I was interviewed over the weekend by Joan Brunwasser of OpEd News about the terrible, dangerous and ill-considered SB 360 bill recently passed by the CA legislature, and still waiting for signature (or, hopefully, veto) from Gov. Jerry Brown.
As I’ve reported previously, SB 360 would end all federal testing of e-voting systems used in CA, and give sweeping new executive powers to the Sec. of State to approve new e-voting systems for use in “a legally binding election”, even with no certification testing by state auditors either!
The measure passed by Democrats, along partisan lines, with little debate, under the false premise that rewriting more than 70 sections of the election code was needed so that L.A. County could develop its own new, 100% unverifiable touch-screen voting system. The bill was authored — and subsequently misrepresented to both lawmakers and the public — by Democratic state Sen. Alex Padilla who also happens to be a leading 2014 contender for Sec. of State to replace Debra Bowen who is termed out next year.
My OpEd News interview begins with this question from Brunwasser…
Give the full interview a read to find out my answer to those questions, along with a number of other thoughts on Democratic science denial when it comes to unverifiable (and untested) election technology.
If you’ve yet to give CA Governor Jerry Brown your opinion on whether he should sign or veto SB 360, you may do so right here. (Choose “SB00360” from the “Please choose your subject” dropdown box, and select Pro or Con on the next screen.) You may also call his office to leave your opinion at (916) 445-2841.
NOTE: The space-aged touch-screen system being developed by L.A. County, is also being planned for sale to other jurisdictions across the country. The way CA tests and certifies its voting machines, or doesn’t, is very likely to have a direct impact on voting systems used in your jurisdictions across the nation as well!
She also pointed out how strange it is that, for this local primary election, 105 percent of Detroit’s adult population suddenly registered to vote. Is there any other city in the United States that has obtained even 100 percent adult voter registration? It does seem odd that the media chooses to ignore the fact that the number of registered voters somehow exceeds 100 percent of the adult population
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/09/22/massive-fraud-in-detroit-election-a-big-deal-for-michigan/
Karen –
Caveat here that I haven’t dug into the Detroit election you cite in any detail (I think it occurred while I was up in the mountains, and I haven’t otherwise found an on-ramp to it.) So, without speaking to what did or didn’t happen in the election you cite, there are plenty of instances where the number of registered voters exceeds the adult population. It is almost always in jurisdictions where voting rolls haven’t been cleared of deadwood (actual dead people and/or people who have moved out of the jurisdiction) in a long time.
In the case of Detroit, you’ll note the local Fox outlet reports (as linked from the story you link to):
The problem is, there were only 514,000 adults living in Detroit in 2012, according to Census Bureau estimates that most demographic experts consider to be a rosy. Even so, that would mean that 105 percent of the Detroit adult population is registered to vote. As anyone knows, you can’t get higher than 100 percent.
Now, 96,000 voters in an off-year Mayoral election out of 514,000 potential voters doesn’t sound particularly outrageous in and of itself. That there are about 25,000 more voters on the rolls than eligible voters in the city also doesn’t sound particularly outrageous if you note that the article also explains the county clerk waits for voters to not vote in two federal elections before beginning the removal process from the rolls. Don’t know if that’s two Presidential elections, or one Presidential and another two years later.
But, in either case, while their system of culling the rolls should likely be improved, that would mean that some 25,000 voters either died or left the city over the 12 years or over 6 years, but have yet to be removed from the rolls. Given what Detroit has gone through over that same period, it doesn’t seem to me to be a particular disturbing number as far as the number of people who would have left Detroit (or died) during that period.
Again, none of that speaks to the other concerns raised in the article you link to, though most of the more troubling aspects, as I could understand them on quick read, have to do with insiders gaming the system, harassing voters and/or stealing blank ballots to use for absentee voting (that latter concern, actually all of them, are among problems I have railed about for years, as I’m sure you know.)
Brad,
Just letting you know that I did follow your link and sent the gubner a note expressing my stark disapproval of SB360. I was gonna post it here but it got a bit on the wordy side. I hope someone reads it.
Thank you for continuing to push back against the computer voting.
Dexter
And thank you, Dexter, for speaking up!