Invisible Ballots
A video on all-electronic voting
Check showings

TrueVoteMD endorsed by Maryland Common Cause, MD Sierra Club, MD Business Leaders for Sensible Priorities, Baltimore Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance, Southern Maryland Council for the Blind, MD Populist Party, MD Green Party, Republican Women of Anne Arundel County, Greenbelt City Council and Takoma Park City Council

Take Action

2. An Open Letter to: House and Senate Ways and Means Committee

Below is a letter that you can send to Attorney General J. Joseph Curran, Jr.

You can send the letter ‘as is’, but please do add a few lines about you and your views. You can also change the subject if you would like. When you are finished, click on the Send button.

To:

Attorney General J. Joseph Curran, Jr.

Cc:

Governor Robert Ehrlich

Subject:

Suggestions: "Please Protect My Vote!", "We need a Voter-Verified Paper Audit Trail!", "Don't let Maryland become the Florida of 2004!", etc.

Dear Mr. Curran,

Type your (optional) personal message here.

Please don't let Maryland become the Florida of 2004. I urge you to take quick action to secure the right of Maryland voters like me to a voter-verified paper ballot in time for the November 2004 election.

Numerous independent computer scientists and newspaper editors around the nation have warned elected officials such as yourself that secure elections, accurate vote counts, and meaningful recounts are simply not possible with the current Diebold touchscreen voting machines in use across Maryland. Security, accuracy, meaningful recounts -- and voter confidence in the legitimacy of democratic governance -- are achievable, but only with voter-verified paper audit trails (VVPAT).

And now we know that Diebold, with the assistance of the Maryland State Board of Elections (SBE), used uncertified GEMS 1.18.19 software in the Maryland primary which is illegal under Maryland law. While your office is tasked with defending the SBE, I am still counting on you to do your job enforcing Maryland law.

And, despite this rising tide of public and expert opinion, the Maryland State Board of Elections and Linda Lamone -- unlike their counterparts in other states -- have refused to act to protect the integrity of the vote. Yet, Linda Lamone has publicly acknowledged that:

(1) the Diebold machines only print a full day tally, not an individual vote, as required by applicable state law. Steve Manning, "Suit Planned Against use of Electronic Voting Machines," Wash. Times (Apr. 22, 2004);

(2) a VVPAT is "desirable" to protect the rights of Maryland voters. Editorial Page, "Touch-Screen Tuneups," Wash Post. (May 7, 2004) ("State Board of Elections administrator Linda H. Lamone told us that her office has been looking into a version of such technology, one that doesn't rely on paper printouts. 'Certainly, no one would contest it would be desirable,' Ms. Lamone said of ensuring an audit trail.") And that,

(3) the problem can be fixed in time for the November 2004 elections. (Steven T. Dennis, "Diebold Critics Hail California Decision," The Gazette May 5, 2004. "Lamone said the state could use optical scan ballots in November's election.")

If this is the case, why does the state refuse to act? If the California Attorney General's office is launching a criminal investigation into Diebold, why won't the Maryland Attorney General do the same? Are the rights of Maryland voters any less important than those of California?

Here are two things you can do right now, today, to stand up for voters' rights:

(1) I urge you to quickly settle Schade v. Maryland Board of Elections -- the Maryland citizens' voting rights lawsuit that calls on the State Board of Elections to live up to its duty to administer "fair and equitable elections" and to ensure Maryland's voting systems are secure and reliable -- by fixing serious security flaws and technical glitches in Maryland's touchscreen voting machines, and by installing available, workable, and affordable safeguards, such as voter-verified paper ballots which would give us something required by state and federal law but unavailable from "black box" voting machines: the possibility of a true recount.

The Schade case is an extremely important voting rights case brought on behalf of registered Maryland voters and candidates for public office to ensure the integrity of the November 2004 elections, and to preserve public trust and confidence in the system by which Maryland voters will elect the next President of the United States. You can read more about the case online at TrueVoteMD.org -- or just take a look at a copy of the plaintiffs' complaint that your office is handling now.

(2) The Attorney General of California, your counterpart, is investigating the charge that Diebold installed uncertified software. I am writing to urgently request that you take the same responsible action. Maryland voters deserve no less.

I have watched as our State Board of Elections has turned a blind eye and a deaf ear to study after study clearly documenting "serious security flaws" in Maryland's voting system. I have watched as our SBE has been on high alert defending Diebold brand machines while it acts to dismiss, cover up, and deny the threat these machines pose to our democracy - a threat so real that the State of California has now banned the machines and is recommending that California Attorney General Bill Lockyer bring criminal charges against Diebold executives.

(3) Prosecute Diebold and take appropriate civil or criminal disciplinary action against those public officials who cooperated and then covered up the use of illegal uncertified vote counting software in our state.

Thank you for moving swiftly to secure voting rights in Maryland; I am a voter who will remember in November. But please help make that memory a pleasant one -- of a strong and vibrant democracy -- and not of a mucky Florida swamp.

p.s. For one source of information, please read the collection of New York Times editorials on "Making Votes Count," posted online at www.nytimes.com. The Times editorial stated on May 18, 2004 that Maryland voters are at risk without voter-verified paper ballots:

"Some states, like Georgia and Maryland, have made the mistake of buying all their machines from one manufacturer, leaving them with little leverage in the case of bad performance.... In an age when consumers expect to be offered a receipt every time they use an A.T.M. or buy gasoline, it is hard to believe that there is opposition to paper records for electronic voting. But the opposition has been strong… As many computer scientists have explained, voters cannot trust electronic machines that do not produce voter-verifiable records."

Other sites: TrueVoteMD.org and verifiedvoting.org

From:


First Name	Last Name


Email


Street Address


City	State	Zip 5	Zip 4 (optional)

Add my name to the Maryland Resolution on Electronic Voting
Send me future action alerts related to verifiable voting
Add me to the True Vote Maryland email discussion list
Send me occasional updates on critical items related to the Campaign for Verifiable Voting
Contact me about helping the Campaign for Verifiable Voting

--> Go to the next step -->

Take Action Today to Make Sure Your Vote Counts!

1.	Find Your State Legislators
2.	Send a Letter to the House Ways & Means Committee
3.	Send a Letter to the Senate Education, Health & Environmental Affairs Committee
4.	Tell Others
5.	Send a Letter to the Editor
6.	Support Federal Election Law Reform
7.	Add a banner to your website

Breaking News

• Sept. 23, 2004 'A Massive Experiment' in Voting in The Washington Post
• Sept. 20, 2004 The Magic Voting Touch, an Editorial in The Washington Post
• Aug. 27, 2004 After Your Vote Vanishes, an Editorial in The Washington Post
• Aug. 26, 2004 Voting machine safeguards in question in The Baltimore Sun
• Aug. 25, 2004 Md. Machines Seek Vote of Confidence in The Washington Post
• How They Could Steal The Election This Time: The Nation Magazine's exhaustive examination of the potential problems with DRE voting systems, including Diebold in Maryland
• The Washington Post on TrueVote MD!
• Blackwell Halts Deployment of Diebold Voting Machines for 2004
• Gov. Ehrlich appoints new member to election board
• E-voting regulators often join other side when leaving office
• Women Voters Drop Paperless Vote Support
• The Disability Lobby and Voting New York Times editorial
•Scans of the Hack the Vote article from the April issue of Vanity Fair magazine.
•Think You Voted in Maryland? Think Again
• Takoma Park supports legislation to require modifications to new voting machines purchased by the State of Maryland to create a verifiable paper trail
• Diebold "basically had no interest in putting actual security in this system," said Paul Franceus, one of the consultants. "It's not like they did it wrong. It's like they didn't bother."
• MD Senate report finds security risks, recommends paper
• Diebold gives paper trail for FREE to San Diego County!!

More news.