http://www2.kucinich.us/node/4894
http://www2.kucinich.us/files/pdfs/DennisKucinichandMar...

"Transcript of Dennis Kucinich and Mary Ann Gould on Voice of the Voters! August 8, 2007:

DK: Thank you very much. It’s great to join you just for a few minutes. I know you have a distinguished guest there who’s done a lot of work on these electronic voting machines.

MAG: We’ll be talking about that. I’d like to start out with a simple concept: values. The United States was founded on a set of ideas rather than on a common race, ethnicity, religion, or power structure. It’s these shared ideas and ideals that built this country and can revitalize it. I’m sure you agree, but I’d like to know: What ideas and ideals do you think are critical to rebuilding and revitalizing America?

DK: First of all, adherence to our Constitution. It starts with all who manage the affairs of this country and are elected to do so to operate with honesty, integrity, and an adherence to the principles that are articulated in the Constitution of the United States. When you have officials who break the law, who use their power to wage war against innocent people, you then have a condition which undermines the democratic tradition. When you have officials who pass laws that attack essential civil liberties, such as the right to free speech and the right to freedom of association, freedom of assembly, then you have a crisis of the Constitution and of democratic governance. I think the Founders set forth the principles very well in the preamble to the Constitution. The Declaration of Independence is a very powerful document about human rights. That’s where it starts with this country.

MAG: Our country is based upon the idea that we the people can govern ourselves. I somehow feel that Washington may have forgotten that.

DK: Of course they’ve forgotten it. The idea of democratic self-governance resonates with Lincoln’s prayer of a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Those of us who take the responsibility to guide the affairs of our nation have a responsibility that is a very high calling to make sure that democratic governance is not just a concept but a reality. We’re losing that today. It’s more government of interest groups, government of corporations, government of anything but the people.

MAG: I couldn’t agree more. In fact, Abraham Lincoln also said elections belong to the people It is their decision. It seems to me today that it is no longer the people’s decision. We just had, and will continue to have on the program, a professor from the University of Pennsylvania, part of the fabulous study that was recently done in California, that showed that the DREs, direct record electronic voting machines, are fundamentally flawed, cannot be fixed. Yet Congress is doing nothing. What can we do about this because lobbyists are fighting it. I have a quote from one Congressman that said, very simply, "Microsoft won." About 29:30

DK: As you know, I’m in favor of using paper ballots in all federal elections, and I’ve introduced a bill to that effect. I also understand that the electronic voting has many flaws and that’s why I don’t think those machines should be used. Period. Because you can hack them, as people have proven, there is a question of the validity of an election. People have to know their vote counts and is counted. People cannot be guaranteed that with the present DRE system.

MAG: What can be done? What we're being told and in fact our professor from Penn had said he would support a ban by Congress of all DREs and if need be use optical scan with much more hand counting of paper ballots. 30:30

DK: Maybe what we could do—again, I have a bill in to make paper ballots in federal elections mandatory, and states for state elections have the ability to set their own kind of format, but I think that when the federal government moves on this, it’ll cause states to come into conformity. There are ways to bring that about. Something occurs to me, and that is, that perhaps the distinguished guest that you have on would be willing to call my office in Washington because there may be a legal basis for a lawsuit here that deals with really denying the right to vote. And I think I’d be very interested in seeing if that research that’s been done could be the basis of a lawsuit to try to throw out that technology for use in a federal election. It may be that unless this has already been adjudicated, it may be that this is a faster route to trying to protect the vote than having to wait for Congress to do something.

MAG: Our concern is 2008, Congressman.

DK: As is mine.

MAG: Yes, and the way it looks now, 2000 is going to look like kindergarten in comparison, I fear, unless some actions are taken. If we leave it to the states, they feel that they have already spent a lot of money, they don’t want to spend any more and they're convinced that adding printers onto the backs of these DREs will give them some type of security. It was proven in California that this is invalid. Even with the printers, these machines are definitely unfixable. And then we hear constantly that 1. Nobody in Congress will support a ban on DREs. 2. Lobbyists are too strong over the will of the people. 3. States and county governments don’t want to make a change because it’s going to be too difficult.


DK: I can say that I’d like to talk to those who can help me build the evidence to present to raise the issue of banning them outright. That might be our only recourse.

MAG: We’ll have John Bonifaz, who is with Voter Action and he’s a lawyer, Constitutional, and has spoken out on that very subject on this show, and we will have the people from the California study get in touch with you on this.

DK: I’d like them to call my Congressional office, it's a public number, it's 202-225-5871. If they give me a call, I’d like to start the discussion and see what we might be able to do. 33:18 I mean, obviously, as someone who has run in many elections, I understand what happens when people put their heart and soul into an election, whether you are a candidate or supporting a candidate, if you have to worry at the end of it all about whether the election was stolen. I mean, this is the United States of America. We shouldn’t have to be worried whether or not an election is legit. Yet here we are in 2007, having had the experience and having these machines used, not being able to prove the outcome, having the outcome in doubt, having thoughts that maybe the election has been rigged. I mean, what are we talking about here? This is central to whether you have a democracy or not. Everybody should be concerned about it. This is an urgent matter. I can tell you that this is one of the topics that comes up most consistently everywhere in the United States. So I want to thank you for raising the level of awareness and I want to thank your guests for their commitment and service. So please contact me in Washington and as the chairman of the subcommittee on domestic policy, I’ll have my staff get involved to see what ways and steps we can take to move in the direction that you are suggesting. I’m interested in two different areas: 1. What action we might be able to take with respect to a ban because I just want to check to see how far we can go in terms of commerce because there is a commerce clause of the Constitution, and I want to check and see if this is consistent with the commerce clause and want to see if there are any states' rights that would be violated here. The other thing is, I want to see if there’s any lawsuit that--

MAG: Let me ask you a question: States' rights vs. citizens' rights, which come first?

DK: Often they’re consistent. State constitutions are often derived from the federal Constitution. I want to make sure that anything that I propose is going to stand up in court.

MAG: We will certainly give you whatever support is necessary and you will certainly have our vote if you will lead the way on this particular issue.

DK: I’m ready to do that, and I would ask you to call me. Thank you for the chance to be on here. As one of the few people who actually voted against the certification of the election in 2004 in the Electoral College, I’ve already shown how I feel about the issue of election integrity and in introducing a bill for paper ballots. I’m there in asking for scrutiny of these DREs. You may remember that I’m the person in Congress who submitted records for the Congressional Record of people who found out about the flaws in the voting machines and they were worried about being sued. I took that information right to the House of Representatives and dared that company to sue me.

MAG: Let me throw out one idea. Our whole government is based and our Founding Fathers based a brilliant idea on the concept of separate and independent checks and balances. If that’s good enough for our government, shouldn’t it be the same for our election system?

DK: Absolutely. Elections have to be verifiable. There’s just no question about it, and when the verifiability of an election is in doubt because of the kind of technology that’s being used, this is a threat to our democracy. I’m aware of it. I care about it. I think about it often. Look, I’m running for president of the United States. Don’t think for a moment that I’m not concerned, that all of the efforts we make, if I’m on the threshold of being elected, and then I gotta worry about somebody stealing the election on top of it. From a personal standpoint, I don’t want to have to worry about it. But from the standpoint of being an American I have a commitment to this country to protect these elections. Thank you and let’s continue to talk and work together.

MAG: Thank you very much.

DK: Thank you and good night."

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/print_fri...nich_reintr.htm
July 29, 2007
Will Kucinich Reintroduce HR6200- Hand Counted Paper Ballots?

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4788
BLOGGED BY Brad Friedman ON 7/9/2007 10:22AM
Calling for Paper Ballots, Kucinich Reiterates Dropped Support of Holt Election Reform Bill

Charging that Congressman Rush Holt's (D-NJ) Election Reform bill (HR 811) "does not address the concerns that Americans have, to do something about electronic voting," Ohio's Rep. Dennis Kucinich reiterated his withdrawal of support for the controversial legislation last Friday.

In an interview on the Peter B. Collins show, the Democratic presidential candidate confirmed earlier reports that he intended to drop his co-sponsorship of the bill in favor of requiring paper ballots for American elections. HR 811, as currently written, fails to ban dangerous electronic touch-screen (DRE) voting systems.

Last week, Election Integrity advocates announced a new effort to contact Congress members in order to learn their position on the Holt bill, and whether or not they would support such a ban. They are asking for help from the public in contacting all members of the U.S. House. (More details on the effort, and how you can help, below.)

"I'm hopeful that Congressman Holt will modify his bill before he pushes for passage of it," Kucinich told host Peter B. Collins during a short interview late Friday.

Here's the short audio of the exchange concerning the Holt Bill [less than 2 mins]: AUDIO LINK


Here's the transcript of the exchange:
PETER B. COLLINS: You have recently removed yourself as a co-sponsor of 811, am I correct?

KUCINICH: I have. Rush Holt's a fine person and I really enjoy serving with him. But I have to say, the bill does not address the concerns that Americans have, to do something about electronic voting, and to make sure that we protect ourselves from the kind of manipulation of an election that can occur with the insufficient controls on software and hardware in this era of electronic voting.

That's why I've advocated paper ballots in all federal elections. That's the paper trail. That's that old time religion in politics where at least you had a chance for a fair count. Every American deserves to know that his or her vote counts and is going to be counted.

And you may remember that in the last election, when it came to the Electoral College, I was one of the few members who challenged the election in the Electoral College and voted against certification of the election based on what happened in Ohio. As did, by the way, Senator [Barbara] Boxer [D-CA], she was one of the leaders on that.

PBC: Indeed, yes...

KUCINICH: And so, we have to stand up and be counted. I'm hopeful that Congressman Holt will modify his bill before he pushes for passage of it.

Kucinich had originally announced his intention to drop his co-sponsorship of the bill last month when asked about it by Election Integrity advocates during a phone appearance at DemocracyFest in New Hampshire. The Ohio Congressman's name is still listed as a co-sponsor, along with 215 others, on the Library of Congress website, but The BRAD BLOG has been told by a source familiar with the LOC's Thomas database that co-sponsorship lists on that site are no longer updated after bills have been introduced and then voted out of committee...

Holt's bill was successfully voted out of committee in May, after undergoing a number of changes that removed additional safeguards written into the original bill, such as full disclosure of all source code for voting systems. The amended version now allows only for review of source code by so-called "experts" under restrictive non-disclosure agreements. The bill has been pending a vote on the floor of the U.S. House ever since. Last week, Holt said in a radio interview that he was hopeful the bill would be scheduled for a vote during the first two weeks of July.

In the last Congress, Kucinich had introduced a bill to require all hand-counted paper ballots in presidential elections. He has said he intends to re-introduce the measure in the current Congress.

Election Integrity advocates have decried the bill on a number of counts, charging that it does not go far enough towards ensuring accuracy and security of voting systems. Many Election Officials around the country have also expressed their concerns about the bill, but for different reasons. They fear the bill's requirements are too onerous and may force them to change recently purchased voting systems, despite the many problems revealed in those very systems.

Supporters of the bill have claimed that legislation requiring a ban on touch-screen DRE systems could not pass in the Democratically-controlled Congress, even though a similar ban on such voting systems was recently passed by the Republican-controlled House and Senate in the state of Florida. Supporters making the claim have failed to present evidence to back it up and have, as of yet, failed to offer the name of a single Congressional member who supports the bill now, but who would withdraw his or her support if the bill were amended to include a ban on DRE voting systems.

An effort is now being mounted by Philadelphia Election Integrity advocate and radio host of Voice of the Voters Mary Ann Gould, along with Joan Brunwasser of OpEdNews.com to contact Congress members in order to get them on record concerning their position on a DRE ban and the Holt bill in general. They are asking for your help in contacting Congress members. More information on that campaign is available here.

Would it be great to hire an Executive for the White House who actually dealt openly
and honestly about the substantive stuff we are living?

http://www.whyy.org/91FM/radiotimes.html
Radio Times with Marty Moss-Coane

Thursday, August 23
CONGRESSMAN RUSH HOLT

(Rebroadcast tonight at 11)
Do we need paper verification in the age of E-Voting? We'll talk with Congressman RUSH HOLT who has introduced bill that would require all voting machines to produce a paper ballot by Nov 2008. It's hoped the uniform paper ballots will prevent the messy recount we saw in the 2000 Presidential election. We'll also hear from ELAINE MANLOVE, the Election Commissioner for the State of Delaware, on the challenges of implementing any changes. Listen to this show via Real Audio | mp3