This morning, I read (in
this morning’s San Jose Mercury) that, in the Senate, Diane Feinstein will be leading an effort to scrutinize
e-voting. Democrats had braced for Republican funny-business during the last election—especially e-voting skullduggery—but when the election turned out well for them, the issue seemed to disappear.
Obviously, the country can't afford to lose sight of it. Perhaps Feinstein's on the ball. Sure hope so.
The Mercury article mentions an organization, founded by a Stanford computer science prof, that is devoted to e-voting reform. According to the
Verified Voting Foundation [VVF] website,
The Verified Voting Foundation is a nonpartisan nonprofit organization championing reliable and publicly verifiable elections…[T]he organization supports a requirement for voter-verified paper ballots…on electronic voting machines allowing voters to verify individual permanent records of their ballots and election officials to conduct meaningful recounts….
Please check it out. (See also
Voter's rights advocacy organizations--Wiki.)
HAVAAs you know, after the 2000 Florida election debacle, citizens fretted about the integrity of vote counting, and that led to legislation called the “Help America Vote Act” (HAVA). HAVA is widely understood as having mandated the use of e-voting (i.e., electronic voting) systems. That has produced a windfall for electronic voting systems vendors such as Diebold.
Mighty suspicious, I’d say.
Oddly, HAVA mandated the use of e-voting, but it also permitted the use of
record-less e-voting machines. Since the 2000 election, many states have moved toward e-voting, but they have not insisted upon e-voting systems that leave records.
One might say, then, that HAVA has produced CRAPPA, or worse.
Hence the creation of VVF and similar organizations.
EAC? —P.U.Naturally, HAVA created a commission, namely, the Elections Assistance Commission (EAC), which is advised by two boards, the smaller of which is the EAC Board of Advisors. EAC and its boards have been busy bees. They're buzzing right now. Hear 'em?
When, back in May, conservative Republican J.C. Watts left EAC's Board of Advisors, Speaker Dennis Hastert (yes,
that guy) nominated our own TOM FUENTES to replace Watts. Bush then appointed Fuentes. (See
More on Fuentes’ appointment.) Naturally, it was a slam-dunk.
DtB duly reported Fuentes’ nomination, which yielded an appreciative posting on Matt Coker’s
Clockwork Orange (5/23/06):
Our buddies at Dissent the Blog are following up an announcement made at the most recent SOCCCD Board of Trustees‘ meeting that former Orange County Republican Party chairman Tom Fuentes has been appointed to the agency that “certifies” electronic-voting systems. As DtB [Dissent the Blog] so eloquently put it:
“Uh-oh.”
[Matt then mentions HAVA.]…The main goal of that act is to replace paper voting with electronic voting. As DtB so eloquently put it:
“Yikes!”
Joining the U.S. Election Assistance Commission is apparently a more plum (plumer? Plumber? Dick Nixon? Hello?) appointment than the National Dog Catcher Commission board or whatever the hell that lowly agency was that Bush appointed Fuentes to after the 2000 stolen presidential election.
INSTA-ADDENDUM: Say, who was that Orange County Republican Party chairman who in 1988 approved the use of poll guards to intimidate Latinos going to vote? And he’s now gonna help oversee national elections at a time when anti-immigrant fever is spreading like lube at a Young Republicans circle jerk? Good times!
Sadly, Matt’s blog is now defunct, evidently.
OK, so here’s my point. HAVA is a DISASTA. And when the likes of TOM FUENTES become our election watchdogs, well, THINGS SUCK BIGTIME.
So let’s support Feinstein’s efforts and the efforts of such organizations as
VVF!
Mentoring is a good thing. But you've gotta be careful.
Many years ago, in one of my philosophy classes, I mentioned a very difficult essay—it was called, “Do the numbers count?”—and it was considered a brain-teaser by my pals back in grad school. In class, I briefly explained its argument. I mentioned that I found it difficult.
The next day, a student from that class showed up for my office hours to explain the article to me. He had found it, read it, and understood it. I was astonished. There was no doubt in my mind that the kid was a genius. Subsequent conversations confirmed this.
I was his mentor, I guess, for about a day or two. But some of his remarks soon revealed that he was, well, mentally ill. (Don’t ask.) I’m no expert, but I am certain that the kid was very dangerous, perhaps a psychopath. I tried to nix the mentor/mentee thing (and I tried to get the kid some counseling), but it was too late: he started stalking me and I had to call in the authorities.
I hate when that happens.
EARLIER TODAY, I read the latest article in the OC Weekly (Sad Chronicle) about accused child molester Jeffrey Ray Nielsen, a prominent local Republican activist with close ties to Republican bigwigs like Dana Rohrabacher, Michael Schroeder, Scott Baugh, and Tom Fuentes.
According to the Weekly, back in 1996, then-25-year-old Nielsen was being mentored by the likes of Tom Fuentes. That, at any rate, is the impression left by letters printed by the Weekly and allegedly written at the time by Nielsen to a young boy in Virginia.
In a letter dated October, Nielsen wrote:
