Sunday, September 17, 2006

Letter to Editor of WashPost re: Major Problems At Polls Feared

Sent to:

Re: Major Problems At Polls Feared (9/17/06, p.A1)

Dear Editor:

The same September 17, 2006 issue with the front page headline "Major Problems at Polls Feared" also reported on the complications with Maryland's Primary Election and the ongoing series of electoral "train wrecks" nationwide this year. Poll problems are not just feared, they have begun. Your "Feared" article is reminiscent of stories prior to the November 2004 election in which the public was told to expect lawsuits and delayed vote counting. Yet immediately after that election, citizens were vilified for trying to spotlight the very problems we were told to expect.

This November, more than one third of the votes will be cast on paperless electronic machines that cannot be recounted. At least an equal number of votes will be counted on optical scanners using secret proprietary computer programming. In a recent survey, Zogby International found 92% of Americans believe we have a right to know and see how our votes are counted. But by design, we cannot know or see how our votes are counted. The problems the Washington Post says we should fear do not stem from results yet to be reported, but rather from the very election conditions that are already in place. Listen closely and you'll hear Americans saying "We Do Not Consent" to secret vote counting that requires blind trust and provides no basis for confidence in the results reported.

Dave Berman
Eureka, CA


Posted by Dave Berman - 10:31 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,; 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