here is our letter to the 5 california senators on the state rules committee, asking for investigations into the workings of digital election machines, as called for by ms. in la (reported by us here):
we write to you to urge you in the strongest possible terms to issue subpoenas to individuals involved in the election voting machine industry and certification insiders, forcing them to report actual workings of the voting machines to the election committee.
(more after the jump)
so many reports have documented the fallibility of digital voting machines, including the recent uc berkeley report which states:
“harri hursti’s attack does work: mr. hursti’s attack on the av-os (optical scanner)is definitely real. he was indeed able to change the election results by doing nothing more than modifying the contents of a memory card. he needed no passwords, no cryptographic keys, and no access to any other part of the voting system, including the gems election management server.”
…and:
“interpreted code is contrary to standards: interpreted code in general is prohibited by the 2002 fec voluntary voting system standards, and also by the successor standard, the eac’s voluntary voting system guidelines due to take effect in two years. in order for the diebold software architecture to be in compliance, it would appear that either the accubasic language and interpreter have to be removed, or the standard will have to be changed.
california can only run software certified by the federal ita process, by state law. the “berkeley team” is saying flat-out that such certification was not done correctly, therefore the entire diebold product line is illegal under state law.” (emphasis ours).
we urge you to do everything in your power to force the officials of this industry to comply with an investigation into the feasibility of using these machines without fear of possible and easily-obtained election fraud.
sincerely,
etc.
if you are a resident of california, we suggest you write (or call) the 5 senators whose numbers are listed here.