Voting Machines

Problems with voting machines remain widespread, including equipment malfunction, shortages, hacking, and non-verifiability. Sixteen states have no paper record for the majority of ballots cast in their elections, which makes verifiable elections impossible. Recounts have historically exposed the electronic machines’ abilities to flip or lose votes. Private companies, who often have connections to prominent political candidates, own the source codes and control most of the programming for these machines that determine our elections. The use of electronic voting machines has increased since the passage of the Help America Vote Act in 2002, despite compelling testimony from computer scientists about the machines’ security vulnerabilities.

DIEBOLD: Return California's Money!

As A Result Of The California Secretary Of State's Findings and Diebold/Premier's Own Admissions That Its Voting Systems Do Not Meet Federal Standards, Velvet Revolution Calls on the Company to Return the Well Over $100 Million in Taxpayer Funds Spent by Californians on Failed, Faulty Voting System Hardware an

From: 
Velvet Revolution

Organize or attend a Voter Assembly in your community on November 7th!

This election is being threatened by unverifiable voting machines, voter ID laws that disenfranchise millions of eligible voters, restrictive election laws for third party candidates and voters who wish to vote early, as well as many other forms of voter suppression that we are likely to witness on November 6 and the weeks leading up to the election.

Sign the Pledge of Action!

Stop vote-flipping in West Virginia


From: 
No More Stolen Elections! & TrueVote.US
What's happening: 

With every passing day there are more reports of machines flipping the vote: Of voters going in to the polling place, selecting the candidates of their choice, and of the voting machines then wrongly recording their votes for other candidates.


So far, all the reports of vote flipping have been of votes changing from Obama to other candidates, or from Democrats to Republicans. Click here to take action.


This is reminiscent of the experience in Sarasota, FL in 2006. When the voting was completed and they counted the vote, authorities discovered that the vote flipping was just the tip of the iceberg. The Sarasota machines were iVotronics -- the same machines now being used in West Virginia -- had 18,000 blank ballots. This was enough to change the outcome of the election. Election officials were unable to reconstruct the race. For more on this see "Vote Flipping with the iVotronic the Florida 2006 Experience" at
http://truevote.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=363 which includes a comment by an election integrity advocate in Sarasota as well as links to reports, including from the U.S. GAO, on the 18,000 lost votes.

Video the Vote

From: 
VideotheVote.org
What's happening: 

Take a look at this excellent video, and then, take action . . .

Organize a Voter Assembly in your community!

Date: 
November 7, 2012 - 12:00pm - 9:00pm

This election is being threatened by unverifiable voting machines, voter ID laws that disenfranchise millions of eligible voters, restrictive election laws for third party candidates and voters who wish to vote early, as well as many other forms of voter suppression that we are likely to witness on and before November 6.  Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004 have taught us that our elections can be stolen if we do not act.

Event Contact
First Name: 
Jolie
Last Name: 
Lizotte
Phone: 
920-312-4246

TRUTHOUT: Lack of transparency in exit polling makes it more difficult to know when an election is rigged

November 9, 2012
By: 
Victoria Collier
news photo

 

Stealing your vote is easier than ever now that the media has decided it can't afford the exit polling that helped track irregular ballot counts in more than a third of the states. Here's why it's important, and what you can do.

The news that America's mainstream media has cancelled exit polling in 19 states, means that insider election theft this November is now even harder to track, and therefore easier to get away with - something that scarcely seemed possible.

We CAN do better

November 7, 2012
By: 
No More Stolen Elections
news photo
 
From an election protection stand point, what did we witness yesterday? 
  • We saw the culmination of the most expensive campaign season in U.S. history, with over $5.8 billion spent to influence the electoral process
     

BRADBLOG: Voter films touch-screen voting machine that flips the vote from Obama to Romney

November 6, 2012
By: 
Brad Friedman

This seems to be the first official video of touch-screen vote-flipping 2012, reportedly captured today in Pennsylvania, where elected officials so disrespect their own voters that they still force almost all of them to vote on these 100% unverifiable systems...

No More Stolen Election's Sarah Manski and other election integrity activists speak about the risks of a stolen election

November 6, 2012
By: 
Free Press

At a Washington Press Club news conference, Nov. 5, 2012, FreePress.org Senior Editor Harvey Wasserman, Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein, NoMoreStolenElections.org Communication Director Sarah Manski, election fraud whistleblower Clint Curtis, and Lori Grace, founder of the Grace Institute for Democracy and Election Integrity, lay out the risks of a 2012 stolen election and what is being done to keep it from happening.

SALON: Is the GOP Stealing Ohio?

November 5, 2012
By: 
Brad Friedman
news photo

Last week, Bob Fitrakis and Gerry Bello at FreePress.org reported an important story concerning what they described as “uncertified ‘experimental’ software patches” being installed at the last minute on electronic vote tabulation systems in 39 Ohio counties.

FREE PRESS: Why we must fight to prevent elections from being stolen through disenfranchisement and machine fraud

November 3, 2012
By: 
Joan Brunwasser, Sally Castleman, Victoria Collier, Bob Fitrakis, Lori Grace, Emily Levy, Mark Crispin Miller, Greg Palast, Jonathan Simon and Harvey Wasserman
news photo

Originally published October 31, 2012

With election day less than a week away, the spectre of another stolen election is upon us. The airwaves and internet are at last filling with discussion of this possibility.

When the first stories were broken by a handful of us after the fiascos of Florida 2000 and Ohio 2004, there was a stunning silence, followed by a wide range of attacks. Today the warnings about the possibility of another election theft are taken with increasing gravity.

The question is deep and profound, with a huge body of research and writing surrounding it.

But among the many concerns, two are key: massive disenfranchisement, and manipulation of the electronic vote count.

DISENFRANCHISEMENT:

FREE PRESS: Ohio's voting machines have "experimental patch" installed week before election

October 31, 2012
By: 
Bob Fitrakis and Gerry Bello
news photo

Why did the Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted's office, in an end run around Ohio election law, have "experimental" software patches installed on vote couhttp://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2012/4766nting tabulators in up to 39 Ohio counties? Voting rights activists are concerned that these uncertified and untested software patches may alter the election results.

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR: Electronic voting machines to be used in the 2012 elections can be hacked

October 26, 2012
By: 
Mark Clayton
news photo

Rapid advances in the development of cyberweapons and malicious software mean that electronic-voting machines used in the 2012 election could be hacked, potentially tipping the presidential election or a number of other races.

Since the machines are not connected to the Internet, any hack would not be a matter of someone sneaking through cyberspace to change ballots. Rather, the concern is that an individual hacker, a partisan group, or even a nation state could infect voting machines by gaining physical access to them or by targeting the companies that service them.

NYT: Ohio Secretary of State discovers that all of Ohio's voting systems are easily corrupted

October 26, 2012
By: 
Bob Driehaus
news photo

Originally published on December 15, 2007

 

CINCINNATI — All five voting systems used in Ohio, a state whose electoral votes narrowly swung two elections toward President Bush, have critical flaws that could undermine the integrity of the 2008 general election, a report commissioned by the state’s top elections official has found.

NYT: Voting machine industry plays large role in the Election Assistance Commission

October 16, 2012
By: 
Adam Cohen
news photo

The much-delayed work of setting federal standards for electronic voting machines is speeding up, and there is reason for concern. Voting machine companies and their supporters have been given a large say in the process, while advocates for voters, including those who insist on the use of voter-verified paper receipts, have been pushed to the margins. Election officials and machine makers may be betting that after the presidential election, ordinary Americans have lost interest in the mechanics of the ballot. But Americans do care, and it is unlikely that they will be satisfied by a process in which special interests dominate, or by a result that does not ensure vote totals that can be trusted.

PACIFIC COAST BUSINESS TIMES: Computer science professors and students hack California's voting machines

October 16, 2012
By: 
Stephen Nellis
news photo

Originally published August 20, 2007

When news broke that California's electronic voting machines were vulnerable to cyber-attack, it was a team of computer scientists from the University of California, Santa Barbara, who hacked one of the systems, eventually leading California Secretary of State Debra Bowen to bar use of the machine in state elections.

"We tried to violate their security any way we could," Giovanni Vigna said of the machines, manufactured by Sequoia and until recently in use in Ventura County. "We successfully compromised the system."

BRAD BLOG: Germany's highest court rules electronic voting unconstitutional

October 15, 2012
By: 
Brad Friedman
news photo

Originally published on March 4, 2009

A finding by the "highest court" in Germany has found electronic voting to be unconstitutional...

Germany's highest court has ruled that the use of electronic voting in the last general election was unconstitutional.
..
September's upcoming elections looks set to see a return to the more traditional pencil and paper countrywide.

SALON: Diebold voting machines can be hacked by remote control

October 15, 2012
By: 
Brad Friedman

Originally published on September 27, 2011

 

 

It could be one of the most disturbing e-voting machine hacks to date.

SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN: Voting technologies require many changes before they can be reliable for voters

October 15, 2012
By: 
Ted Selker
news photo

Originally published in October 2004

The attached PDF is an article about the complexities of voting and the potential for electronic fraud in voting technologies.

 

COMMON DREAMS: Bain Capital owns electronic voting machines that will count many of Ohio's ballots

October 14, 2012
By: 
Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman
news photo

Electronic voting machines owned by Mitt Romney's business buddies and set to count the votes in Cincinnati could decide the 2012 election.

The narrative is already being hyped by the corporate media. As Kelly O'Donnell reported for NBC's Today Show on Monday, October 8, Ohio's Hamilton County is "ground zero" for deciding who holds the White House come January, 2013.

O'Donnell pointed out that no candidate has won the White House without carrying Ohio since John Kennedy did it in 1960. No Republican has ever won the White House without Ohio's electoral votes.

WSJ: Virginia votes will be tallied on wireless voting machines

September 26, 2012
By: 
Joel Schectman
news photo

In this November’s presidential election, Virginia voters will cast ballots on machines that use wireless technology state lawmakers barred five years ago to protect voting machines from hackers. Continued reliability and security concerns over electronic voting are not unique to Virginia, or to machines that use wireless technology, but the case illustrates the credibility issues that have plagued electronic voting machines in use across the country in the aftermath of the messy 2000 presidential election, when the federal government mandated changes to election systems and processes.

WSJ: Many states still do not require a paper trail for touch screen machines

September 14, 2012
By: 
Joel Schectman
news photo

A decade after Dana Debeauvoir helped change Travis County, Texas to an all-electronic voting system she still expects to be falsely accused of fixing the coming election, just as she had in the last two presidential races. The clerk, who has administered voting for 25 years in the county that includes Austin, says the public has remained mistrustful of the ballot system, where voters pick candidates directly from a computer screen, without marking a piece of paper. “There have been so many hard feelings,” says Debeauvoir. “You get people saying ‘I know you have been flipping votes.’”

The ISTHMUS covers Hand Count Votes Now!

July 19, 2012
By: 
Judith Davidoff
news photo

In a few weeks, a group of volunteers will don latex gloves, huddle around a table in downtown Madison under the watchful eyes of election clerks and start counting — by hand — a select group of ballots cast in the June 5 recall elections.

Mary Magnuson, an electoral reform activist, submitted an open records request to the Madison city clerk on June 14 asking to inspect "any and all ballots," including optical scanned ballots and absentee ballots, that were cast in Wards 16, 19, 39, 40 and 100 in the recall election against Gov. Scott Walker. She also asked to inspect the tapes used in the scanners and any inspectors' reports prepared by poll workers.

USA TODAY: Electronic voting is the real threat to elections

June 6, 2012
By: 
Editorial Board of USA Today
news photo

Imagine how easy voting would be if Americans could cast ballots the same way they buy songs from iTunes or punch in a PIN code to check out at the grocery store: You could click on a candidate from a home computer or use a touch screen device at the local polling place.

It's not entirely a fantasy. In many states, some voters can already do both. The process is seductively simple, but it's also shockingly vulnerable to problems from software failure to malicious hacking. While state lawmakers burn enormous energy in a partisan fight over in-person vote fraud, which is virtually nonexistent, they're largely ignoring far likelier ways votes can be lost, stolen or changed.

How? Sometimes, technology or the humans running it simply fail:

NEWSWEEK: Serious doubts remain about the 2000 Florida recount's legitimacy

May 13, 2012
By: 
Michael Isikoff
news photo

(originally published on November 18th, 2001)

After spending nearly $1 million, a consortium of big news organizations last week rendered what it once thought would be final word on last year's bitterly contested Florida recount.

The decision: a split verdict.

NYT: Excessive over votes recorded by electronic machines in New York results in thousands of lost votes

December 6, 2011
By: 
Sam Roberts
news photo

-As many as 60,000 of the votes cast in New York State elections last year were voided because people unintentionally cast their ballots for more than one candidate, according to a study being released this week. The excess-voting was highest in predominantly black and Hispanic neighborhoods, including two Bronx election districts where 40 percent of the votes for governor were disqualified.

-The study, by the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University Law School, blamed software used with new electronic optical-scan voting machines as well as ambiguous instructions for disenfranchising tens of thousands of voters. The old mechanical lever-operated machines did not allow votes for more than one candidate for the same office.

NYT: Oregon tests if the iPad could replace voting machines for disabled voters

November 16, 2011
By: 
Katherine Seelye
news photo

Could the iPad someday supplant the voting machine?

Oregon last week became the first state in the country to use iPads to allow people with disabilities to vote, and it intends to use them again for another election in January. Several other states are expected to follow suit with iPads or other tablets, possibly as early as for next year’s presidential election.

RADIO NETHERLANDS: World watches as Dutch vote with pencil

June 7, 2010
By: 
Radio Netherlands

This Wednesday, Dutch voters will go to the polls to elect a new parliament. Each voter will enter the voting booth, unfold a large piece of paper, and use a red pencil to check a box next to their preferred candidate. Not one voting machine will be used. The Dutch returned to voting with pencils because computers can't guarantee the privacy of voters. The return to voting with a pencil has attracted interest from democracies around the world. The Netherlands is the first country to go back to voting with paper ballots, after making the transition to computers. Other countries are wondering if they should follow the Dutch example.

Not used to counting ballots

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD: Philippine Elections Rife with Violence, Irregularities and Voting System Malfunctions

May 20, 2010
By: 
Paige Cram

Seven members of the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) observed pre-electoral and election-day conditions during the Philippines’ historic election last week and found widespread irregularities, a high potential for fraud, voter machine breakdowns, military intimidation and a deadly gun battle inside the poll. NLG observers joined over 80 other observers from 12 different countries as members of the People International Observer Mission.

More Info: 

Contact: Paige Cram, Communications Coordinator, National Lawyers Guild, communications@nlg.org, 212-679-5100, ext. 15

SEATTLE TIMES: Foreign electronic voting systems similar to the US systems are suspected of being tampered

March 25, 2009
By: 
Greg Gordon
news photo

WASHINGTON - The CIA, which has been monitoring foreign countries' use of electronic-voting systems, has reported apparent vote-rigging schemes in Venezuela, Macedonia and Ukraine and a raft of concerns about the machines' vulnerability to tampering.

Appearing last month before a U.S. Election Assistance Commission field hearing in Orlando, Fla., a CIA cybersecurity expert suggested that Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez and his allies fixed a 2004 election recount, an assertion that could further roil U.S. relations with the Latin leader.

NYT: The largest tester of electronic voting machines banned from testing after they failed to prove that they conducted all of the required tests

January 4, 2007
By: 
Christopher Drew
news photo

A laboratory that has tested most of the nation’s electronic voting systems has been temporarily barred from approving new machines after federal officials found that it was not following its quality-control procedures and could not document that it was conducting all the required tests.

The company, Ciber Inc. of Greenwood Village, Colo., has also come under fire from analysts hired by New York State over its plans to test new voting machines for the state. New York could eventually spend $200 million to replace its aging lever devices.

SALON: Princeton University study demonstrates how Diebold's machines can be hacked

September 13, 2006
By: 
Brad Friedman
news photo

Having reported extensively on the security concerns that surround the use of electronic voting machines, I anxiously awaited the results of a new study of a Diebold touch-screen voting system, conducted by Princeton University. The Princeton computer scientists obtained the Diebold system with cooperation from VelvetRevolution, an umbrella organization of more than 100 election integrity groups, which I co-founded a few months after the 2004 election. We acquired the Diebold system from an independent source and handed it over to university scientists so that, for the first time, they could analyze the hardware, software and firmware of the controversial voting system.

NYT: North Carolina's election machine blunder

January 18, 2005
By: 
Adam Cohen
news photo

The November election may feel like ancient history, but it is still going on in North Carolina. The state has been unable to swear in an agriculture commissioner because a single malfunctioning electronic voting machine lost more ballots than the number of votes that separate the two candidates. The State Board of Elections, the candidates and the public are sharply divided on how to proceed. The mess North Carolina finds itself in is a cautionary tale about the perils of relying on electronic voting that does not produce a paper record.

WSJ: Diebold security flaws emerge as electronic voting spreads

October 25, 2004
By: 
Anne Marie Squeo
news photo

THE HANGING CHADS and lost ballots of the 2000 presidential-election debacle made it seem a foregone conclusion that modernized, electronic-voting machines would be widely embraced the next time around. And so they will be. But paranoia about stolen elections and security flaws has made Nov. 2 a make-or-break event for the fledgling industry and its biggest player, Diebold Inc.

SOJOURNERS: The e-voting system is dangerously vulnerable to fraud

September 1, 2004
By: 
David Batstone

Florida, 2000 presidential election—the vote count long will be recalled as a low point in U.S. democratic politics.

The hue and cry of electoral corruption and a stolen election compelled the U.S. Congress to act. Boldly, it committed $3.9 billion in matching federal funds to assist states in the transition toward digital voting systems. Here, under the flag of the Help America Vote Act, was the answer for hanging chads.

Remarkably, about 30 percent of the electorate—50 million voters or so—will submit a ballot in the coming November elections using paperless machines. Be worried. The e-voting system in place is dangerously vulnerable to fraud.

NATION: How the 2004 election could be stolen

August 16, 2004
news photo

On November 2 millions of Americans will cast their votes for President in computerized voting systems that can be rigged by corporate or local-election insiders. Some 98 million citizens, five out of every six of the roughly 115 million who will go to the polls, will consign their votes into computers that unidentified computer programmers, working in the main for four private corporations and the officials of 10,500 election jurisdictions, could program to invisibly falsify the outcomes.

HARPER'S: A citizens' guide to hacking the 2004 election

April 1, 2004
By: 
Brendan Koerner
news photo

That serious problems plague our new, computerized voting machines--on which 29 percent of U.S. voters are poised to cast their votes in November--has been apparent ever since $3.9 billion in federal funding for the machines was made available in 2002, in the aftermath of Bush v. Gore. In the years since, report after report has cautioned that the machines lack the security and robustness necessary to withstand the assaults of hackers or unscrupulous technicians. But no one seems likely to stop the rollout of the machines, more than 50,000 of which have been purchased by states.

HUMANIST: Touchscreen voting machines leave a paperless trail in districts where the polls do not match the results

January 1, 2004
By: 
Michael I. Niman
news photo

Manipulating election votes, the act of stealing an American election, used to sound far fetched. While many people weren't always confident that voters would make fully informed decisions, it was always assumed that each vote would at least be counted. Then came Florida--and the whole quaint notion of elections got tossed out the window. The final 2000 election recount showed that George W. Bush didn't win but he came close enough to move in for the kill.

Voter advocacy groups look at how prepared states are to ensure that our votes are counted

October 17, 2012
Pamela Smith, Michelle Mulder, Susannah Goodman

This report reviews how prepared each state is to ensure that every eligible voter can vote, and that every
vote is counted as cast. Because we cannot predict where machines will fail during the upcoming national
election, every state should be as prepared as possible for system failures.

The Verified Voting Foundation, the Rutgers Law School Newark Constitutional Litigation Clinic and
Common Cause surveyed states’ voting equipment and ranked the states according to their preparedness.
The rankings are based on how states laws and practices compare to a set of best practices already being
used in some places.

BRENNAN CENTER: Electronic voting machines record higher rates of residual votes among poor and racial minority populations

October 16, 2012
Lawrence Norden, Jeremy M. Creelan, David Kimball, Whitney Quesenbery

Originally published August 28, 2006

On August 28, 2006, the Brennan Center released a report and policy proposals regarding the performance of various voting systems and their ability to allow voters to cast valid ballots that reflect their intended choices without undue delay or burdens. This system quality is known as usability. Following several high-profile controversies in the last few elections including most notoriously, the 2000 controversy over the butterfly ballot in Palm Beach voting system usability is a subject of utmost concern to voters and election officials.

UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT: ES&S optical scan machines prone to loss of data due to battery failures

October 8, 2010
Tigran Antonyan, Nicolas Nicolaou, Alexander A. Shvartsman, Therese Smith

Abstract

Optical scan (OS) voting systems play an increasing role in the United States elections, with over 40 states deploying such systems. The AccuVote optical scanners (AV-OS) manufactured by ES&S account for over 20% of all OS systems. OS systems typically use removable media (cards) to provide election-specific programming to the scanners and to convey precinct election results for central tabulation. Several reports document occurrences of AV-OS memory card failures, with up to 15% of all cards failing in some cases.

PEW CENTER: Higher rates of residual votes found in Florida among African-American, Hispanic, and senior voters

October 1, 2010
Paul Gronke, Charles Stewart III, James Hicks

This report describes a project that examined the residual vote rates in the state of Florida’s 2008 presidential preference primary, taking advantage of a state law that, for a time, required all jurisdictions to report over- and under-votes at the precinct level.

UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT: Statewide audit of optical scan machines

November 18, 2009
Tigran Antonyan, Seda Davtyan, Sotirios Kentros, Aggelos Kiayias, Laurent Michel, Nicolas Nicolaou, Alexander Russell, and Alexander A. Shvartsman

Abstract

Document: 

FRIEDMAN: Democracy's Gold Standard

September 14, 2009
Brad Friedman

Last March, the country's highest court found that secret, computerized vote counting was unconstitutional. Unfortunately, the country was Germany, and the Constitution violated by e-voting systems was the one that the U.S. wrote and insisted Germans ratify as part of their terms of surrender following WWII.

Paul Lehto, a U.S. election attorney and Constitutional rights expert, summarized the German court's unambiguous, landmark finding:

"No 'specialized technical knowledge' can be required of citizens to vote or to monitor vote counts."
There is a "constitutional requirement of a publicly observed count."

Prospects for Participatory Democracy in the U.S.A

December 1, 2008
Ben Manski

Location: Barcelona, Spain Presented at the International Seminar on Participatory Democracy "Participatory Democracy. Political Actors and Social Movements" Abstract Diagnosing Democratic Collapse The U.S. political system suffers from a potentially fatal condition, a malady that can be diagnosed as "Democratic Collapse." The causes of this collapse are known: First, the consolidation of corporate control of the establishment political parties. Second, the sacrilegious enshrinement of corporations as persons under law, entitled to constitutional protections against citizens and governments.

Additional Information: 

Ben Manski is a Fellow with the Liberty Tree Foundation for the Democratic Revolution in its Local Democracy and Democratizing Education program areas. He served as Co-Chair of the Green Party of the United States from 2001 through 2004, and was active in the U.S. student, labor, peace, and environmental movements throughout the 1990s. Ben has a degree in law from the University of Wisconsin, and has written on the corporatization of higher education in the United States.

NICHOLS: Special Report on the 2008 Elections

November 5, 2008
John Nichols

This victory alone is not the change we seek. It is only the chance for us to make that change.
And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were. ~ Barack Obama
<

~ NOVEMBER 5, 2008 ~

Additional Information: 

John Nichols is the Washington correspondent for The Nation magazine.
He is also a member of the Liberty Tree Board of Directors.

Advancement Project: Several Battleground States Not Prepared for Voter Turnout

October 9, 2008

Our recent Action Alert on fighting shortages of volunteers and voting machines focuses on the election officials and administrators of particular states that have been identified as likely problems. Advancement Project has released a poignant study detailing the failures of 7 specific swing states that will not have adequate capacity in terms of voting machines and volunteers to meet the expected record voter turnout for the upcoming Presidential election. Their release of this information follows....

SEVERAL BATTLEGROUND STATES NOT PREPARED FOR VOTER TURNOUT

Additional Information: 

For more information, feel free to contact Sabrina Williams (202/728-9557 or 305/904-3960) or Tia Gordon (202/728-9557 or 202/906-0149)

Liberty Tree Panel at Claim Democracy Conference

November 1, 2007
Brandon Lacy Campos, David Cobb, and Patrick Barrett

Click here to view the video:

2007 Claim Democracy Conference

MANSKI & PECK: Corporatization: An internal clash of civilizations

January 1, 2006
Ben Manski and John Peck

Hurricane Katrina destroyed as yet uncounted lives, communities, and ecosystems. The hurricane also destroyed popular visions of the US state, sweeping away the last vestiges of federal paternalism, revealing the costs of corporatization in its wake. Years of budget cuts, cronyism, and corporatization rendered the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) incompetent to manage this greatest of national emergencies. Now, after the flooding of the Gulf coast, the words of prominent corporate ideologue Grover Norquist are widely perceived to carry a still more sinister tone: “My goal is to cut government in half in twenty-five years; to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub”(quoted by Dreyfuss, 2001).

Additional Information: 

Ben Manski is Executive Director of Liberty Tree Foundation for the Democratic Revolution. John Peck is Director of Family Farm Defenders.

How to Organize a Voter Assembly Manual

November 7, 2012

I want to organize a Voter Assembly in my community, where do I start?

Choose a Good Location and Time

Accessible, public spaces outside (parks, prominent intersections, or in front of civic buildings) are usually a good bet. If you need to use an indoor space then an accessible, public space such as a community center would be ideal.

Voter Bill of Rights

September 26, 2009

From unreliable electronic voting machines and millions of uncounted ballots, to partisan election officials and 10-hour waits at the polls, it is clear that our electoral system is in dire need of an overhaul. To build a more just, secure, and robust democracy, please support the following 10-point Voter Bill of Rights:

1. Pass a Constitutional Amendment Confirming the Right to Vote

Syndicate content