lou Dobbs' series "Democracy at Risk" on CNN.

BlackBoxVoting.org also reported Monday that our lawyer friend Paul Lehto is in Kentucky representing seven candidates from two political parties as they challenge election conditions there. BBV links to a few documents in this case and they are worth reading too. Lehto simply has the best mind for framing arguments on election conditions:

"The Court must recall at all times that the voting here in question involves invisible electronic ballots which have not been inspected at any time by any party hereto, even the County Clerk has not counted them. Rather, the electronic ballots have been purported to be counted in secret by trade secret counting software owned by the vendors.

There is no reason at all or basis for confidence in the electronic counting until verified by the plaintiffs not only because the Clerk himself is a defendant-candidate here, but also because it is the nature of the computer to do precisely as it is told without reference to any laws, morals or ethics."
The pursuit of a hand count continues for San Diego's 50th district Congressional seat. Again it is BradBlog.com for the latest and most comprehensive collection of stories on this subject. The fundraiser I mentioned over the weekend hit its 10k goal and I understand a lawyer has been retained. In addition, the Oregon Voter Rights Coalition and Ohio's J30 Coalition have both now chimed in with "no basis for confidence" statements.

Also making the rounds in the past few days is this transcript of a speech given last November by Oregon Secretary of State Bill Bradbury.
"We are seeing proposals that are costly and complicated to prove that an election is as accurate as we say it is. I believe we are faced with a compelling public demand to do more than we're now doing to verify election results.

We cannot ignore our constituents. It's not enough anymore to simply tell them "just trust us."

We need to revisit our compromise, and look again at the best way to validate election results. Administrative recounts of selected precincts to verify election results would not only be appreciated by the public, it would also improve elections administration by allowing us to identify and fix systemic problems in vote counting before certification of the results.

We don't believe that there are systemic problems in vote counting, but we don't have the procedures to prove it. We believe that our elections are accurate, but we need hard evidence to show the public."
There is a theme through all of these wonderful advances. The election integrity community has picked up the stakes and relocated them, shifting the boundaries of the overall debate. Many key points are no longer approached as if they are in dispute. This greatly expands our latitude in aggressively and proactively framing our message. We are moving the ball downfield.

Permalink:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2006/07/moving-ball-downfield.html


Posted by Dave Berman - 3:38 AM | Permalink
Comments (0 So Far) | Top of Page | WDNC Main Page
As shown on
Dave's new blog,
Manifest Positivity

We Do Not Consent, Volume 1 (left) and Volume 2 (right), feature essays from Dave Berman's previous blogs, GuvWurld and We Do Not Consent, respectively. Click the covers for FREE e-book versions (.pdf). As of April 2010, paperbacks are temporarily out of print. Click here for the author's bio.

Back Page Quotes

"Give a damn about the world you live in? Give a damn about what you and I both know is one of the most shameful and destructive periods in American history? If so, do something about it. You can start by reading We Do Not Consent."

— Brad Friedman, Creator/Editor, BradBlog.com; Co-Founder, VelvetRevolution.us


"If in the future we have vital elections, the "no basis for confidence" formulation that GuvWurld is popularizing will have been a historically important development. This is true because by implicitly insisting on verification and checks and balances instead of faith or trust in elections officials or machines as a basis for legitimacy, it encourages healthy transparent elections. It’s also rare that a political formulation approaches scientific certainty, but this formulation is backed up by scientific principles that teach that if you can’t repeat something (such as an election) and verify it by independent means, it doesn’t exist within the realm of what science will accept as established or proven truth."

— Paul Lehto, Attorney at Law, Everett, WA


"Dave Berman has been candid and confrontational in challenging all of us to be "ruthlessly honest" in answering his question, "What would be better?" He encourages us to build consensus definitions of "better," and to match our words with actions every day, even if we do only "the least we can do." Cumulatively and collectively, our actions will bring truth to light."

— Nezzie Wade, Sociology Professor, Humboldt State University and College of the Redwoods


"Dave Berman's work is quietly brilliant and powerfully utilitarian. His Voter Confidence Resolution provides a fine, flexible tool whereby any community can reclaim and affirm a right relation to its franchise as a community of voters."

— Elizabeth Ferrari, San Francisco, Green Party of California


"This is an important collection of essays with a strong unitary theme: if you can't prove that you were elected, we can't take you seriously as elected officials. Simple, logical, comprehensive. 'Management' (aka, the 'powers that be') needs to get the message. 'The machines' are not legitimizers, they're an artful dodge and a path to deception. We've had enough...and we most certainly DO NOT consent."

— Michael Collins covers the election fraud beat for "Scoop" Independent Media


"What's special about this book (and it fits because there's nothing more fundamental to Democracy than our vote) is the raising of consciousness. Someone recognizing they have no basis for trusting elections may well ask what else is being taken for granted."

— Eddie Ajamian, Los Angeles, CA


"I urge everyone to read "We Do Not Consent", and distribute it as widely as possible."

— B Robert Franza MD, author of We the People ... Have No Clothes: A Pamphlet for every American