- Wanted - one or more really good constitutional
lawyers. Why? Voting machines. We need to challenge their use in
our elections.
-
- Voting machines violate the Constitution and threaten
what's left of American democracy like no terrorist ever could. Only
a handful of private companies sell and service the machines that register
and tabulate votes in U.S. elections. And it's all done in complete
secrecy. We've lost control of our election process and Congress doesn't
seem to notice or care.
-
- If this isn't fascism, I don't know what else to call
it.
-
- Over the last several years, particularly in 2002, election results in
the U.S. have come under increasing suspicion due to widespread voting
machine "glitches" and unexpected election upsets. In an
overwhelming number of these questionable elections... Republicans won. That
makes sense. Republicans, such as U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE),
long ago cornered the market in voting machine sales and service.
-
- Some people think that voting machines can be made 'secure'
by incorporating technical safeguards and standards, but that misses the
point in law. Once the machine is in the polling booth critical parts
of the voting process become unobservable and, therefore, violate Articles
I & 2 of the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act. But,
to my knowledge no individual or organization, such as the NAACP,
ACLU or Common Cause, have challenged the constitutionality of voting
machines. Although plenty of distraught candidates have gone to court accusing
the voting machines of miscounting their votes, but to little avail.
-
- In a November 1996 article for Relevance magazine, Philip
OâHalloran wrote, "Many court cases involving allegations of
fraud were brought against vendors of electronic systems. There were no
convictions. Was there ever any proof of tampering presented? No. Part
of the reason for this may be that during the litigation the plaintiffs
were never given access to the vote tabulating program, and hence there
was no opportunity for anyone to establish evidence to either prove or
disprove the allegations. We should point out that even if the court allowed
the plaintiffâs experts to inspect the source-code, there would be
no proof that the code provided to the court was, in fact, the selfsame
code used in the particular election in question."
-
- They're barking up the wrong tree anyway. How can a
machine-produced vote ever constitute a legal vote? Isn't it merely circumstantial
evidence of a vote produced by a machine that may or may not have been
cast by a voter? In Bush v. Gore the Supreme Court said, "A legal
vote is one in which there is a 'clear indication of the intent of the
voter.'"
-
- Voting machines reflect the action of the machine first
and the intent of the voter ...maybe. When machines are in the voting booth
three violations of federal law take place:
-
- 1. inability to observe if voting machines properly
register votes
- 2. inability to observe if voting machines properly count
votes
- 3. inability to enforce the Voting Rights Act, because
of the inability to observe if voting machines are properly registering
or counting votes
-
- Enforcement of the Voting Rights requires that Federal
Observers observe whether votes are being "properly tabulated."
Civil Rights statutes state, "Observers are authorized to watch all
polling place activities, including assistance to voters and the counting
of ballots." However, voting machines constitute a concealed
tabulation of the vote which cannot be observed by Federal Examiners, making
the examiner's role in that regard moot and the federal Voting Rights Act
unenforceable. Nelldean Monroe, Voting Rights Program Administrator for
the U.S. Office of Personnel Management admitted to this reporter in November
of 2002 that there is no training and no opportunity for Federal Observers
to observe the accuracy of voting machines.
-
- There is significant case law that upholds
the constitutional right to have votes cast and counted properly. The
Supreme Court held in the following three cases:
-
- Allen v. Board of Elections (1969) - "The Act
further provides that the term "voting" "shall include all
action necessary to make a vote effective in any primary, special, or general
election, including, but not limited to, registration, listing or other
action required by law prerequisite to voting, casting a ballot, and having
such ballot counted properly and included in the appropriate totals of
votes cast with respect to candidates for public or party office and
propositions for which votes are received in an election."
-
- Reynolds v Sims (1964) - "It has been repeatedly
recognized that all qualified voters have a constitutionally protected
right to vote and to have their votes counted. In Mosley the Court stated
that it is "as equally unquestionable that the right to have one's
vote counted is as open to protection as the right to put a ballot in a
box." The right to vote can neither be denied outright nor destroyed
by alteration of ballots nor diluted by ballot-box stuffing. As the Court
stated in Classic, "Obviously included within the right to choose,
secured by the Constitution, is the right of qualified voters within a
state to cast their ballots and have them counted."
-
- Wesberry v. Sanders (1964) - "It is in the
light of such history that we must construe Art. I, 2, of the Constitution,
which, carrying out the ideas of Madison and those of like views, provides
that Representatives shall be chosen "by the People of the several
States" and shall be "apportioned among the several States according
to their respective Numbers." It is not surprising that our Court
has held that this Article gives persons qualified to vote a constitutional
right to vote and to have their votes counted."
-
- But that's not happening. Our votes are not being cast
or counted openly or properly. As far as we know some madman from Midland
is counting them.
-
- Lynn Landes is a freelance journalist. She publishes
her articles at <http://www.EcoTalk.org>EcoTalk.org. Formerly Lynn
was a radio show host, a regular commentator for a BBC radio program, and
environmental news reporter for DUTV in Philadelphia, PA.
-
- 215 629-3553
- <mailto:lynnlandes@earthlink.net>lynnlandes@earthlink.net
|