Posted on 08/29/2010 5:06:23 AM PDT by humblegunner
Officials still investigating cause of fire that destroyed voting devices
A day after a fire destroyed virtually all of Harris County's electronic voting gear, officials were still determining the cause of the warehouse blaze and furiously exploring ways to accommodate voters come early November.
Houston's fire marshal's office hasn't made a ruling on whether Friday's early-morning fire was accidental or deliberately set, said Harris County Clerk Beverly Kaufman, who hopes to hear something on the cause early this week.
"It would break my heart to think someone would do something like this to the election process," she said, adding that she was unaware of anyone who might have had a motive to burn down the building.
Houston Fire Department officials did not return phone calls on Saturday.
(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...
And it's not the tech that matters. It's the character of the people counting the ballots.
she was unaware of anyone who might have had a motive to burn down the building.
She cannot determine “motive”?
Check to see which incumbent was in trouble for re-election.
That would be a likely place to start looking.
This is true.
I’ll bet that if we have to go with paper we could round up plenty of volunteers for the process.
If we treated vote fraud like the treason it is, we'd have less of it.
Cui bono?
The more ad hoc the process, the greater the opportunities for mischief and honest mistakes. If you don’t think paper ballots cannot be tampered with, you are living in a fantasy world.
I grew up in New York City, where voting was done by mechanical tabulating machines for years, basically adding machines. The voter would set levers indicating his or her preferences. The opening the curtain to the voting booth would tabulate the votes and reset the levers. I do not recall anyone ever questioning the accuracy or reliability of this method. The machines would be locked down after the polls closed and the talleys recorded. It seems almost fool proof to me.
Thank God there is no suggestion that this might throw the coming election itself into doubt......................
Both Perry & White probably already have their legal teams
working on strategies to contest the outcome as a result
of this. Hanging chads, anyone?
Even when they win they *think* it's rigged by republicans. Idiots.
Probably why NYS is getting rid of the lever machines.
Our local Board of Election just informed us of this happy news.
My memories go back to the 1950’s and early 60’s. Massachusetts mostly uses optically scanned ballots and there are few complaints of irregularities, except with “sticker campaigns”. A sticker campaign is where a person not on the ballot has supporters distribute adhesive stickers near the polling places to be used in a write-in campaign, which are counted as valid votes. Sticker campaigns are rarely successful.
One tactic is to store ballots in a manner such that stickers become detached from the ballot (in a hot, humid basement, with the heat set to 95 degrees or in freezing attic) in order to protect a powerful incumbent. Regardless, someone who cannot qualify for the initial ballot generally has little chance of succeeding anyway.
I well remember those (NYC) machines (some are still in use)One recurring problem with these machines was countless instances that when the voting started at 6am in the morning many of the machines, instead of starting from zero, had votes already tabulated for one candidate or another
This is what happened when we had paper ballots. I was a Poll Watcher in the 2000 election in Harris County (Houston) in a dim precinct. The virtually un-hackable ESlate machines put a stop to most of this fraud:
Report on Poll Watching, 11/7/00
1. I was the only Poll Watcher at Precinct 154, Harris County, TX. The polling place was at St. Andrews United Methodist Church, 2420 Garland, Houston, TX.
2. The Election Judge was Joe Delgado. Ray McKenzie and Oscar Trevino were the Deputy Election Judges. All were Democrats as were the clerks.
3. Problems encountered:
A. The Election Judge did not start off with the ballots in numbered sequence making it difficult to determine how many people had voted. They eventually started over at #1.
B. The ballot can was never locked. The staff was continually taking ballots out to sort, count, and re-box throughout the day.
C. Throughout the day people showed up with VRCs (Voter Registration Cards) indicating that they were registered in other precincts. I objected and generally the Election Judge declined to let them vote. I counted at least 35 from other precincts who were turned away. Examples:
Lynda Reyes
Jusino Sametra
Nicole Harrison
Juan Aurelio Avalos
Angelica Luna
Richard Michael White
D. There were a number of questionable voters who had moved according to the address on their TDL (Texas Driver’s License), but they were still registered in Precinct 154. I was not able to copy down names and addresses in every case. They were all allowed to vote. Examples:
Roy Simmons 1015 Colquit Houston, 77056
Joseph Banuelos said that he moved 15 years ago, but he had a VRC for this precinct and was allowed to vote.
Ladislao Maldonado had moved to Pasadena, but had a VRC for Precinct 154. He was allowed to vote.
Domingo Ramirez had moved to Pearland, but had a VRC for Precinct 154. He was allowed to vote.
Belia Delacroy Guerrero came in and stated that she had been working at another precinct polling place. However, she had a VRC for Precinct 154 and was allowed to vote.
Manuel Mata
Pedro Ortegon
Michael Banuelos
E. Many women had names different from that on the voter rolls, allegedly because of marriage. Examples:
Debra Roe (per TDL) voted as Debra Green
F. There were cases where more than one voter at the same address had the same name, e.g., two Eva Riojas (she said one was her daughter, but the birthdate did not match her TDL), and she was allowed to vote.
G. The Election Judge was going into the voting booth with many new voters who did not speak English. He was advocating a “Yes” vote on the Arena measure. Since I speak Spanish, I questioned him on this. He seemed surprised and stopped advocating the measure to the voters.
He also told them in Spanish, “Punch out this hole for a straight Democrat ticket, and you can leave.” They meekly complied.
H. Francesco Gonsales had a valid Voter Registration Card for Precinct 154 but was not in the book. He was allowed to vote.
I. Donna Long had no identification whatsoever. She completed the Challenge form and was allowed to vote.
J. The Democratic Party “Card Pusher” at this location, Manuel Rodriguez, tried to vote. However, he could not produce identification or a VRC so I objected. He was not allowed to vote although he claimed to live in the neighborhood. All of the staff including the Election Judge seemed to be friends of his.
K. There were a number of discrepancies where the name, date of birth, street number, etc. were different on the TDL, VRC, or in the book. In almost every case they were allowed to vote.
L. There were a number of people who tried to vote who were obviously not living in the area. This included one man with a New York State Driver’s License, one from San Antonio TX, and several from the Rio Grande Valley. They were not allowed to vote because I objected.
M. Some VRCs were badly smudged and difficult to read.
N. Precinct 154 had no Statement of Residency forms for voters who needed them.
O. It was common for the questionable voters to have 000000 for their date of birth on their VRC.
P. Joe Delgado, the Election Judge, was very upset over the number of people who claimed to have registered to vote and never received a VRC in the mail. However, he called the Registrar’s office and cleared up most of the cases.
Q. The Election Judge complained of voters being removed from the rolls who had not voted since 1996. Some of these appeared to be legitimate.
R. Late in the day we started to get a number of people trying to vote without a TDL or a VRC or any other form of identification. My impression was that they were trying this tactic at different polling places to see how many times someone would let them vote. Most left immediately when I started to write down a description of the person attempting to vote.
Note that now even TRYING to vote more than once is a FELONY.
S. I noticed that a lady in line waiting to vote already had a hole punched in her ballot. I notified the Election Judge and the ballot was put into the spoiled pile. Hole number 13 had already been punched for the Gore-Lieberman ticket.
T. The Election Judge allowed one voter to vote without completing the Challenge form. He said that he knew her personally and that she had voted in the Primary. I did not get her name. Note that this is now a felony.
U. G. Gerrardo had two registrations at the same address. He voted and said that he would cancel one registration.
V. Ray McKenzie, the Deputy Election Judge, seemed to be against the Arena measure and did not tell some voters about it when he was assisting them. He encouraged voters to punch the straight ticket. Note that trying to influence voters is now a felony.
W. Late in the day Joe Delgado, the Election Judge, was on the telephone trying to confirm voters’ eligibility. He was running behind on signing ballots. The Democratic card pusher, Manuel Rodriguez, sat down and with the Judge’s permission began to forge Joe Delgado’s signature. When I noticed and started writing notes on my pad they stopped immediately, and Joe resumed signing ballots.
X. Rick Noriega, the incumbent State Legislator, arrived at 6:40 P.M. and began talking to the voters, the Election Judge, and the Democratic card pusher. When I began writing on my pad, he left.
4. Observations:
A. People seemed to take a long time in voting. However when I mentioned this to the Election Judge, he said that about one third were voting straight tickets according to his observation of the holes punched.
B. The clerks were in the process of handing ballots to people who were registered in other precincts. However when I objected, they stopped accepting these voters.
C. A very high percentage were voting for the first time, and many of them asked for assistance from the Election Judge or his deputies.
D. At least 8 ballots dropped in the box were totally blank with no holes punched. Ray McKenzie said that 1% blank undervoted ballots is normal (he had been Election Judge for the 35 previous years at this precinct).
E. The state inspectors who came through were very helpful, especially Alice Zimmerman. They knew the details of the rules and corrected a number of minor violations on the spot.
F. The Election Judge said that he worked very hard for his party prior to the election. He personally walked 5 precincts.
G. A large number (estimate over 100) of voters had an address on their Texas Driver’s License that was different from their Voter Registration Card. The general explanation given was that the voter had not put in a change of address card. These people were allowed to vote as long as they had a VRC for Precinct 154. However, it is possible that some individuals simply registered again each time they moved resulting in the potential for voting multiple times at different precincts.
H. The Democratic “card pusher” was giving out drinks and bags of popcorn. This made him popular with voters.
I. The TDL provided better and more accurate data than the VRC.
J. Bringing coffee and donuts for everyone helped my relationship with the staff. They were courteous at all times.
K. The final count of ballots cast was 863 at Precinct 154. There were 5 spoiled ballots. The Election Judge told me that about 200 had voted early or absentee.
5. Recommendations:
A. Poll Watchers need more training. I was unsure whether many of the practices were legal and proper. I had to take the Election Judge’s word on many questions. For example, a checklist of what to look for and a decision tree to handle potential questionable voters would have helped. I received the official state pamphlet, but it needs to be expanded.
B. Having a computer hookup like that at Early Voting locations would help immensely.
C. Checking credentials is probably one of the most valuable things that a Poll Watcher can do. On the VRC one needs to check the precinct, name, DOB, and address and cross check with the TDL and the voter roll.
D. The Poll Watcher needs to be careful of voters being handed more than one ballot. Several people walked back up to the clerks and said that they had not been handed a ballot. It would have been easy to obtain two ballots as the clerks were inundated late in the day.
E. One of Joe Vu’s poll watchers, Khoi Le, told me that during Early Voting, he found a plastic strip in a voting machine that prevented holes from being punched when the ballot was inserted. I inspected each voting machine regularly in my precinct and found no such device. However, anyone could place such a strip in a machine that would prevent punching holes for certain candidates. It might also produce dimpled or pregnant chads.
F. Poll Watchers need to be able to speak the language of the voters. At Precinct 154, if the Poll Watcher does not speak Spanish then he won’t really know what is going on.
G. Poll Watchers should dress like a person in authority. Because I wore a suit and tie, the voters seemed to think that I was the person in authority. I believe that this contributed to fewer attempted violations.
H. There is no substitute for having a Deputy Election Judge from the opposite or minority party. This person is intimately involved in the process and has more value than a Poll Watcher.
I. If the “card pusher” had a computer or mapbook, he could help voters who went to the wrong polling place. Ideally, there should be a computer to check names, addresses, etc. against the voter roll. For example, he could have a sign that says, “Check With Me First If You Have A Question About Where To Vote”.
J. There were a number of voters who could not locate their VRC. If a party wants to get their base to the polls it should help voters with their paperwork in advance.
K. Somehow, the voter roll needs to be purged of people registered under multiple names and at multiple addresses.
L. Poll Watchers need to ask more questions and get issues resolved early in the day with the Election Judge. Once the clerks are instructed properly, they will tend to perform properly.
Here are my Free Republic posts from the 1996 California election:
Start watching for phantom voters on the rolls. The professional election scam artists use illegals and winos to steal sample ballots from your mailbox in order to vote them absentee. In the 1996 election in Orange County I surveyed 200 registered voters in Orange County across 7 precincts. 50% were non-existent phantom voters. 50%!!! The phantoms were registered to ordinary homes in suburban neighborhoods where the mailboxes were accessible from the street to facilitate stealing the sample ballots. BTW, my survey was in Bob Dornan’s district during the election where he lost his seat. IMHO, the phantom voters did far more fraud damage to him than the illegal aliens that you read about in the controlled press. The LA Slimes and the OC Register knew about this because I offered them proof; they were careful to cover up the highly successful Democratic phantom voter project. California elections often go to the candidate who is willing to commit the most felonies. If any Freepers want to know how to bust this scam, email me.
Like I have been saying for 7 years now: The vote fraud scam artists often register phantom voters as Republicans or Independents to confuse investigators. Start watching for phantom voters on the rolls. They simply make up names and register them to an address with a mailbox on the street
In California vote fraud professionals register hundreds of thousands of non-existent phantoms so that they can vote them absentee by mail. Stealing elections is a big, profitable business in a number of areas. The stats on registration and turnout are worthless until the voter rolls are purged of such phantoms. You can find the precincts where this is practiced by spot checking phonebooks, reverse directories, etc. as well as cross checking population figures with the 2000 Census. Illegals, felons, and dead voters can be detected by similar means.
Now they’ll have to use paper ballots. Much easier to lose, “find” or jigger the results!
Poll watchers are supposed to prevent that.
If someone can tinker with the software, do you even need warm bodies anymore? In my neck of the woods, none of the poll watchers ever even attempts to verify signatures. Seems to me if everything’s computerized, how the heck do voters ever find out if there’s a problem?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.