RSSGroups Sue for New Florida Congressional Vote
By Ed Oswald | Published November 22, 2006, 12:09 PM
A lawsuit filed in Florida state court Tuesday alleges that electronic voting machines in a portion of Florida's 13th Congressional District were improperly maintained and selected, causing problems in the House race between Republican Vern Buchanan and Democrat Christine Jennings.
Although Sarasota County officials -- where the problem is said to have taken place -- certified their results allowing Buchanan to win by some 369 votes, there were fairly widespread reports of difficulty in casting votes in the race.
The Sarasota Herald-Tribune conducted an unscientific survey shortly following the vote and found some troubling results. Of the 300 who called the paper to report problems, 36 had trouble finding the race, and 62 percent said the machine failed to initially register a vote on the review screen shown before casting the vote.
These problems apparently affected the results of the race. Some 18,000 voters, or about one out of every seven, cast no vote for the House seat. Contrast this with the national average, which sits at about one out of every 50 voters.
The issues may have been enough to give Buchanan the edge - Sarasota County voted for Jennings by a margin of 53 to 47 percent. Thus, several left leaning groups including People for the American Way, Voter Action, American Civil Liberties Union of Florida and Electronic Frontier Foundation have sued to challenge the results and are asking for a revote.
Democrat Jennings has also requested an investigation and re-vote, filing a separate complaint on Tuesday. The campaign contents that it was " clearly a case of machine error."
Representatives for Election Systems and Services, the company that produced the e-voting machines used in the district, nor county elections supervisor Kathy Dent were responding to media requests for comment.
Sweet. He's gone.
Score: 0
|Wow, wincement. The advertising DOES annoy me, but geez :D
Score: 0
|I hate spammers. Period.
I don't care what shape or form they come in. I hate them.
Score: 0
|Isn't it curious how every single "problem" with a voting machine always favors the repub candidate? That's hilarious that it always falls for the cons..., er, I mean, the conservatives.
Score: 0
|I beg to differ, sir. The problems in Florida are actually nothing next to the ones in Texas, but since we're all a bunch of biased conservative morons (with some of the best gas prices in the country, I might add) most foreign news organisations (that would be all of them) don't give a damn...
...Oh, and the real reson for the lawsuits involving Republican wins is because the ACLU are involved, and they are openly anti-American. They are not really Democrats, it is just that some Democrats have started moving to their way of thinking, sadley.
If you believe otherwise, you'd better read US History books a little more--they are the threat that almost every founding father warned about. Read some quotes from Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, James Madison, John Jay, and hosts of others.
I know I will be criticised for this, and I'm sure some will ask what the heck I'm talking about, but the point is I cannot show you--if you look at their quotes regarding what will/could be the demise of America, you will see what I'm referring to. If you refuse to do so because I am obviously a misguided individual who knows nothing about reality, then even if I proved the truth to you, you would reject it.
Score: 0
|"Prove the truth" to us then, oh wise one.
A group of non-partisan people who are willing to stand up for the right of the people are anti-American? You're saying that America doesn't stand for the right of the individual and that a grand power-hungry government and large profit-hungry corporations should have the right to erode the rights of the majority of the population without any oversight?? Now THAT is anti-American my friend, if America is truly the land of the free. Politicians will always bash the ACLU as they give the common man a greater voice to limit their grip on absolute power and control.
Please tell me what kind of neo-con brainwashing have you been sucked into believing? I'm listening for the proof that you are so willing to confer to us unenlightened fools.
Score: 0
|""Prove the truth" to us then, oh wise one."
You missed my point...? Why should I, when you would reject it anyway? The only reason I'm replying to your post is so that others can see and perhaps understand, but you aren't dealing with an issue based on intellect, but rather you believe what you do based on morality--moral issues will never be resolved until you make the change, and nothing I say or do will change that. I would hope you were willing to change, but based on your comments, I'd say you weren't...
"A group of non-partisan people who are willing to stand up for the right of the people are anti-American?"
No, the ACLU, People for the American Way, Voter Action, and Electronic Frontier Foundation are all just a touch lefty last I checked.
"You're saying that America doesn't stand for the right of the individual and that a grand power-hungry government and large profit-hungry corporations should have the right to erode the rights of the majority of the population without any oversight??"
Please stop using the "state a question that spills biased crap" tactic, nobody is dumb enough to take that at face value without checking the facts. Funny side note--the Dems are now saying they will make this the most honest administration ever, yet given their recent track record regarding honesty, well...
That last part sickens me. First of all, to state that our form of government does not have any oversight shows your lack of knowledge of how our government works. The only 'break' in our checks and balances lies in the Judicial Branch deciding they will also do the job of the Legislative Branch by changing legal precedence of laws that have existed since our nation was founded. The Excecutive Branch is doing what it has always done in times of war.
The voting machine issue may be a legitimate concern, but the fact remains that the votes have been counted. If you'd like, we can recount every other state that you guys won by a slim margin, namely Montana, and well, there were problems:
http://www.infowars.com/...ud_across_the_board.htm
Like I said, it is just a political move--they only care about the "problems" where they might gain the upper hand, but care nothing for the states that were won by Dems by a slim margin, since those might flip the other way.
"Politicians will always bash the ACLU as they give the common man a greater voice to limit their grip on absolute power and control."
Politicians? I haven't heard many bash the ACLU--not to say they haven't--but I "bash" the ACLU because of their clear bias--they would rather die than defend a "Christian's" freedom of speech, but they'll support terrorists, illegal aliens, and even foreign countries interests before they would consider supporting any "common man". They don't give a crap about the common man...
""Prove the truth" to us then, oh wise one."
Score: 0
|The 2000 recount was to favor the Republicans?
Interesting. Won't Al Gore be surprised.
Score: 0
|My first comment is, if you don't live here you are uninformed as to what has happened. The bigger problem is that the idiots that designed the machines purposely overlook problem areas to manufacture a machine at a lower cost and greater profit. All votes should be verifiable as to omitted entries and etc. Far greater scutiny of persons voting needs to be implemented. Voters in my area received cards to vote with almost no verification that they were in fact the person they claimed to be. No check was made as to whether the voter was actually alive or had passed away. This whole mess needs a good going over by someone not associated with the bureaucracy. All of this needs to be in everyday simple english and the lawyers need to keep thier hands out of it. All they want is the money anyway.
Score: 0
|"Voters in my area received cards to vote with almost no verification that they were in fact the person they claimed to be. No check was made as to whether the voter was actually alive or had passed away."
Yes--here in TEXAS we had voting machines that asked if we wanted English or Spanish...
...Before bashing me or giving a negative score, attempt to understand me here. I have absolutely no problems with immigrants voting, as long as they are American by birth or naturalisation, as stated in the US Constitution, I am fine if they came from Mexico, Spain, Russia, Iran, Canada, North Pole, or whatever. I have a major problem with NON-US CITIZENS voting, however, and last I checked becoming a U.S. citizen requires knowing some basic US history--and the test is ONLY ADMINISTERED IN ENGLISH.
It is not that I am against other languages or even cultures--but if citizenship REQUIRES knowledge of the English language and only citizens may vote, there is NO reason to have alternate languages for voting except to SPECIFICALLY encourage non-US citizens to find a way to vote illegally.
I have emailed the White House and encourage every other US citizen with any sense of conviction to do the same. This is unacceptable, and frankly in my opinion unconstitutional.
Score: 0
|For some of those questions on the polls, you have to be perfectly fluent in English to understand what the hell they mean. Can you imagine someone trying to vote on those questions with only some knowledge of the English language?
Score: 0
|egads, another Democrat crying foul in Florida! Why am I not surprised?
Vote libertarian, and to heck with the donkey and elephants!
Score: 0
|Okay, get a grip please. I live in Sarasota and have watched this all play out. It was nasty all the way up to the day of the election. The voting problems of the votes for this race not registering were pointed out to the Supervisor of Elections, Kathy Dent, during early voting and she (a Republican) blamed the voters for not being able to read a ballot correctly. When it happened during the election she again said there was nothing wrong with the ballot or machines.
Of course 18,000 people undervoted and many had problems with the machines not registering a vote. After the election Ms. Dent said that she told her poll workers to warn voters about the election so that they see it on the ballot. I wasn't warned about the ballot by the poll worker that took me to the touch screen. This was a reported problem after the election, so were her workers doing their job?
Lastly if you look at a statistical analysis of the undervotes versus previous undervotes in this race in previous years here is how it plays out:
1.Total ballots with 13th district on them: 94931
2. Undervotes: 18,382
3. Buchanan percent in Sarasota County: 46
4. Jennings percent in Sarasota County: 54
5. Typical undervote percent: 4.42 - (This number based on figures from the Sarasota County Supervisor of Elections for the 13th District for the years 1996 to 2004. 1996: 4.78, 1998: no data available, 2000: 15.47 percent, 2002: 2.22 percent, 2004: 6.26 percent. I've left out the 2000 results because as stated in the Sarasota Herald Tribune several experts believe that because the 13th was below the Presidential race on the ballot which most people turn out for and only vote in and that a Republican incumbent seeking a 5th term was running against an inexperienced Democrat that it is an anomaly.)
6. Total undervote percent all years 1996 - 2004: 7.18
7. Undervote percent 2006: 12.92
My upper range statistics which have no compensation for typical statistical undervotes:
18382 * .54 = 9926 Jennings
18382 * .46 = 8456 Buchanan
1470 - 400 vote lead for Buchanan = 1070 vote victory for Jennings
My mid range based on dropping an anomaly undervote year:
94931 * .0442 = 4192 ( undervote percent from #5 above)
18382 - 4192 = 14190 (actual undervote minus typical undervote to remove true undervotes)
14190 * .54 = 7663 Jennings
14190 * .46 = 6527 Buchanan
7663 - 6527 = 1136 - 400 vote lead for Buchanan = 736 vote victory for Jennings
My worst case based on all years undervote percent:
94931 * .0718 = 6816 ( undervote percent from #6 above)
18382 - 6816 = 11566 (actual undervote minus typical undervote to remove true undervotes)
11566 * .54 = 6246 Jennings
11566 * .46 = 5320 Buchanan
6246 - 5320 = 926 - 400 vote lead for Buchanan = 526 vote victory for Jennings
All of which points to a different outcome based on all undervote scenarios.
Score: 0
|I live in Sarasota as well. You'll also note that we voted in a measure to go back to paper based ballots as to not have to go through all this typical Florida voting BS again.
Unfortunately, the median population here consists of elderly people over 65...and let's face it...the typical senior and the computer don't work well together, so most will not notice the flaws of the system at the point in which they occur (I didn't say all seniors). Most of them, by poll have expressed the desire to go back to some paper form of ballot which in turn creates a paper trail.
When voting moved entirely to electronic, thus eliminating the paper trail, we went from one extreme (manual recounts) to the other (not having anything to recount). You'd think some someone with an ounce of intelligence would have figured that out. But, being a government operation, they are required to fail so that they can spend more tax dollars. Plus, if we had an accountable voting system, the Republicans would have nothing to b**** about when the result does not go their way.
::shrug::
Score: 0
|why they always point out the problem after the damage is done. why can't they do more QA before releasing the damn thing.
Score: 0
|blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. People always have to complain about something.
Score: 0
|Changes obviously need to be considered, and hindsight is always 20/20. But the end all and be all of this whole mess, is that Buchanan has been certified as the winner, and without any hard proof or evidence of tampering, the result will stand, and Buchanan will be seated, and Jennings will go home.
I don't think there's a judge in this country, liberal or conservative, that would void the election and order a new one. Without proof of wrongdoing, there just is no justification for it.
And if Jennings carries her fight to Nancy Pelosi, and demands the House seat her, rather than Buchanan, after Buchanan has been certified as the winner, the Republicans would be well justified if they tied the House in knots for several months. And even as a minority, they could do it.
The Democrats would do well to remember another recent election, where long time congressman "B-1" Bob Dornan, (R-Calif) was defeated by Loretta Sanchez, I think in 2000 or 2002. There was significant evidence of votes being cast by illegal aliens, but despite that, the Republican House seated the Democrat, Sanchez.
Here, there is no evidence of wrongdoing, and if Pelosi and her new majority seat Jennings, I fear they might well create a constitutional crisis that will come back to bite them in their collective butts in 2008.
Ken
Score: 0
|