Has American Democracy died an electronic death in Ohio 2005's referenda defeats?
by Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman
November 11, 2005

While debate still rages over Ohio's stolen presidential election of 2004, the impossible outcomes of key 2005 referendum issues may have put an electronic nail through American democracy.

Once again, the Buckeye state has hosted an astonishing display of electronic manipulation that calls into question the sanctity of America's right to vote, and to have those votes counted in this crucial swing state.

The controversy has been vastly enhanced due to the simultaneous installation of new electronic voting machines in nearly half the state's 88 counties, machines the General Accountability Office has now confirmed could be easily hacked by a very small number of people.

Last year, the US presidency was decided here. This year, a bond issue and four hard-fought election reform propositions are in question.

Issue One on Ohio's 2005 ballot was a controversial $2 billion "Third Frontier" proposition for state programs ostensibly meant to create jobs and promote high tech industry. Because some of the money may seem destined for stem cell research, Issue One was bitterly opposed by the Christian Right, which distributed leaflets against it.

The Issue was pushed by a Taft Administration wallowing in corruption. Governor Bob Taft recently pleaded guilty to misdemeanors stemming from golf outings he took with Tom Noe, the infamous Toledo coin dealer who has taken $4 million or more from the state. Taft entrusted Noe with some $50 million in investments for the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation, from which some $12 million is now missing. Noe has been charged with federal money laundering violations on behalf of the Bush-Cheney campaign. Taft's public approval ratings in Ohio are currently around 15%.

Despite public fears the bond issue could become a glorified GOP slush fund, Issue One was supported by organized labor. A poll run on the front page of the Columbus Dispatch on Sunday, November 6, showed Issue One passing with 53% of the vote. Official tallies showed Issue One passing with 54% of the vote.

The polling used by the Dispatch had wrapped up the Thursday before the Tuesday election. Its precision on Issue One was consistent with the Dispatch's historic polling abilities, which have been uncannily accurate for decades. This poll was based on 1872 registered Ohio voters, with a margin of error at plus/minus 2.5 percentage points and a 95% confidence interval. The Issue One outcome would appear to confirm the Dispatch polling operation as the state's gold standard.

But Issues 2-5 are another story.

The Dispatch's Sunday headline showed "3 issues on way to passage." The headline referred to Issues One, Two and Three. As mentioned, the poll was dead-on accurate for Issue One.

Issues Two-Five were meant to reform Ohio's electoral process, which has been under intense fire since 2004. The issues were very heavily contested. They were backed by Reform Ohio Now, a well-funded bi-partisan statewide effort meant to bring some semblance of reliability back to the state's vote count. Many of the state's best-known moderate public figures from both sides of the aisle were prominent in the effort. Their effort came largely in response to the stolen 2004 presidential vote count that gave George W. Bush a second term and led to U.S. history's first Congressional challenge to the seating of a state's delegation to the Electoral College.

Issue Two was designed to make it easier for Ohioans to vote early, by mail or in person. By election day, much of what it proposed was already put into law by the state legislature. Like Issue One, it was opposed by the Christian Right. But it had broad support from a wide range of Ohio citizen groups. In a conversation the day before the vote, Bill Todd, a primary official spokesperson for the opposition to Issues Two through Five, told attorney Cliff Arnebeck that he believed Issues Two and Three would pass.

The November 6 Dispatch poll showed Issue Two passing by a vote of 59% to 33%, with about 8% undecided, an even broader margin than that predicted for Issue One.

But on November 8, the official vote count showed Issue Two going down to defeat by the astonishing margin of 63.5% against, with just 36.5% in favor. To say the outcome is a virtual statistical impossibility is to understate the case. For the official vote count to square with the pre-vote Dispatch poll, support for the Issue had to drop more than 22 points, with virtually all the undecideds apparently going into the "no" column.

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1559

American democracy is quite safe and well, thank you. John Kerry didn't get to create mischief since he clearly lost the presidency, and now Soros didn't get to manipulate the process. A good result for all.

Not sure what the article is about other than some insane ravings about a "stolen election," but it sounds like "Dispatch polls" are bogus.

When left wing crazies write a sloppy piece like this, I tend to wonder where they were when New Jersey democrats clearly broke the law in allowing the criminal Torricelli to drop out so that Lousenberg could take his place. It is an easy story to cover since it is real

American democracy died quite a while ago do to lack of interest by the American people. This is evident from the fact that we have only two important political parties, which represent the same narrow corporate interests and agree not to discuss any of the issues that actually affect the lives of ordinary people.

Funny how the left never mentions JFK in Illinois, or how Lyndon Johnson bought the votes for his first congressional seat. But that wouldn't fit their agenda, so it's swept under the rug.

Bush WON the election, fair and square. Kerry was a terrible candidate to begin with, and his loss was certianly no great surprise. Senators don't win Presidential elections (at least not since JFK) anymore, but governers do.

Anyone who thinks the voting system over the last two elections hasnt been proven to desperately need fixing has there head up there ass.

Whether or not the election was stolen is irrelevent--What you need to explain are the thousands of overhead votes for Bush and Kerry in multiple counties. Especially in Ohio. Also, what is unacceptable is people being called by there local voting registration centers and being told the incorrect address to vote at, and then not being allowed to vote later, as has happend en mass the last two elections. Oh, also, I dont think the company responsible for counting 80% of the votes in the US should donate to and purely support one candidate.

Bush WON the election, fair and square. Kerry was a terrible candidate to begin with, and his loss was certianly no great surprise.

Yea, fair and square: Kerry was a Flip-Floper! He didnt really do his duty in Nam! Im a war president, with war on my mind!

Only in america could you use this argument to say Kerry was terrible and Bush used fair and honest tactics to win.

Almost as honest as the phone calls made in Arizona claiming McCain had an illigatimet black daughter in 2000.

American democracy died quite a while ago do to lack of interest by the American people. This is evident from the fact that we have only two important political parties, which represent the same narrow corporate interests and agree not to discuss any of the issues that actually affect the lives of ordinary people.


Exactly Guido, and they've convinced some people that we have some form of Democracy left and not the Plutocracy that this actually is...

Funny how the left never mentions JFK in Illinois, or how Lyndon Johnson bought the votes for his first congressional seat. But that wouldn't fit their agenda, so it's swept under the rug.

Bush WON the election, fair and square. Kerry was a terrible candidate to begin with, and his loss was certianly no great surprise. Senators don't win Presidential elections (at least not since JFK) anymore, but governers do.


So, you believe in what you call conspiracy theories when it comes to Democrats rigging elections, but when Reublicans do it it's all "fair and square"???


I see...

Anyone who thinks the voting system over the last two elections hasnt been proven to desperately need fixing has there head up there ass.

Whether or not the election was stolen is irrelevent--What you need to explain are the thousands of overhead votes for Bush and Kerry in multiple counties. Especially in Ohio. Also, what is unacceptable is people being called by there local voting registration centers and being told the incorrect address to vote at, and then not being allowed to vote later, as has happend en mass the last two elections. Oh, also, I dont think the company responsible for counting 80% of the votes in the US should donate to and purely support one candidate.


Or that exit polls were off by miles..

The reason you see people saying things like we see here is because they know that by sweeping it under the rug the truth will never come out, the truth is their enemy.

Black people in Florida not being allowed to vote because Bush's cronies labeled them as felons in the 2000 election is ok too, as long as it's the neo-cons doing the fixing.

So, you believe in what you call conspiracy theories when it comes to Democrats rigging elections, but when Reublicans do it it's all "fair and square"???


I see...

I'm not talking about any conspiracies. I'm talking about well known and documented history. Don't take my word for it, look it up yourself.

I'm not talking about any conspiracies. I'm talking about well known and documented history. Don't take my word for it, look it up yourself.

And what took place in Florida and Ohio is well documented as well, it's fresh in our minds, nobody doubts a bastard like Johnson would rig an election, just as people like Bush wouldn't hesitate to cheat either..

And what took place in Florida and Ohio is well documented as well, it's fresh in our minds, nobody doubts a bastard like Johnson would rig an election, just as people like Bush wouldn't hesitate to cheat either..

Yes, it is, and it's a good thing the democrats weren't able to mess the election up with their shenanigans.

If the Democrats are so good at fixing elections, doesn't it stand to reason they might have won an important one recently?
The fact that we have voting machines all over the country, and the only people who have seen the source code running the software work for a company that donates heavily to the GOP, should concern anybody who isn't devoutly Republican.
Although, it should concern the devout Republicans too. Once one party has managed to rig elections to get all the votes, they don't need to pander to their base anymore either.

If the Democrats are so good at fixing elections, doesn't it stand to reason they might have won an important one recently?
The fact that we have voting machines all over the country, and the only people who have seen the source code running the software work for a company that donates heavily to the GOP, should concern anybody who isn't devoutly Republican.
Although, it should concern the devout Republicans too. Once one party has managed to rig elections to get all the votes, they don't need to pander to their base anymore either.

That's the point. They're NOT really good at it, because they keep getting stopped.

I think we need to have constant monitoring of the programmers that wrote the code for the machines, because some of them are likely democrats and will sneak stuff in there to guarantee a democrat victory. See how foolish that sounds?

It wouldn't be - IF there had been allegations of Democratic election-tampering in two successive elections decided by about 1% of the vote, one of which had to be called by the Supreme Court.

Any form of electronic voting is a move in the wrong direction because it is impossible to verify the votes later. It is impossible to detect tampering too.

If democracy is going to survive in America, we need paper ballots that can be recounted and verified later if necessary.

double post

Any form of electronic voting is a move in the wrong direction because it is impossible to verify the votes later. It is impossible to detect tampering too.

If democracy is going to survive in America, we need paper ballots that can be recounted and verified later if necessary.
Agreed.

That's the point. They're NOT really good at it, because they keep getting stopped.

I think we need to have constant monitoring of the programmers that wrote the code for the machines, because some of them are likely democrats and will sneak stuff in there to guarantee a democrat victory. See how foolish that sounds?

Well, it's not very foolish at all actually hadit. Because nobody knows how these voting machines work, except the company that creates them, any criticism is valid.
Really, it's not partisan issue when you get down to it. The source code behind the voting machines, and everything about how they work, should be available to the public. If we are going to live in a democracy, it is essential to be very open about how our voting process works.
Electronic voting can work, but only if it's done in such a way that the process can be reviewed and verified.

I personally think both parties want to obfusicate the voting process though. It's the only explanation for why, in national elections, we seem to be unable to get exact counts of votes.
For instance, a bank never tells you that you have around 100 dollars in your account. They always know, down to the penny, don't they? That same technology could be applied to voting if the political will existed.