California disappears the rules

From Black Box Voting:
You are the owners of your government. One thing you should attend to very closely when overseeing elections is any item that is missing.
For example, the California document called “Procedures for Approving, Certifying, Reviewing, Modifying and Decertifying Voting Systems” has disappeared from the secretary of state’s Web site — a remarkable coincidence, since many citizens are looking for it.
They want to know how it is that the Secretary of State can claim procedures were followed, given the sorry state of security and accuracy in many of the voting systems now being used in California.
When Emery County Clerk Bruce Funk allowed Black Box Voting to examine the Diebold TSx voting system, security flaws characterized as “the nuclear bomb” for electronic voting machines were discovered by Black Box Voting’s consultants.
Jody Holder, the lead plaintiff in the Voter Action lawsuit in California, is one of the citizens who’s been hunting for information on why the rules and regs about this have become more elusive. He’s perplexed. (more on lawsuit:
“I have a screen shot of Secretary of State Bill Jones’ website showing a link to the Procedures. The link to the Procedures was moved from the website page concerning Certification of Voting Systems to the Publications page last fall. Within the last month the link was still there and working. Today the link is still there but takes you to a ‘404 Error’ page,” Holder writes.
Well, somebody disappeared it. — a site that retains copies of old Web pages even if they are removed from the Internet — shows a version in 2002, with a change made in 2003, and shows the existence of the document in six months intervals after that. But click the links in — all are now missing.
Here is a copy of a public records request from California citizen Dan Ashby of Election Defense Alliance, as he engages California officials in a wrestling match over this issue:
Well first, citizens might find this document handy on August 9, when California holds its public comment session on Hart Intercivic voting machines and the activist-endorsed VotePad (more on this even here: – and if you plan on attending, Black Box Voting has compiled these rare documents, dozens of official manuals etc. on Hart Intercivic here: – )
(1) The machine or device and its software shall be suitable for the purpose for which it is intended;
(2) The system shall preserve the secrecy of the ballot; [current “VVPATs” do not]
(3) The system shall be safe from fraud or manipulation;
(4) The system shall be auditable for the purposes of an election recount or contest procedure;
(5) The system shall comply with all appropriate federal and California laws and regulations, [wait — how do the Diebold machines “comply with” the FEC standards?] and;
(6) The system shall have been certified, if applicable, by means of qualification testing by a Nationally Recognized Test Laboratory (NRTL) and shall meet or exceed the minimum requirements set forth in the Performance and Test Standards for Punch Card, Mark Sense, and Direct Recording Electronic Voting Systems, or in any successor voluntary standarddocument, developed and promulgated by the Federal Election Commission.
There are many other interesting bits, especially in light of the apparent non-existence of the service and repair logs requested by San Diego citizen Bruce Sims. Like this:
——————————————————————–———— quote: 1829. Log of Maintenance Performance means a written record which contains all information relating to performance of scheduled and non-scheduled maintenance requirements recommended by the vendor or manufacturer of such equipment and all service visits performed by vendor or manufacturer.
1830. Maintenance Log means a written record which contains all information relating to system testing, performance of scheduled and non-scheduled maintenance requirements recommended by the vendor or manufacturer of such equipment, and all service visits performed by vendor or manufacturer.
And this, given the fact that the scientists who examined the system for this report say they were not permitted to see a working model of the system:
——————————————————————–———— quote: (a) The applicant shall make a working model of the item under review available to the Secretary of State for the duration of the review.
The outstanding work of Jody Holder, Bruce Sims, Dan Ashby and others in California shows effective use of “judo” — using the weight of a big opponent against it. Citizens dealing with government corruption are fighting a David and Goliath battle, but David can flip Goliath using judo. The weight of the government is in its rules and regulations.
Find them. Use them strategically. And if you discover they

are missing, there’s probably something very useful in them.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.