Patrick Mallon
Monday, Oct. 14, 2002

This article is the latest in the ongoing weekly series on the California governor's race. See previous articles:

Davis Slams Property Owners on 9/11 (10/7)
Only Vote Fraud Can Save Davis Now (9/30)
Is Simon Taking a Dive? (9/23)
The Tide Is Turning (9/16)
Davis and Apologists Fooling Themselves (9/9)
The Farce That Is Sacramento (9/3)
A Democratic Party Art Form - Inventing Voters (8/26)
Tammany Hall's Next Target - Simon's Faith (8/16)
California Governor's Race: Defying the Lies as Bombs Fly (8/9)
Stealth Agenda Trumps Academic Success in Schools (8/2)
Simon Survives Attacks, Davis Cons for Cash (7/26)
Paralyzed From Facing Reality (7/19)
California: Wanted! An Ethical Governor. Apply Within (7/15)

This week, clairvoyant Davis defenders and apologists in the media are microanalyzing a picture. Seems the hayseeds in the Simon campaign screwed up (intentionally?) and used a California Organization of Police and Sheriffs (COPS) photograph to falsely claim Davis accepted an illegal campaign check in the governor's office.

With almost universal statewide TV, radio and print outlets delivering a condemnatory "That's it, Simon should step down!" response, it's revealing how not one has equally demanded that Davis step down for damage far more serious to the pocketbooks of California taxpayers.

Some candidates must be more equal than others.

So, while reporters write Simon's obituary over at One-Hour Photo, let's discuss how to steal an election. After all, this was the same week Dick Gephardt implored undocumented immigrants rights advocates in Washington to "help us elect those who will give you earned amnesty." How those lacking any legal right to vote can do that is no real mystery.

Find Me The Guy Who Writes Vote-Tabulation Software

Since conduct any nitwit would deem extortion and bribery are entirely "legal" to the Davis Familia, what happens if heavy-handedness and sympathetic reporting still aren't enough to re-elect the team of "Leadership We Trust, Values We Share"? As any liberal knows, do whatever it takes, because Republicans don't fight as dirty.

So, if one wanted to steal an election, which method would be the most effective? Planting illegal immigrants as poll workers? Recruiting little old ladies (lifelong Democrats wearing sneakers) to look the other way as carloads of "provisional balloteers" show up just before close? How about sending hundreds of thousands of absentee ballots to invalids at nursing homes, then "helping" them fill out their choices?

All textbook and standard donkey tactics.

But if you guessed "none of the above," give yourself a pat on the back. The easiest way to steal an election is to manipulate the software program used to tabulate the vote count.

One programmer, one software routine, press Enter.

Can it be done? Look at it this way. An obscure routine built into cryptic software can be programmed to change the count, and there is no paper audit trail to identify tampering. It's not that difficult to make the association with Touch Screen equipment already being used in Riverside and Plumas counties. Granted, no system is infallible, but at least with printed ballots, tangible evidence of an actual vote exists.

The most ardent supporter of increasing Touch Screen usage is none other than … Well, what a coincidence! Art Torres, California Democratic Party chairman. It was "Reconquista" Art Torres who said in 1995: "Proposition 187 was the last gasp of white America." And here the media were telling us only Republicans were racists.

State Registrar of Voter Policies

So, what are the policies? According to the Canvas of the Vote section on the official Web site of California Secretary of State Bill Jones:

Immediately upon the close of polls on election day, the county elections officials and the Secretary of State begin what is called the "semifinal official canvass of the vote" – the tallying of early-returned absentees and the ballots cast in each of the state's 25,702 voting precincts. The semifinal official canvass begins at 8:00 p.m. on election night and continues uninterrupted until the last precinct is counted.

All ballots are then collected from the 58 counties and tabulated by computer.

Twenty-five thousand, seven hundred two voting precincts. That's a lot of polls to monitor for voting chicanery. And who's watching the poll workers? Probably more people than are watching the developer of tabulation software.

State guidelines operate in conjunction with Federal Election Commission (FEC) guidelines. The site describes verification procedures performed by a "Nationally Recognized Test Laboratory (NRTL)" in the section on Approving and Certifying Voting Systems. Who's NRTL? Shouldn't someone explain?

What Companies Tabulate Votes in California Elections?

California uses three types of voting systems:

1. Mark Sense Systems. Similar to the standardized tests given in school, the voter marks the appropriate position on the ballot with a No. 2 pencil or other approved marking device. Companies providing these systems are DFM Mark-a-Vote, ES&S Optech Eagle, ES&S 350/550 and Global (Diebold) Accu-Vote ES-2000.

2. Punch-Card Systems. These use pre-scored computer punch cards on which the voter indicates his or her vote choices by punching out the pre-scored holes. Datavote, Votomatic and Pollstar are punch-card system providers.

3. Touch Screen Systems. This system allows the voter to cast a ballot on a "touch screen," similar to an ATM machine. Touch screen providers are Sequoia Pacific AVC Edge and Global (Diebold) AccuVote-TS.

California should follow the example of Indiana, where the official Web site of Secretary of State Sue Anne Gilroy actually provides a detailed list of vote software, contract information and lists of software releases.

http://www.in.gov/sos/elections/voters/certifiedsystems.html

Wouldn't it be refreshing if papers of record like the LA Times and San Francisco Chronicle would investigate and inform voters about the importance of scrutinizing those who write the software for contracted vote tabulation companies – you know, to ensure the integrity of the vote?

But then, they've already decided that Simon should step aside, so what's the point?

'Scalable' Vote Fraud and Tech Mavens

Back in March 2001, Rebecca Mercuri, a 46-year-old authority on voting systems, was interviewed on the subject of computer voting by the Wall Street Journal.

"I fear for what's happening," says Mercuri, who has programmed for decades and teaches computer science at Bryn Mawr College. "The idea of running an election on the Internet is totally horrifying.

"Voting-systems companies usually turn to crack-proof codes to ensure that information remains private. But no matter how good the encryption, you still need to worry about how the information could be altered or misread."

Presciently, Erik Nilsson, a software engineer who at the time monitored computerized voting for the Palo Alto-based Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR), wrote 12 years back listing ways in which vote-counting software can be "secretly changed."

"The possibilities include adding extra ballots, discarding some ballots, misreading ballots, turning off the computer's internal record-keeping system or simply changing the results. Any of these threats can be accomplished by a single computer expert or, in many instances, by a non-professional."

One programmer, one software routine, press Enter.

Priceless Right to Vote Treated Like Litter

Hundreds of thousands of American soldiers have fought and died for our right to vote, a freedom the majority now take for granted. The right to vote is our primary link to democracy, and yet it's being treated as a plaything.

Have we reached the noxious stage where validating a person's right to vote results in being called intolerant and bigoted?

There's no question illegal immigrants are voting: We know there is NO photo ID requirement to vote, we know anyone can just show up at the polls and request a provisional ballot (no questions asked), and we know that upwards of 3 million absentee ballots are issued in this state, many to people who just invent names and wait for the ballot to arrive in the mailbox.

The lack of concern or reporting on this appalling lack of accountability appears to be driven by party politics. Our newspapers are patently of the liberal persuasion. Republicans in Congress demanded a photo ID requirement for voting in recent election-related legislation. Democrats vetoed the ID requirement as "biased against minorities."

It was Democrats who were silent when Loretta Sanchez defeated Robert Dornan in a 1996 congressional race shrouded by incontrovertible proof that illegal immigrants voted for Sanchez.

Now, wary and cynical California voters have no clue as to who writes the software that counts their ballots, who is watching the software engineers who write patches and upgrades to cryptic tabulation code, and who, if anyone, watchdogs their performance.

Meanwhile, writers for California newspapers are over at One-Hour-Photo, writing an epitaph for a candidate they never gave a fair shake to anyway, while rationalizing another four years for Davis. But all's not lost, maybe these self-impressed grocery clerks got a good deal on double prints.

One engineer, one program, press Enter. What could be easier?

See next article in series: Commissar Davis and the People's Press

You may e-mail Patrick Mallon at patrick@newsmax.com.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
California Governor's Race

A product that might interest you:
David Horowitz shows "How to Beat the Democrats"