Navigation
Topics
Log In
Log Out
:
Special Search
New Today
New This Week
Advanced Search
Tree View
Your Account
Edit Profile
Register
Forgot Password
Tools
Help/Instructions
Policies
CLICK STATE TO SEE:
"WATCH LIST"
Marked with: 
"OPEN & HONEST"
Marked with: 
...
|
| Where are the FOIA documents? |
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4077
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 15, 2006 - 11:21 pm: | 
|
Where are the FOIA documents posted and where is the accounting?
Melinda Watson of Yavapai County, Arizona goes by the screen name troubleinwinter on other Web sites. She wrote the following under her "troubleinwinter" pseudoname. We have found that the flame-throwing is reduced when people use real names, so I will provide troubleinwinter's real name here, using the identifier she emailed me. If anyone reposts this elsewhere, edit to remove real name. Can we help Melinda navigate through this site to find what she needs?
quote:"Why am I NOT surprised she has not posted the rest of the docs... She raised money to file 3,000 FOIA across the country after 2004 election, with the promise to post the docs for study. Over a year ago, she begged donation of a high speed scanner (which she obtained) to scan and post the resultant materials.
To this date, a year and a half after the election, I cannot find an accounting of how many FOIAs were sent, how many were/were not complied with fully or partially.
I can find none of the resulting documents posted.
If anyone can provide a link showing where Bev has fulfilled her promises to those who sent her money, I'd be fascinated to see it.
Melinda, we have the One-on-One section where you can ask questions and get answers.
I'll get Melinda started
Here is an executive summary of the problems we encountered with public records request, written by Jim March and I. I delivered this personally to John Conyers' office on Jan. 5, 2005:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/1960.html
Volusia County public records:
Here is a preliminary update published in Jan. 2005:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/3504.html
The Volusia County records remained in Volusia County with Florida Fair Elections Coalition until Dec. 2005, when FFEC director Susan Pynchon and I met in Leon County for the second Hursti Hack and she returned them to Black Box Voting.
We scanned the Volusia County poll tapes (about 600 pages) and posted them in Jan. 2006. Here is a link to the Volusia County poll tapes along with an analysis of the problems found:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/2197/15675.html
The tapes show tampered dates and other problems indicating memory card tampering. In fact, these tapes were what led to the Black Box Voting Harri Hursti project in Leon County.
Here is the formal report on the initial Hursti test:
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/BBVreport.pdf
Palm Beach County refused to provide the records, forcing us to sue to obtain them. After paying for the lawsuit and the records themselves, the costs for Palm Beach County totalled about $7,000. In the records obtained from Palm Beach, we found over 100,000 system errors from election day. More than four dozen voting machines contained votes time and date-stamped on the wrong day -- sometimes in the middle of the night, sometimes the wrong year.
Here are about 10,000 pages of Palm Beach County records:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/2197/6620.html
Here is an article about what we found in the error logs:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/19421.html
Here is another 10,000 pages of documents, this time from Pinellas County, Florida:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/2197/9652.html
We posted most of the Lucas County, Ohio documents in December 2004, but some rather misguided activists took it upon themselves to attack the site, trashing the forums and corrupting the forum program to the extent that we could no longer use it. Because of the security problems experienced while we were at that Web host, we relocated the site. The Lucas County documents were lost when we moved to a more secure environment. This is an example of how the flame wars that afflicted the activism movement during 2005 adversely affected everyone. Whatever anyone thinks of me personally or the Black Box Voting site as a whole, it made no sense to mess up the Lucas County document repository. Hopefully, activists from various camps will pledge to work more cooperatively this year.
We have since obtained a replacement set of the Lucas County documents, but have not posted them yet. I believe they are available elsewhere, and I know that activists like Rady Ananda and JoAnne Karasek from Ohio have done great work in analyzing them.
We have many boxes of records from Broward County awaiting scanning. In fact, we have a jumbo-sized filing cabinet full of public records from various places, and a storage room full of boxes of poll tapes.
Getting all the documents scanned takes weeks and weeks and weeks, even with a high speed scanner. Therefore, we looked at all the records but posted online only selected sets.
Most of the locations wrongfully withheld records or provided nonresponsive records. We are not staffed to follow up on delinquent records, nor do we have the funds to file 1,000 lawsuits at once.
However, we did bring this subject up again with John Conyers' staff. Kathleen Wynne and I spoke with the attorney handling records requests for the Conyers report. To our surprise, she reported the same problem we had! She informed us that even the House Judiciary Committee didn't seem to be able to get its records requests filled unless they sued for the records. The Chair of the California Elections Committee, Debra Bowen, reported the same problem to us. Her records requests in preparation for a series of senate hearings were simply ignored, in violation of California law.
Black Box Voting, through the work of Jim March, has drafted and proposed legislative language in California to address the elections public records crisis.
Black Box Voting also met with one of the most successful litigants to date on FOIA and public records requests, Armen Yousoufian, who won over $200,000 in damages from King County Washington for wrongfully withholding records. You can find an interview of Yousoufian with advice for obtaining public records here:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/9954/10071.html
and read more about how to pry open government here:
http://www.ArmenYousoufian.com
and here
http://www.Yousoufian.blogspot.com
We have broken the public records effort out separately on our 990 form. You can see the status of the 990 here:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/73/27283.html
We requested $50,000 for the FOIA effort and we succeeded in raising that amount. As you can see in the report, many locations chose to charge exhorbitant fees -- Orange County Florida wanted $16,000, and Michigan wanted $128,000 just for one set of state-level records. Several newspaper reporters have expressed their shock and awe to us over the prohibitive cost of obtaining even the most basic records to try to audit an election.
Thus, one facet of the elections crisis is indeed access to the public records needed to even attempt to substantiate the vote.
One good thing: Citizens all over the country have caught the FOIA bug. Many citizens emulated our original records request. We often post our new records requests here online, and citizens tell us it helps them create their own.
The election reform movement needs citizens all over the place, not just a few leaders, so to the extent that these public records efforts provide examples and role models for others, they also perform a valuable service.
If you have a specific county that you are wondering about, please let us know, and we'll see if we can dig it out of the files, scan it, and post it for you.
By the way, the FOIA (public records) requests are not the only thing we use the high speed scanner (and staff hours) for. We recently posted 45 previously unreleased Hart Intercivic manuals here:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/2197/4537.html
In addition, when you log in as a member you can visit the members workspace. In "The Stash" you'll find all kinds of things, from the code escrow agreements used by the Diebold to travel schedules of executives to staff lists for vendors.
Enjoy, and if you have questions, just ask! There are only three of us, and we're busier than a one-legged man in a butt-kicking contest. We decided to sit out the nit-picking contest and the flame-throwing contest, giving us more time to focus on constructive actions like working with the folks seeking advice on the One-on-One - Here is a link that shows constructive and cooperative work in election reform: http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/73/73.html
We are excited to see all the different Web sites and resources now for election reform. We encourage readers to visit them all and frequent those that suit your style. I think you'll find that we and the members here at this site are responsive and friendly.
After all, we're all in this together. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4078
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 15, 2006 - 11:38 pm: |
|
Also, here is another link you may find helpful. The Black Box Voting forums have a section called the Document Archive. There is a section within that called Public Records which has a variety of additional public records.
We encourage browsing through the whole Document Archive. It contains over 100,000 pages of documents. In addition, members of BBV can upload documents as well. You'll find additional documents scattered throughout the forums. You might want to try a search for anything with the suffix "pdf", for instance.
We think you'll be pleased at the variety of information you can find, and this grows each week.
Link to Document Archive:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/2197/2197.html |
Pat Vesely
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Pat_vesely
Post Number: 170
Registered: 02-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 15, 2006 - 11:43 pm: |
|
Thanks Bev!
Pat A. Vesely ;-) |
Melinda Watson
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Troubleinwinter
Post Number: 1
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 10:29 am: |
|
Is this to say that only five counties out of 3000 have complied, all of them in Forida? Evidently at this point three counties' documents are posted.
Volusia
Palm Beach
Pinellas
Lucas (docs were lost and replacements have not been scanned or reposted)
Broward (have not been scanned or posted)
Perhaps there is a more complete list you can direct me to. |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 2095
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 12:21 pm: |
|
Hi Melinda,
The responses from hundreds of counties are online, including copies of the additional documents that they returned, in many cases. All responses that were received were scanned and are online, I think.
I found it remarkable to read through them, and quite revealing. It is an education to see how many "responses" are actually "unresponsive" to what was asked for. Follow-up from BBV is indicated in comments with the original response.
* You get a feeling for who is cooperative, who is obstructive, who has basic reading comprehension and who doesn't, etc. (In some cases, there are clues as to which jurisdictions should be examined more closely when funds permit.)
* You will see some eye-opening information about how much different counties charge for responding to the request.
* The responses show what election officials were responsible in following up on the security implications after they'd been sent the Hursti Report by registered mail. (Almost none took any action; some claimed they never received it.) This could be of potential value since some state officials have a fiduciary duty to respond to security issues once they have been informed.
* The responses also showed some of the behind-the-scenes responses on the part of various election officials, county/state officials and Diebold.
These are all in the Document Archive, as mentioned above. |
Melinda Watson
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Troubleinwinter
Post Number: 2
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 1:07 pm: |
|
"You get a feeling for who is cooperative, who is obstructive..." Indeed.
Can you please direct me to "The responses from hundreds of counties" in response to the FOIA requests regarding documents related to election 11/2/2004?
Is there a database listing each FOIA and which have been complied with, and/or or responed to? Surely there must be a tally of some sort. |
Pat Vesely
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Pat_vesely
Post Number: 171
Registered: 02-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 2:06 pm: |
|
Hi Melinda, welcome to Black Box Voting.org!
As Bev explained above, BBV.org consists of three full time employees and a number of volunteers spread out across the country who are doing an almost impossible job of keeping this issue in the forefront of the American political landscape. We put in insane hours often working 12 to 16 hours a day, 7 days a week supporting investigations and legal actions on behalf of other grass roots election reform organizations.
For example, here it is Easter Sunday and I'm here answering questions for you rather than spending 'quality time' with my wife and children. I'm more than happy to do that if it helps advance the election reform movement in any way.
As Catherine has already pointed out, (Thanks Catherine!) the Document Archive contains tens of thousands of documents that all took time to request, receive, analyze, scan and post. With such a large task at hand and such a small crew to actually do it, we are forced to prioritize what we focus our limited time and efforts on. As much as we would love to create lists of, and post, every single document we receive to satisfy requests such as yours, we are limited to posting what we can as time and needs allow.
We created the 1 on 1 forum to address requests for specific information from individuals and and election reform groups that need help in their local areas. We don't have the time or resources to waste on answering such a generic request, nor have we had the time or resources to generate lists of all that we've accomplished or what remains to be done. We'd rather focus our attention on the most obvious areas where fraud is likely to have occurred rather than waste our resources documenting areas where there is no indication of problems and where local officials have been cooperative with our requests.
If you take the time to read through some of the other requests in this forum, you can get a better idea of what we do and how we can help you.
If you have a request for specific information for your area, please feel free to post it and we will do our best to answer it. If you are just seeking generic information about what all we've done, try using the 'Advanced Search' function at the upper left hand side of this page.
Thanks for your understanding and enjoy the site!
Pat A. Vesely ;-) |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 2098
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 2:12 pm: |
|
Sure.
Use the link provided above for the Document Archive. (I think it's important that you see the lengthy list of headings here. Each heading on this list has numerous other topics within it.)
Choose Public Records. (Again, it's important that you see the long list of items in this section.)
Then choose (US) Hursti Report Follow-Up. You'll see the hundreds of items there. There are 500 posts plus additional replies, organized alphabetically by State. Some threads here actually contain several documents or link to documents posted in other threads so as to avoid unnecessary repetition. (E.g., many counties returned the copies of the same letter from the SoS office.)
There are also posts that contain the text of the FOI and the parameters of who it was sent to (all SoS, counties and jurisdictions that use Diebold machines).
The responses are not in the form of a database. The degree of responsiveness is something that each individual can decide for themself. You'll get a better feel for this after you have spent time reading through many of them. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4081
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 2:38 pm: |
|
Melinda, I'll meet with the staff tomorrow and review the charts that we have detailing the responses of each jurisdiction. I think publishing a database is a reasonable request, since we requested a significant amount of funds for the project. As Pat mentioned, it does take staff time, and with six impossible things to do before breakfast, sometimes we miss a basic communication function like this one. Thinking about it, I do believe it's important, and will see if we can get it posted along with the 990.
I do know that we have scanned many of the Nov 2004 records that aren't online yet. We have to make a determination as to whether it is a good use of funds to add server space for the records. One of the factors in considering this is the amount of use such records have attracted. Even those records covered in the Associated Press have been downloaded very few times, indicating to us that the online versions were not used by very many people. We generally have shared them (even when not online) with the local citizens groups when they are actively doing the work.
Our working system for this has been to have a giant dry erase board in the office listing the jurisdictions, status, and which ones are the "hot" ones for additional follow up, along with the staff assignment. In additiona, we have an Excel spreadsheet -- two, actually, we don't have the stuff consolidated onto one, for boring reasons.
I think it is also reasonable for citizens to request information if they are planning to study their own county, and we'll do our best to provide it. I'm not sure it is reasonable to demand putting all the records online, as even the ones we have increased our backup service costs and server space needs. I say that because usage is low and it's more efficient to share directly when groups plan to use the records for analysis.
A report on the FOIA effort results will be posted along with the 990, but it may not be formatted according to the project guidelines that you created, Melinda. We have had our own project guidelines for this task.
Now, I have some additional data and questions for you, Melinda:
Contributions of Melinda Watson to Black Box Voting FOIA project:
$0.00
Contributions of Melinda Watson to any Black Box Voting project:
$0.00
My questions:
Melinda, you have made speculations and allegations at other Web sites about Black Box Voting, using fake names. Will you be willing to issue a correction to those that spread misinformation about our organization?
As I'm sure you know Melinda, Election Science Institute did a very similar FOIA effort. In fact, I think they used a records request almost identical to ours and employed Roxanne Jekot (boredtodeath, vgebert, Maddy McCall, DemActivist, SaddenedDem) for pay, after raising considerable funds to do so.
1. Can you point me to equivalent questions you posted speculating about or questioning the ESI public records / audit project?
2. Where is the database you refer to for ESI?
3. Are you evaluating the expenditures of each election reform group, or have you selected only Black Box Voting? If you have selected only one group, what caused you to make such a decision?
4. Do you believe that Black Box Voting has contributed, and is contributing, valuable information, research and resources for citizens?
If so, which do you feel are most valuable for election reform?
We don't place a valuation on input by the amount an individual has donated, but it helps to inform those who have supported Black Box Voting if they see a nonsupporter focusing only on this group, especially after posting misinformation at other Web sites without asking us directly for the facts.
We evaluate input by whether the individual who provides it appears to share the goals upon which our organization was founded. We pay careful attention to the constructive ideas and preferences of those who truly share our commitment to accurate, fair elections.
Melinda, I hope you will let us know how Black Box Voting can best support your own efforts to achieve election reform in Yavapai County, Arizona, one of the original Diebold locations.
I assure you we will take your ideas into consideration. |
Melinda Watson
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Troubleinwinter
Post Number: 3
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 3:47 pm: |
|
My query is simple: How many responses were received to the FOIAs regarding election 11/02/04? Which complied or gave other responses?
I am pleased that you agree that "publishing a database is a reasonable request". EXEL seems a better method than a dry-erase board.
Being directed to sift through thousands of documents that are entirely unrelated to this simple query is not helpful.
I am quite sure that you are anxious to post such basic information of results of the FOIA effort, al
In regards to the 990, while you need not post it online, it is a matter of law that it must be provided to anyone who requests it. Since your staff is apparently too overworked to even keep a complete and unified database of who has and hasn't responded/complied with FOIAs after well more than a year, perhaps it would be best to just post the 990, rather than responding to multiple requests.
Your comments to me unrelated to my query are not worthy of response, as some are nonsense and some are difflection.*
From BBV: Inflammatory comments deleted. BBV forum rules -- focus on the issues, no insults. |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 2100
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 4:04 pm: |
|
Melinda,
You must have missed my second post above in response to your query. This will help you quickly find the documents you want, without "sift[ing] through thousands of documents that are entirely unrelated to this simple query."
I even provided you with a rough count of the number of responses.
In case you can't find it, here's the post that tells you how to find what you want. |
Melinda Watson
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Troubleinwinter
Post Number: 4
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 4:39 pm: |
|
The links you provided appear to be responses to a BBV letter of Sept. 7, 2005, requesting information pertaining to the July 4, 2005 BBV Security Alert written by Harri Hursti.
That has nothing whatever to do with my query, which is regarding responses to FOIAs related to 11/02/2004 elections records.
Why is this like pulling teeth? It seems an obvious and clear-cut question. HOW MANY FOIAs WERE COMPLIED WITH? HOW MANY WERE NOT? |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 2101
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 4:56 pm: |
|
Melinda,
Oh, right. I misunderstood what you wanted.
It would be great to get a feel for these FOI results from the 2004 elections--I agree with you about that. Maybe we'll see something here soon. Stay tuned.
My experience has been that constructive suggestions are always welcome here, though of course there are limitations to what a small staff can do. It would be great if BBV could double or triple their staff size--that would expand the scope considerably.
This is the first I heard about the ESI project. Have you heard anything at all from them about their results? |
Pat Vesely
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Pat_vesely
Post Number: 172
Registered: 02-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 5:12 pm: |
|
Melinda, actually, the list(s) that Catherine referred to had been posted on the old BBV.org site, before it was corrupted, and will need to be dug out of the archives and reformatted before it can be reposted here. I just got off the phone with Bev and we're trying to make time in our schedule to accommodate your request.
Since we do have a number of other requests for assistance and support for actions that require our immediate attention, coming from other election reform organizations that require our help in a timely fashion, your request will have to wait.
We simply can't just drop what we're doing in support of those who have supported our efforts and are in need of documentation for meetings with their local officials this week, to immediately address a request from someone who has been dismissive of our work just to satisfy their curiosity.
While publishing a list of the information you requested would be nice, it would do nothing to help our goals in the here and now. As it is, no less than four members of our organization have taken time out of their schedules on this holiday to help answer your questions. Three of us have answered you directly, and John Howard, (AKA HarmonyGuy from DU) took the time to search for the missing lists.
We have gone out of our way to try to be helpful, taking time away from our families on a holiday no less, and also taking time away from more important matters. With each post you've made, your tone has become more and more demanding. Why is that?
We've conceded that your request has some merit and have offered to accommodate it as soon as we can. That's the best we can do right now. If your goal is to waste our time consider your mission accomplished.* Your request for a copy of our completed Form 990 has been duly noted and will be sent at our earliest convenience within our legal responsibility to do so.
Happy Easter! I'm off to go spend some time with my family.
Pat A. Vesely ;-)
*From BBV admin: speculation about motivation removed |
Bruce Sims
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ubetchaiam
Post Number: 740
Registered: 06-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 5:14 pm: |
|
Somehow, I just can't see Bev Harris begging for anything except perhaps the health and well being of her family. And I've never-in 3 years of interaction- ever observed or heard ANYONE at BBV begging for anything.
Bev, if you need dba help, let me know. |
Melinda Watson
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Troubleinwinter
Post Number: 5
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 5:28 pm: |
|
Yes, "FOI results from the 2004 elections--I agree with you about that", I am pleased that you agree.
ESI is not the subject at hand. BBV is. It is now 1-1/2 years post election, and as far as I can tell, (I now must add Glades County, FL) there are four counties' docs posted on BBV, but no accounting of what other counties did or did not comply.
Are we to assume that all other counties did not respond? Partly responded? Responded but have not been posted? There is no way for us to know. THERE IS NO ACCOUNTING* (other than a dry erase board) that I can find.
A great deal of money was raised for this very specific effort, yet the results evidently are not annalized, not tracked, not logged or simply kept from public knowledge.* Why is that? "Staff is busy".
from BBV: Inflammatory sections crossed out, in keeping with BBV posting style requirements.
*Most nonprofits account for projects on their 990. See the thread on 990 for accounting on this project
**Assumes facts not in evidence. Results have been analyzed. Depth of analysis depends on the nature of anomalies found in the tapes. The Hursti Report is a result of analysis of Diebold poll tapes. Results are tracked, but not entered into public report format. Results were logged in two ways: 1) Checked in the results on the board 2) Logged payments for each request into accounting. Until now, no one has asked for the specific report Melinda appears to be asking for. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4082
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 5:37 pm: |
|
We get asked to provide a lot of information about a lot of things. Normally when people ask for it on Easter Sunday and they are generous about giving a day or two to reply.
You are correct that Catherine was referring to a different set of records requests.
I should explain that it doesn't work to keep the whole set of information in a spreadsheet. The "notes" section describing the responses to the requests became extensive for some jurisdictions.
There is a spreadsheet of the original requests sent out, but the actual results of the test are in the form of neatly filed and labeled records rather than narrative data entry or statistical data entry. Some analysis has been has been done on every set of results. Formal reports are not written up on most, especially when there are no particular anomalies or the problems are the same for every jurisdiction that has that system.
The original spreadsheets were actually two spreadsheets, not because we were disorganized (although at times we have been, while we were putting in more infrastructure). It wasn't because we were overworked, though we generally are. It is because we weren't networked at the time we compiled the database for and sent those requests. We had two people (me and Kathleen) working on it. We were at that time not funded even to the extent that we had computers, so we were donating the use of two different personal computers. Since then, Black Box Voting has been able to purchase a set of computers for the office. Now we can put things on the network, but back then we couldn't, thus the two spreadsheets. Of course, we can certainly merge them together. We haven't done that, because that particular task hasn't risen to the top of the our priority list.
What may seem clear cut to you is not clear cut.
For example, is King County, which provided what they contend to be the GEMS audit log but is really a different audit log, discarded the Windows Event log, and provided poll tapes that were each about 100 feet long due to an unusual way of tabulating the precincts (but wanted too much money to provide all the poll tapes) -- would that be considered complying, not complying or partially complying?
The records request had seven or eight parts. The reports requested vary depending on the voting system used, but for obvious reasons we had to create a somewhat generic request form.
It is inaccurate to create a chart with simple "yes-no" answers. You could do so for statistical purposes, I suppose, but we did not do this project to create statistics. We undertook this to determine if it is possible to substantiate the election results with the voting machine logs. We learned that, by and large, the logs did not substantiate the results, the logs showed that many of the districts use unreliable and error-prone machines, and that it is possible to tamper with the logs. When done clumsily, it leaves telltale signs, as it did in King County and Volusia County and Palm Beach County.
Let's start by having a look at the original records request. I'll attach it in the next post. After examining it, it would be helpful if you can let us know how you would define "complied with."
For example, what do you do when the public official thinks they are complying but doesn't understand their own system so they send you a variation of the report, but not exactly what you asked for?
Do you define it as "complied with" if you had to sue to get the records because it was initially not complied with?
We could categorize the responses, but I'm not sure if that's what you're looking for either. That's kind of a statistical approach, and I don't believe it is a good use of time for election reform actions, as compared with all the things that are a higher priority. We're not interested in just cranking out a report to some arbitrary specification for statistical purposes.
Perhaps it will help if you can explain what you need the information for. That way, we can help you define the report in a way that matches your needs.
I would like to know how we can best help you in constructive election reform efforts. After all, what point is there in creating various reports, if not to be used for taking effective action on reform efforts?
quote:Your comments to me unrelated to my query are not worthy of response, as some are nonsense and some are difflection.
At Black Box Voting, we try to focus on issues and actions. So, in your responses, if you can first assume that we are willing to cooperate, and next, help us help you by explaining why the information is needed (and therefore, giving us guidance on how to format and define the information), then we can move forward in a really good way.
"How many FOIAs were complied with and how many were not" is not answerable without establishing definitions as to what qualifies as "complied with." We can set those definitions if you provide information on what you need the information for.
For example: Are you working on election reform by creating a paper on public records compliance? In that case, you probably have a working definition of your own that we can match to.
Are you trying to find out which areas of the country need additional follow up on the records requests? In that case, you'd want a laundry list of what they did and did not provide and any flaws with it. If that's what you need, if you can let us know the geographic area it will help.
It should be a simple matter to let us know how best to provide what you really need, and it would be great if you can describe how you are hoping to use this information to take election reform actions, because that will help others who visit this site. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4083
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 5:44 pm: |
|
|
Melinda Watson
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Troubleinwinter
Post Number: 6
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 5:47 pm: |
|
Pat, "With each post you've made, your tone has become more and more demanding." I think I have only tried to clarify and simplify the specifics of my query.
As for your Easter Holiday, I have never made any requests that I obtain answers on any particular time schedule (though I will admit that some of my questions directed privately to Bev go back a year or more).
"publishing a list of the information you requested would be nice, it would do nothing to help our goals". Should I take this to mean that the claims and promises made by BBV to post results of FOIA are to be regarded as meaningless talk?*
from BBV: Repeat inflammatory. Suspended. |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 2103
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 5:52 pm: |
|
The ESI matter seems relevant because if two groups have independently sought the same or similar information it would be interesting to compare the results. |
Melinda Watson
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Troubleinwinter
Post Number: 7
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 5:55 pm: |
|
Catherine~ ESI is relevant to the overall issue. But my query only relates to BBV FOIA results. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4084
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 6:04 pm: |
|
The ESI matter is also relevant because if Melinda isn't really working on election reform actions with this request, but is in fact working on activism turf wars -- something that all of us are striving to reduce in 2006, because there are more important things to do with our time -- well then, this should be exposed for other activists so they will understand the context of her questions.
We're all in this together. Thus, the question about why the information is needed and whether it is a general question aimed at two different groups (both of whom raised money and both of whom invested some of the funds raised into FOIA requests and analysis) -- or if it is information needed for an upcoming meeting, or what. Cranking out information for turf wars is our lowest priority and probably will never make it to the top of the list. But if it is needed for valid election reform actions, we're here for you.
If Melinda will provide information as to how she is using this to achieve specific election reform actions, we'll put our absolute best efforts towards helping her do so.
If it's a turf war thing, we'll query our membership as to what THEY would like to see done to help in their local election reform actions, and we'll focus on whichever action is most constructive.
The 990, by the way, IS the report or the "accounting for it", and here is the thread where we discuss timeline and how we're handling the 990:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/73/27283.html
The 990 thread lets interested parties know that they can email us to get a pdf file of the 990 (beginning May 15) and also that we have made the decision to become more transparent than any other election reform site that we know of. We will post our 990s here on our Web site, to save people the trouble of requesting them or waiting for them on Guidestar.
I'll admit that my first paragraph here questions motivation as well. You see how one jab triggers another which triggers another? This is pretty rare for BBV. Sorry, Melinda, for guessing at your motivations. Instead, let's turn it around to something more constructive: If you can help us learn why you need this information (because the "accounting for FOIA actions" is on our 990, so you must need this report now for something else). We don't just jump through hoops at anyone's beck and call, there has to be a reason to assign it a priority. Otherwise, one person could order us to mail them a ham sandwich, and another person could ask us to find sources for a college paper, and still another could request a list of all the respondents to the Hursti public records requests. The only way to establish a priority is to know a little more about what election reform action it's needed for. |
Pat Vesely
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Pat_vesely
Post Number: 173
Registered: 02-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 6:05 pm: |
|
No Ma'am, just that it isn't our highest priority at this time. If you take some time to read through the various forums here you will find many requests for information from election reform activists who require specific information that they need for upcoming meetings. Those requests take priority.
Your request is rather general in nature and was made with no specific goal or time requirement stipulated. As Bev has already pointed out, if you have a specific reason that the information is needed with a specific time constraint for obtaining it, there are a number of us who would be more than willing to help you get it. That's what we do here. 
As I've asked you previously, please take some time to read a few of the other requests in this forum, and also check out some of the other forums here to see how we help out other election reform activists on any given day. We take great pride in what we do here, and we do the very best we can to help everyone in a timely fashion. If you feel your request should be satisfied at the expense of other more pressing issues, I'm sorry, I don't know what to tell you other than we're doing our level best to do as much as we can. We can only do so much on any given day.
Peace!
Pat A. Vesely ;-) |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4085
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 6:06 pm: |
|
Boils down to two questions for Melinda:
1. What made you decide to focus only on one organization, not both?
2. How do you intend to use this information for election reform actions? |
Melinda Watson
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Troubleinwinter
Post Number: 8
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 6:16 pm: |
|
Hahaha! I noted the editing of my post above. I have never seen such a thing done before! Usually, people simply respond, rather than crossing out another's post. But it is your site.
I have not requested "in depth reports" or "the nature of anomalies found in the tapes" nor "Logged payments for each request into accounting".
I have already indicated my qestion: "My query is simple: How many responses were received to the FOIAs regarding election 11/02/04? Which complied or gave other responses?" I have managed to divine from your site that six counties, all in Florida, responded, and four have been posted. That is the extent of information I have been able to distill down thus far. |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 2104
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 6:16 pm: |
|
Wow--that's some FOIA request. It's easy to imagine that lots of responses might be partial, and there might be a lot of variation in the degree of completeness.
You'd need a lot of different categories if anyone ever wanted to describe the degrees of compliance/obstructiveness. Then you could factor in the speed of response, number of communications (or litigations) required to elicit a response, cost of getting the requested documents. . . It could make a great Ph.D. thesis for someone out there.
I guess the main thing was, the responses you got served your purpose in helping identify the places where BBV should focus its first investigations. (Doing a database or statistical analysis wasn't BBV's reason for carrying out this exercise. It's good that you made that clear.)
I have seen tens of thousands of documents here that resulted from the FOIA follow-up investigations (Florida in particular), and I remember that some couldn't be posted immediately because another group was using them for their lawsuit.
I seem to remember seeing other FOIA documents from some other states, some which were initially kept offline so as not to alert election officials in another state (Washington & California, I think) about what anomalies were special targets. Once the results were received and analyzed then the responses were posted online.
I also remember seeing this explained several times on the BBV website, in response to queries such as Melinda's.
It'll be helpful to have Melinda's feedback on the information that will be most useful to her. I'll be curious to see an overview if it's possible to put the data together without compromising more important projects. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4086
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 6:27 pm: |
|
Melinda:
We have policies for what is constructive and what is not. When people spread disinformation or spin, the first time or two we highlight it by crossing it out in red and identifying why it doesn't meet our forum requirements. If people continue to post inflammatory material, or material that puts an inaccurate spin on things, or question the motivations of others, or post overly aggressive rebuttals we suspend them -- but that hardly ever happens. The crossout method helps create respectful dialog very quickly.
And you're in good company. Pat Vesely has had some posts chided in this manner, quite a while ago. Several have. It has really worked to get the dialog focused on election reform actions and away from flame-throwing. All we're interested in is action that improves our elections.
Do you have an upcoming meeting that you need this information for? Pat is correct that those posts are assigned a higher priority.
Is your contention that because documents aren't posted that they don't exist? That's what we would consider "spin" because there are more constructive ways to get answers to that.
For example: Do you have the 2004 documents for Travis County Texas?
(Answer: Yes. Do you need them? What's your deadline?)
Reply: We're trying to compare them with the messed up results from the most recent election where all the extra vote showed up. We have a meeting next Thursday
(Answer: Okay, we'll get them to you by then. Also, you should check out the new stash of Hart manuals, and if you have a programmer, we can provide you with additional information in a private forum.)
See how constructive that is? First, assume that we are sincere about what we are doing. While our initial thought was to just load everything online, that wasn't the most useful thing for the activism movement. We learned that activists want and need just specific information. That's why we have this section. They let us know what they need, by when, give us a little background, and we see what we can do to help. |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 2105
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 6:40 pm: |
|
I think it would be instructive for activists, media and members of the public from right across the country to see the relative responsiveness to the FOIA requests.
Just a simple subjective scale (1 to 5 or 1 to 10). Or maybe 0 to 5, with zero being complete unresponsiveness or requiring litigation in order to get a response, and taking costs subjectively into account in cases like Michigan where the costs were obviously an obstructive barrier. (So in some cases a state-imposed barrier would affect the local jurisdiction's ratings.)
Depending on your preferences, you could choose to rate according to compliance or according to obstructiveness. (I'd choose compliance. More constructive.)
I admit that this would take time, but it would provide a tremendous baseline in revealing the degree of transparency or lack thereof in the existing election system, and the degree of cooperation that citizens were or were not getting from the public officials who are supposed to be serving them.
It would also demonstrate why funding of organizations such as BBV is so crucial.
A country-wide rating would also put pressure on those places that show up as real black spots. It would be a great media tool. And it would give activists in the problem areas a strong incentive and a helpful tool to focus their efforts.
It would be useful to include a field for a brief optional explanatory note for places where there was something especially good or bad.
To keep your own time to a minimum, another staff member could do a rough draft based on the documents provided and then you could easily correct the ratings if necessary.
It would provide a lot of added value to the work already done. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4087
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 6:54 pm: |
|
Catherine -- That's a great idea. It meets the criteria of being efficient and providing a tool to improve election integrity at the same time.
Melinda -- does that sound like the kind of thing you're looking for? |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 2106
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 7:01 pm: |
|
Bev,
Thanks for the red-lining on a number of posts up above, including your own. It makes things clearer about what is and isn't ok, and restores a level playing field. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4089
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 7:23 pm: |
|
Regarding the issue of posting real names:
Just say no to turf wars, it's best for the election reform movement. Malicious information or misinformation and innuendo that damages the reputation of a real entity will result in confronting the issue using real names on both sides.
In 2005, and to a lesser extent in 2006, we have seen some cybersmear behavior that gets over the top. Unfounded accusations alleging all kinds of things, from fraud to killing people. Always under fake names.
If you use a fake name on the Internet and don't want your real name used elsewhere, avoid cyberlibel and avoid speculations. If you have a question about Black Box Voting, just come to the One-on-One and ask.
The right to confront one's accuser is well established in American jurisprudence, whether the damaging speculations, innuendo etc. are printed in a magazine, mailed in a private letter, or scrawled on a bathroom wall. The right to anonymity vanishes when you choose to spread damaging rumors, speculations, or innuendos against a real entity.
It's best for the election reform movement to avoid this kind of behavior anyway, don't you agree?
We don't "out" the names of individuals from other forums unless they are engaged in malicious innuendo, inaccurate and damaging speculations, or flat-out libel. Any of these things may result in outing the fake name.
The Trollwatch section of this forum now has a roster of fake names/real names. It is private except to a handful of researchers, and was set up for the sole purpose of combatting organized Internet-based cybersmears using the fake-name tactic. |
Melinda Watson
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Troubleinwinter
Post Number: 9
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 7:43 pm: |
|
Catherine's suggestion makes a great deal of sense to me. "relative responsiveness to the FOIA requests" seems no different from what I have been asking for.
I don't know why it was so important to post my personal, private information before I joined this board. Because I had sent a private email request for BBV's 990, as per law? Because I have expressed opinions on DU? To intimidate me? Why would you care to post a person's private information, who was not a member here? To allow people to harass me? Not just my name, but my town. Good work, Bev. I have already gotten numerous hangup calls today, and have never gotten a single one before. Good work. If you have any conscience or decency, you can delete my personal information now. |
Melinda Watson
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Troubleinwinter
Post Number: 10
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 8:01 pm: |
|
Well, that is interesting. Sometime after you posted my name and town (before I registered as a member), you finally saw fit to replace my town name with my county, without comment. Makes me wonder why you posted my town in the first place. |
Melinda Watson
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Troubleinwinter
Post Number: 11
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 8:16 pm: |
|
Bev posts: "We don't "out" the names of individuals from other forums unless they are engaged in malicious innuendo, inaccurate and damaging speculations, or flat-out libel. Any of these things may result in outing the fake name."
("fake name"? People have user names... they are not attempting to pass themselves off as someone else.)
It would appear that the following post is what caused you to decide to "out" my personal name and the name of my small town, which seemingly has led to telephone harassment. I see nothing different in my post from what I have discussed here on your site today. So WHY, specifically, did you post my personal information?
troubleinwinter (1000+ posts) Sat Apr-15-06 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. Why am I NOT surprised she has not posted the rest of the docs...
She raised money to file 3,000 FOIA across the country after 2004 election, with the promise to post the docs for study. Over a year ago, she begged donation of a high speed scanner (which she obtained) to scan and post the resultant materials.
To this date, a year and a half after the election, I cannot find an accounting of how many FOIAs were sent, how many were/were not complied with fully or partially.
I can find none of the resulting documents posted.
If anyone can provide a link showing where Bev has fulfilled her promises to those who sent her money, I'd be fascinated to see it.
|
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 4095
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 5 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006 - 11:56 pm: |
|
Melinda,
When you choose to repeat negative, malicious talking points, naming real names while using your fake name, you lost the right to anonymity. I reviewed your posting history on other sites before publishing your real name. You do not have the right to keep your name private when you spread malicious innuendo against real people and a real organization. You lost that right.
You are engaged in a turf war. You participate in this turf war with a handful of other election reform activists, who tag-team with each other to manufacture disapproval.
We believe that it is particularly important if you are in the election reform movement to identify who you are when you attack other groups.
Why do you think turf wars are a good way to invest your time?
Why not spend your time doing real election reform instead?
There are valid reasons to have different approaches in election reform. It is unAmerican for one election reform group to try to annihilate another election reform group.
You parrot negative turf war talking points:
quote:We must support those who are genuine in their devotion to real transparent elections.
I'm not guessing at motivations here, because you yourself state that you believe part of your elections reform efforts involve "separating" different groups/people:
quote:I see part of supporting them as separating ourselves from those who would use the movement for personal gain
You allege that "Bev Harris" is "using the movement for personal gain" without any knowledge of my personal financial situation or any information whatsoever about what I have or have not "gained." Shame on you.
quote:or discredit us.
Classic turf war stuff. "Our way is the only way." "Only our group is a legitimate group." "We're the bestest and the onliest."
Now, Melinda:
Of course, our 990 is public record. Of course, we include accountability for the projects for which we have solicited donations.
Instead of simply waiting for the 990 to appear on schedule, you go around the Internet under a fake name posting innuendo as if we are "hiding something" when we don't post it ahead of schedule.
The fact that you claim to have been asking for "accountability" over a year ago (read: a year before the 990 was due) indicates you have some sort of special criteria for the Black Box Voting organization that doesn't apply to any other election reform group, nor indeed to any other nonprofit group anywhere.
That behavior is dishonorable, fractures coalitions, creates distrust among election reform advocates, and must not be allowed to take place under a hidden identity.
I doubt very much that you are getting hangup calls from anyone involved with this organization. However, if you participate in smear tactics and turf wars, others in Arizona who are involved in election reform have the right to know who you are. After all, they might be next! Maybe other Arizona activists were checking to see if it's the Melinda Watson they know, so they can be more careful when sharing any information with you.
People have a right to know about such behavior before working with you. Black Box Voting has the right to know the names of those who spread libel and misinformation around the Internet.
You, too, may want to learn more about the individuals you tag-team with.
boredtodeath is Roxanne Jekot, a convicted felon (bank robbery) who worked for Election Science Institute and has posted cyberlibel under at least six different screen names. Both funders and employers have the right to know about this behavior. Jekot also runs CounttheVote.org, a Georgia voting reform organization. However, instead of posting smears under her own name, so that everyone can see that the disruption is coming from a rival election reform activist who is employed by a rival elections reform group. Roxanne Jekot posts under the monikers "boredtodeath" "vgebert" "Maddy McCall" "Roxannej" "SaddenedDem" "DemActivist" -- and those are just the ones we know about. If you Google those names you'll see the vicious and inappropriate nature of the turf wars.
Hiding behind a fake name is not appropriate.
"Willyourvotebecounted" is Joyce McCloy, who heads NCVerifiableVoting. She, too has participated in behavior that fractures the election reform movement, doing so under a fake name. Other North Carolina activists, many of whom are members here, have a right to know. We have a right to know.
The "anonymous army" method of fake-name Internet political opinion-molding is disreputable. If you plan to participate in either turf wars or smear tactics, you have also effectively made the decision to have your real name accompany such efforts.
I would hope that re-thinking the strategy will take place next. What's more important? Achieving election reform or having a turf war? (And why should either one be done using a fake name?) |
|
|
Sample copy of Nov. 2004 records request
