Emails Detail RNC Voter Suppression in Five States
By Jason Leopold and Matt Renner
t r u t h o u t | Report
Thursday 26 July 2007
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/072607A.shtml
Truthout has obtained previously undisclosed GOP campaign emails from the 2004 presidential race that reveal and detail strategies to disenfranchise voters in crucial swing states.
(Photo: Truthout)
Previously undisclosed documents detail how Republican operatives, with the knowledge of several White House officials, engaged in an illegal, racially-motivated effort to suppress tens of thousands of votes during the 2004 presidential campaign in a state where George W. Bush was trailing his Democratic challenger, Senator John Kerry.
The documents also contain details describing how Bush-Cheney 2004 campaign officials, and at least one individual who worked for White House political adviser Karl Rove, planned to stop minorities residing in Cuyahoga County from voting on election day.
The efforts to purge voters from registration rolls was spearheaded by Tim Griffin, a former Republican National Committee opposition researcher. Griffin recently resigned from his post as interim US attorney for Little Rock Arkansas. His predecessor, Bud Cummins, was forced out to make way for Griffin.
Another set of documents, 43 pages of emails, provided to Truthout by the PBS news program "NOW," contains blueprints for a massive effort undertaken by RNC operatives in 2004, to challenge the eligibility of voters expected to support Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry in states such as Nevada, New Mexico, Florida and Pennsylvania.
One email, dated September 30, 2004, and sent to a dozen or so staffers on the Bush-Cheney campaign and the RNC, under the subject line "voter fraud strategy conference call," describes how campaign staffers planned to challenge the veracity of votes in a handful of battleground states in the event of a Democratic victory.
Furthermore, the emails show the Bush-Cheney campaign and RNC staffers compiled voter-challenge lists that targeted probable Democratic voters in at least five states: New Mexico, Ohio, Florida, Nevada and Pennsylvania. Voting rights lawyers have made allegations of so called "vote caging," against Republicans previously. These emails provide more evidence. One Republican operative involved in the planning wrote "we can do this in NV, FL, PA and NM because we have a list to run against the Absentee Ballot requests, and should."
Vote caging is an illegal tactic to suppress minorities from voting by having their names purged from voter rolls when they fail to respond to registered mail sent to their homes. The Republican National Committee signed a consent decree in 1986 stating they would not engage in the practice after they were caught suppressing votes in 1981 and 1986.
In a letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island) and Edward Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) said "[c]aging is a reprehensible voter suppression tactic, and it may also violate federal law and the terms of applicable judicially enforceable consent decrees." Senators Rockefeller (D-West Virginia) and Whitehouse have called for a Justice Department probe into the practice.
One of the individuals connected to the White House who was the recipient of dozens of emails discussing the strategy to suppress votes was Coddy Johnson, the national field director of Bush's 2004 campaign and former associate director of political affairs, working under Karl Rove. Johnson's father was Bush's college roommate at Yale. Another person who was asked to participate in the so-called "voter fraud strategy" conference call was Jennifer Millerwise, a former deputy communications director for the Bush-Cheney 2004 re-election campaign and a former spokesperson for Vice President Cheney. Millerwise was interviewed by Patrick Fitzgerald during the federal investigation into the leak of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson.
Other participants for the conference call included Mark "Thor" Hearne. Hearne is closely aligned with Karl Rove and the RNC and has been accused of pushing for the firings of some US attorneys by at least one of the fired attorneys. Some of the attorneys believe they were fired based on their refusal to prosecute alleged cases of voter fraud.
Emails among Ohio Republican Party official Michael Magan, Coddy Johnson, then national field director of the Bush-Cheney 2004 campaign, and Timothy Griffin, reveal the men were given documents that could be used as evidence to justify widespread voter challenges if the Bush campaign needed to contest the election results. Johnson referred to the documents as a "goldmine".
The valuable documents were lists of registered voters who did not return address confirmation forms to the Ohio Board of Elections. The Republican operatives compared this list with lists of voters who requested absentee ballots. In the opinion of one of the strategists, the fact that many names appeared on both lists was evidence of voter fraud. "A bad registration card can be an accident or fraud. A bad card AND an Absentee Ballot request is a clear case of fraud," according to former Bush-Cheney campaign staffer Robert Paduchik.
Another Republican operative saw the value of the Ohio list from a media strategy perspective. According to the emails, Christopher McInerney, a RNC researcher said "... I have already tasked our IT [information technology] person with creating a match list between the Board of Elections return mail list and the Absentee Ballot request list. Jack [Christopher] thought this would be a good idea to have - to reference as part of the larger DenHerder press strategy." It is not known what the "DenHerder press strategy" refers to, but Dave DenHerder served as regional political director for the 2004 Bush campaign.
McInerney's email continues, "I can't speak to other states, but if they don't have flagged voter rolls, we run the risk of having GOP fingerprints."
Strategist Christopher Guith responded by saying "I would think we are less worried about "fingerprints" if we have decent evidence that fraudulent ballots are being cast. I think the intent is to take the Board of Elections' list and challenge absentee ballots? At that point, isn't it more important to stop absentee ballots that we have a high certainty of fraud than avoid the hit?"
McInerney's and Guith's emails have been previously disclosed.
Griffin responded, "I guess we have to make sure we have bodies. It seems like it always comes down to bodies. Why don't you ask your peeps in each state at issue if they have the resources to do this. Then, I might/can put some resources in the states that are lacking."
The emails seem to show the Republican operatives were preparing for a confrontation reminiscent of the Florida recount affair that followed the 2000 Presidential election. This exchange took place less than one month prior to the November 2004 election.
The list of questionable voters that was compiled by the Ohio Board of Elections was quite similar to the vote caging lists used by the Republican campaigners. The Board of Elections sent out voter confirmation letters to targeted registered voters. The letters required the voter to return a confirmation request or have their name removed from the voter rolls. Because the confirmation letter gave the voter 60 days to respond, a voter who failed to respond to the confirmation request would still be on the voter rolls for the primary election, but would be purged prior to the general election.
The list was apparently checked by two people identified only as "Ted" and "Evan who" made handwritten notes in one of the columns. According to their notes, they described certain parts of Cleveland where low-income and minority voters were targeted as containing "mixed use buildings" and "single family apartments." Another section said, "looks like a parking lot ... doesn't look residential."
In an interview with Truthout in May, David Iglesias, the former US attorney for New Mexico, said Pat Rogers, one of Hearne's colleagues, alleged there was widespread voter fraud in New Mexico and pressured Iglesias to bring criminal charges against some individuals. Iglesias said he had investigated those allegations tirelessly and found zero evidence to back it up. He added that, based on evidence that had surfaced thus far and "Karl Rove's obsession with voter fraud issues throughout the country," he now believes GOP operatives had wanted him to go after Democratic-funded organizations in an attempt to swing the 2006 midterm elections to Republicans.
Jason Leopold is a former Los Angeles bureau chief for Dow Jones Newswire. He has written over 2,000 stories on the California energy crisis and received the Dow Jones Journalist of the Year Award in 2001 for his coverage on the issue as well as a Project Censored award in 2004. Leopold also reported extensively on Enron's downfall and was the first journalist to land an interview with former Enron president Jeffrey Skilling following Enron's bankruptcy filing in December 2001. Leopold has appeared on CNBC and National Public Radio as an expert on energy policy and has also been the keynote speaker at more than two dozen energy industry conferences around the country.
Matt Renner is a reporter for Truthout.
--
Friday, July 27, 2007
Saturday, January 27, 2007
First two convictions in vote-fraud!
Ohio poll workers convicted
From the Associated Press
January 25, 2007
CLEVELAND ? Two election workers were convicted Wednesday of rigging a recount of the 2004 presidential election to avoid a more thorough review in Ohio's most populous county.
Jacqueline Maiden, elections coordinator of the Cuyahoga County Elections Board, and ballot manager Kathleen Dreamer each were convicted of a felony count of negligent misconduct by an elections employee. They also were convicted of one misdemeanor count each of failure to perform their duty as elections employees.
Prosecutors accused Maiden and Dreamer of secretly reviewing preselected ballots before a public recount on Dec. 16, 2004. They worked behind closed doors for three days to pick ballots they knew would not cause discrepancies when checked by hand, prosecutors said.
Ohio gave President Bush the electoral votes he needed to defeat Democratic Sen. John F. Kerry in the close election and hold on to the White House in 2004.
Maiden and Dreamer will be sentenced Feb. 26.
--
From the Associated Press
January 25, 2007
CLEVELAND ? Two election workers were convicted Wednesday of rigging a recount of the 2004 presidential election to avoid a more thorough review in Ohio's most populous county.
Jacqueline Maiden, elections coordinator of the Cuyahoga County Elections Board, and ballot manager Kathleen Dreamer each were convicted of a felony count of negligent misconduct by an elections employee. They also were convicted of one misdemeanor count each of failure to perform their duty as elections employees.
Prosecutors accused Maiden and Dreamer of secretly reviewing preselected ballots before a public recount on Dec. 16, 2004. They worked behind closed doors for three days to pick ballots they knew would not cause discrepancies when checked by hand, prosecutors said.
Ohio gave President Bush the electoral votes he needed to defeat Democratic Sen. John F. Kerry in the close election and hold on to the White House in 2004.
Maiden and Dreamer will be sentenced Feb. 26.
--
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Let's Not Roll Over and Go to Sleep Yet, NY! News from Bo Lipari
Introduction by Bo Lipari, Executive Director, NYVV
New York, Ciber and the EAC
The full text of Doug Kellner's email follows the introduction
Albany, NY January 25, 2007
At the New York State Board of Elections meeting on January 23, 2007 Commissioners Kellner and Aquila came out strongly for issuing a subpoena to the EAC and Ciber to force them to give up any information and paper work they have related to Ciber's failure to be accredited. This has resulted from Ciber and the EAC's refusal thus far to offer any information to the State of New York about the problems reported by the New York Times. As I've reported earlier, the State Board had told Ciber earlier this month to officially halt New York's certification testing until the situation is clarified. Unfortunately, Commissioner Helena Donohue would not support issuing a subpoena this week, asking instead that the Board give Ciber until the next Commissioner's meeting in two weeks.
Ciber has further shown their indifference to full disclosure - they recently claimed proprietary confidentiality rights on a four page document they presented to the State Board concerning their interpretation of the COTS software testing requirements, another point where New York State is demanding strict compliance to regulations.
Voting integrity advocates have long called attention to the fact that the so-called "Independent Testing Authorities" are neither independent, conduct rigorous tests, or are in any sense of the word authorities. Rather, they have operated in a closed loop system with the voting machine vendors, and have used the lack of independent oversight to give us the sham that is our country's voting machine testing process. But here in New York State, Ciber is working not for the vendors, but for citizens. And Ciber has consistently shown that they are incapable of providing the level of competency we demand. New York State, by requiring compliance with the highest current standards and through the oversight of a truly independent security review team, has exposed the dirty little secret of the voting machine vendors and the testing labs - their shoddy work does not serve the interests of voters or the public good.
New York State Commissioner Douglas Kellner has issued an email to the public detailing much of what New York has found out. His outrage at the failures of Ciber and the EAC to provide essential information to New York are evident, and at yesterday's meeting he announced that New York must consider immediately terminating Ciber's contract. I concur with Commissioner Kellner when he concludes:
"New York should take a stand to end the veil of secrecy that shrouds the testing process."
The voting machine vendors and testing agencies have had the run of things too long. It's time for a change.
-Bo Lipari
Executive Director
New Yorkers for Verified Voting
Below is the email from Doug Kellner. Feel free to distribute.
From: Doug Kellner
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 12:46 AM
Subject: New York, Ciber and the EAC
On January 4, 2007, the New York State Board of Elections voted to suspend Ciber from further testing of voting systems submitted to the New York State board for certification pending a thorough review of Ciber?s accreditation status. We also addressed requests to both the Election Assistance Commission and to Ciber for all of the relevant documents and reports concerning Ciber?s application to the EAC for accreditation as a testing laboratory.
Much to our surprise (well, maybe I?m not really surprised), EAC has still not provided any of the background documentation that we have requested. While giving lip service acknowledgement of our request, Tom Wilkey, now Executive Director of the US EAC and former Executive Director of the New York State Board of Elections, has completely stonewalled us. The New York State board felt compelled to make a formal Freedom of Information Act request. Mr. Wilkey?s only response so far is that the EAC is reviewing the issue and is deciding how to respond.
This failure to provide relevant information to a state agency, the first in the country to require testing to the 2005 standards, is truly outrageous and scandalous. Not only does it further delay New York?s efforts to come into compliance with the Help America Vote Act, it seriously prejudices the five voting system vendors who have made such a substantial investment in trying to obtain certification to the rigorous standards set by New York. In addition to requiring compliance with VVSG 2005, New York law requires a voter verifiable paper audit trail, prohibits devices or functionality potentially capable of internet, radio or wireless data communication, requires escrow of all software including source codes and authorizes disclosure in court proceedings; our regulations require full disclosure of all political contributions by vendors and their executives and set several other standards that are more rigorous than the VVSG.
While there is general agreement at the New York State Board that we should be looking to the EAC to assist and guide us in our investigation, we also made a formal request to Ciber for the same information. After all, they do hold a $3 million contract from our agency. There has been nothing but similar stonewalling from Ciber. Ciber?s last communication regarding our information request was that they were trying to co-ordinate a response with the EAC.
What?s going on here? Both the EAC and the unaccredited testing lab are refusing to open the curtain that hides their soiled laundry. Co-ordination of the response suggests that we are only going to receive a laundered version of the facts.
I have also become increasingly annoyed with Ciber?s use of the label ?confidential competition-sensitive? on reports that they have prepared for our agency at our expense. You may recall that in November I circulated for comments Ciber?s first draft of their report to explain New York?s interpretation of the exceptions to the exemption from testing of Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS)software that is used in the voting machine itself as opposed to election management software that does not generate code used in the actual voting process. (Yes, ?exception to the exemption? is a double negative that means that the COTS source code must be tested in those cases.)
Ciber was apparently miffed that I dared to subject the advice that they furnished to New York to public scrutiny. They added the ?confidential competition sensitive? label to the second draft. I objected and requested that they remove the label. Ciber said they?d think about it, but ignored my request. When I received the final document that had been approved by both Ciber and our independent security review consultants, New York State Technical Enterprise Corp. (NYSTEC), I insisted that I be allowed to make the document public. Ciber balked. When I renewed what had become demands, Ciber?s attorney?yes their attorney?revised the technical report that the ?experts? at Ciber and NYSTEC had determined to be final and said that he would not object to release of that report. (I have distributed that report, known as COTS Testing Version 4 to many). I then asked for an explanation why Version 3, the ?final? report was still labeled confidential. I also gave formal notice that I would ask the commissioners to release the report. Last night Ciber?s in-house attorney wrote me that he agreed that there was nothing in the ?final? report that was properly labeled competition sensitive. The New York commissioners voted the make the Version 3 ?final? COTS report public today. I will send copies of Version 3 to the technical blogs and anyone else who requests it. I am still distressed, however, at Ciber?s efforts to stiffle discussion of the issue by improperly claiming confidentiality.
At today?s meeting of the New York State elections commissioners, while everyone deplored the stonewalling by EALC and Ciber, I requested authority to issue a subpoena to Ciber for all of the documents that we have requested. Republican Commissioner Helena Donohue blocked the subpoena by arguing that we should give Ciber additional time to respond to our request voluntarily. She said that she would reconsider issuing a subpoena at our next meeting scheduled for February 7.
In view of the collaboration between the EAC and Ciber, I am determined that we should not accept partial disclosure. New York should take a stand to end the veil of secrecy that shrouds the testing process.
Douglas A. Kellner
Co-Chair
New York State Board of Elections
New Yorkers for Verified Voting is a program of International Humanities Center, a nonprofit organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the IRS Code.All donations are tax deductible.
New Yorkers for Verified Voting
Bo Lipari
Executive Director
contact@nyvv.org
New York, Ciber and the EAC
The full text of Doug Kellner's email follows the introduction
Albany, NY January 25, 2007
At the New York State Board of Elections meeting on January 23, 2007 Commissioners Kellner and Aquila came out strongly for issuing a subpoena to the EAC and Ciber to force them to give up any information and paper work they have related to Ciber's failure to be accredited. This has resulted from Ciber and the EAC's refusal thus far to offer any information to the State of New York about the problems reported by the New York Times. As I've reported earlier, the State Board had told Ciber earlier this month to officially halt New York's certification testing until the situation is clarified. Unfortunately, Commissioner Helena Donohue would not support issuing a subpoena this week, asking instead that the Board give Ciber until the next Commissioner's meeting in two weeks.
Ciber has further shown their indifference to full disclosure - they recently claimed proprietary confidentiality rights on a four page document they presented to the State Board concerning their interpretation of the COTS software testing requirements, another point where New York State is demanding strict compliance to regulations.
Voting integrity advocates have long called attention to the fact that the so-called "Independent Testing Authorities" are neither independent, conduct rigorous tests, or are in any sense of the word authorities. Rather, they have operated in a closed loop system with the voting machine vendors, and have used the lack of independent oversight to give us the sham that is our country's voting machine testing process. But here in New York State, Ciber is working not for the vendors, but for citizens. And Ciber has consistently shown that they are incapable of providing the level of competency we demand. New York State, by requiring compliance with the highest current standards and through the oversight of a truly independent security review team, has exposed the dirty little secret of the voting machine vendors and the testing labs - their shoddy work does not serve the interests of voters or the public good.
New York State Commissioner Douglas Kellner has issued an email to the public detailing much of what New York has found out. His outrage at the failures of Ciber and the EAC to provide essential information to New York are evident, and at yesterday's meeting he announced that New York must consider immediately terminating Ciber's contract. I concur with Commissioner Kellner when he concludes:
"New York should take a stand to end the veil of secrecy that shrouds the testing process."
The voting machine vendors and testing agencies have had the run of things too long. It's time for a change.
-Bo Lipari
Executive Director
New Yorkers for Verified Voting
Below is the email from Doug Kellner. Feel free to distribute.
From: Doug Kellner
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 12:46 AM
Subject: New York, Ciber and the EAC
On January 4, 2007, the New York State Board of Elections voted to suspend Ciber from further testing of voting systems submitted to the New York State board for certification pending a thorough review of Ciber?s accreditation status. We also addressed requests to both the Election Assistance Commission and to Ciber for all of the relevant documents and reports concerning Ciber?s application to the EAC for accreditation as a testing laboratory.
Much to our surprise (well, maybe I?m not really surprised), EAC has still not provided any of the background documentation that we have requested. While giving lip service acknowledgement of our request, Tom Wilkey, now Executive Director of the US EAC and former Executive Director of the New York State Board of Elections, has completely stonewalled us. The New York State board felt compelled to make a formal Freedom of Information Act request. Mr. Wilkey?s only response so far is that the EAC is reviewing the issue and is deciding how to respond.
This failure to provide relevant information to a state agency, the first in the country to require testing to the 2005 standards, is truly outrageous and scandalous. Not only does it further delay New York?s efforts to come into compliance with the Help America Vote Act, it seriously prejudices the five voting system vendors who have made such a substantial investment in trying to obtain certification to the rigorous standards set by New York. In addition to requiring compliance with VVSG 2005, New York law requires a voter verifiable paper audit trail, prohibits devices or functionality potentially capable of internet, radio or wireless data communication, requires escrow of all software including source codes and authorizes disclosure in court proceedings; our regulations require full disclosure of all political contributions by vendors and their executives and set several other standards that are more rigorous than the VVSG.
While there is general agreement at the New York State Board that we should be looking to the EAC to assist and guide us in our investigation, we also made a formal request to Ciber for the same information. After all, they do hold a $3 million contract from our agency. There has been nothing but similar stonewalling from Ciber. Ciber?s last communication regarding our information request was that they were trying to co-ordinate a response with the EAC.
What?s going on here? Both the EAC and the unaccredited testing lab are refusing to open the curtain that hides their soiled laundry. Co-ordination of the response suggests that we are only going to receive a laundered version of the facts.
I have also become increasingly annoyed with Ciber?s use of the label ?confidential competition-sensitive? on reports that they have prepared for our agency at our expense. You may recall that in November I circulated for comments Ciber?s first draft of their report to explain New York?s interpretation of the exceptions to the exemption from testing of Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS)software that is used in the voting machine itself as opposed to election management software that does not generate code used in the actual voting process. (Yes, ?exception to the exemption? is a double negative that means that the COTS source code must be tested in those cases.)
Ciber was apparently miffed that I dared to subject the advice that they furnished to New York to public scrutiny. They added the ?confidential competition sensitive? label to the second draft. I objected and requested that they remove the label. Ciber said they?d think about it, but ignored my request. When I received the final document that had been approved by both Ciber and our independent security review consultants, New York State Technical Enterprise Corp. (NYSTEC), I insisted that I be allowed to make the document public. Ciber balked. When I renewed what had become demands, Ciber?s attorney?yes their attorney?revised the technical report that the ?experts? at Ciber and NYSTEC had determined to be final and said that he would not object to release of that report. (I have distributed that report, known as COTS Testing Version 4 to many). I then asked for an explanation why Version 3, the ?final? report was still labeled confidential. I also gave formal notice that I would ask the commissioners to release the report. Last night Ciber?s in-house attorney wrote me that he agreed that there was nothing in the ?final? report that was properly labeled competition sensitive. The New York commissioners voted the make the Version 3 ?final? COTS report public today. I will send copies of Version 3 to the technical blogs and anyone else who requests it. I am still distressed, however, at Ciber?s efforts to stiffle discussion of the issue by improperly claiming confidentiality.
At today?s meeting of the New York State elections commissioners, while everyone deplored the stonewalling by EALC and Ciber, I requested authority to issue a subpoena to Ciber for all of the documents that we have requested. Republican Commissioner Helena Donohue blocked the subpoena by arguing that we should give Ciber additional time to respond to our request voluntarily. She said that she would reconsider issuing a subpoena at our next meeting scheduled for February 7.
In view of the collaboration between the EAC and Ciber, I am determined that we should not accept partial disclosure. New York should take a stand to end the veil of secrecy that shrouds the testing process.
Douglas A. Kellner
Co-Chair
New York State Board of Elections
New Yorkers for Verified Voting is a program of International Humanities Center, a nonprofit organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the IRS Code.All donations are tax deductible.
New Yorkers for Verified Voting
Bo Lipari
Executive Director
contact@nyvv.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)