Wednesday, August 02, 2006

Legal Challenges to Election Conditions From Coast to Coast

The Contra Costa Times reported Tuesday that CA Secretary of State Bruce McPherson was named as a defendant in yet another lawsuit. The suit was filed by the Paralyzed Veterans of America, the California Council of the Blind and the American Association of People with Disabilities. Also named as defendants are the counties of Alameda, San Francisco, Marin, Sonoma and Yolo. The case is based on the failures to comply with the Help America Vote Act (HAVA).

Also Tuesday, a Federal judge in Seattle ruled that voter registrations must not be contingent upon registration forms matching perfectly with DMV records. In an e-mail newsletter, CA State Senator and Secretary of State Candidate Debra Bowen explained the importance of this ruling and its relevance to California:

The case is relevant in California because the California Secretary of State adopted regulations to implement an agreement with the Bush Administration's Justice Department in 2005 that are very similar to the Washington state law the court put on hold yesterday afternoon. It's not known how many Californians may have been prevented from registering or re-registering to vote prior to the June primary or how many are still experiencing problems as they attempt to register in time for the November election.

"That ruling tells me there's a very good chance the regulations the Secretary of State adopted to implement his agreement with the Bush Administration violate federal law and the state Constitution because of the barriers they put up to prevent eligible Californians from registering to vote," said California State Senator Debra Bowen, the chairwoman of the Senate Elections, Reapportionment & Constitutional Amendments Committee and the Senate Select Committee on the Integrity of Elections.
In her role on the Senate Select Committee, on Monday Bowen was also part of a hearing about problems with the June primary election in Kern County. Blogger Dusty has a first person account of the "priceless" exchanges between the Senators and a hapless Diebold representative. Also, with the Kern Registrar supposedly on vacation, the Deputy Registrar was put forward as a sacrificial scapegoat, unable to answer some or many of the Senators' questions.

Meanwhile, in Florida, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is making good on the strong words he recently wrote for Rolling Stone. Together with attorney Mike Papantonio, the two have filed a qui tam suit, a whistleblower action alleging the government has been defrauded. Computerworld reported on Wednesday:
August 02, 2006 (Computerworld) -- A federal whistleblower lawsuit has been filed against the e-voting industry, alleging that one company sold electronic voting devices that did not to perform as promised.

But details about the suit are sketchy because of secrecy rules surrounding whistleblower litigation, according to Matt Schultz, an attorney at Levin, Papantonio Thomas Mitchell Echsner & Proctor PA, the Pensacola, Fla., law firm that is handling the case. Schultz was assigned to the suit, but the lead attorneys are Mike Papantonio and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.


The lawsuit was filed approximately four weeks ago, but Schultz was unable to divulge in which federal district the filing took place. Nor could he discuss which e-voting machine vendor is targeted because the document is currently under seal.

According to Schultz, insiders at one of the four major e-voting vendors in the U.S. have testified to misrepresentations by the unnamed company about the accuracy, reliability and security of the direct recording electronic (DRE) devices. DRE usually signifies a touch-screen voting system.
BradBlog recently published a lengthy in-depth interview with RFK, following that on Wednesday with a conversation with Papantonio.

Watch the We Do Not Consent Blog for continued coverage of these cases, as well as the Bilbray/Busby contested election in San Diego.


Posted by Dave Berman - 11:47 PM | 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,; Co-Founder,

"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