What's really going down in California

From a reader:

CA’s Rethug SoS is trying to get Diebold machines certified by Feds!!!

He’s basically trying to do an end-run around California’s Election Reform Groups


McPherson’s office, rather than simply decertifying Diebold once and for all in California, has today decided instead to pass the buck back to the so-called Federal “Independent Testing Authority” (ITA). The ITA is a group of several companies chosen and paid for by the voting machine companies such as Diebold themselves, to test their equipment and software on behalf of the Federal Government. Those ITA labs then either certify the software and/or hardware or send it back to the company with the results of the failed tests kept confidential.

State Senator Debra Bowen (D-Redondo Beach) has been an outspoken critic of McPherson’s process for considering recertification of Diebold and has
otherwise been a watchdog on issues related to the quickly changing Electoral landscape in the Golden State. She released a statement to The BRAD BLOG late this
evening (complete statement posted at end of this article). Bowen is critical of
McPherson’s plan to “punt” the issue back to the Feds and says in her statement:

“The Secretary of State shouldn’t punt the decision about whether Diebold machines should be used to count ballots in California to the federal government and an ‘independent’ testing authority that’s financed by the voting machine vendors. That decision needs to be made in the open, right here in California.”

Here’s an article about the crooked “testing labs” that McPherson wants to leave CA certification up to.

The ITAs are hired by and paid by — the vendors. That is, when a vendor has a voting machine that they want certified, they find an ITA who is willing to certify the voting machine. Any memos about flaws that are discovered remain confidential. There is no requirement to disclose any problems that are found with the machines. In fact, the entire ITA report is considered proprietary information of the voting machine vendor. After all, they paid for it. This provides an incentive for ITAs to certify machines, to satisfy their clients.

Avi Rubin, the writer of this article, commends McPherson “for the dialogue that he opened up” about the ITAs. He must not know our POS SoS very well. Well Mr. Rubin, here is his consistent pattern: say one thing, but do another.

Example: Attend a meeting wherein the unscrupulous practices of these ITAs are exposed, then turn around and hire them.

0 thoughts on “What's really going down in California”

  1. Avi Ruben has straddled that fence more than a few times. When he conducted the test on Diebold’s touch screens that revealed stunning flaws and by and large helped advance election integrity research–he neglected to disclose his involvement with competitor “VoteHere” which raised quite a stink.

    I spent over a year researching and writing on the topic and Mark- you are my hero! Please visit my newly launched website http://www.whoscounting.net
    (unsure of which code to use here, cut paste if needed)
    It is 16 chapters of all things electoral and I’d recommend the Technology and the Companies chapters to start perusing.
    The 2006 clock is ticking terribly loudly and we really need armies of activists to help guard the guards before hand.

    And, lastly– Where is Kevin Shelley? Try to find one word about him since his “resignation”.
    Would love to know…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *