EP7 - Election Fraud

In the fall of 2001, after an eight-month review of 175,000 Florida
ballots never counted in the 2000 election, an analysis by the
National Opinion Research Center confirmed that Al Gore actually
won Florida and should have been President. However, coverage of
this report was only a small blip in the corporate media as a much
bigger story dominated the news after September 11, 2001.

New research compiled by Dr. Dennis Loo with the University of Cal
Poly Pomona now shows that extensive manipulation of
non-paper-trail voting machines occurred in several states during
the 2004 election.

The facts are as follows:

In 2004 Bush far exceeded the 85% of registered Florida Republican
votes that he got in 2000, receiving more than 100% of the
registered Republican votes in 47 out of 67 Florida counties, 200%
of registered Republicans in 15 counties, and over 300% of
registered Republicans in 4 counties. Bush managed these remarkable
outcomes despite the fact that his share of the crossover votes by
registered Democrats in Florida did not increase over 2000, and he
lost ground among registered Independents, dropping 15 points. We
also know that Bush "won" Ohio by 51-48%, but statewide results
were not matched by the court-supervised hand count of the 147,400
absentee and provisional ballots in which Kerry received 54.46% of
the vote. In Cuyahoga County, Ohio the number of recorded votes was
more than 93,000 greater than the number of registered
voters.

More importantly national exit polls showed Kerry winning in 2004.
However, It was only in precincts where there were no paper trails
on the voting machines that the exit polls ended up being different
from the final count. According to Dr. Steve Freeman, a
statistician at the University of Pennsylvania, the odds are 250
million to one that the exit polls were wrong by chance. In fact,
where the exit polls disagreed with the computerized outcomes the
results always favored Bush - another statistical impossibility.
.

Dennis Loo writes, "A team at the University of California at
Berkeley, headed by sociology professor Michael Hout, found a
highly suspicious pattern in which Bush received 260,000 more votes
in those Florida precincts that used electronic voting machines
than past voting patterns would indicate compared to those
precincts that used optical scan read votes where past voting
patterns held."

There is now strong statistical evidence of widespread voting
machine manipulation occurring in US elections since 2000. Coverage
of the fraud has been reported in independent media and various
websites. The information is not secret. But it certainly seems to
be a taboo subject for the US corporate media.

Black Box Voting reported on March 9, 2005 that voting machines
used by over 30 million voters were easily hacked by relatively
unsophisticated programs and audits of the computers would not show
the changes. It is very possible that a small team of hackers could
have manipulated the 2004 and earlier elections in various
locations throughout the United States. Irregularities in the vote
counts certainly indicate that something beyond chance occurrences
has been happening in recent elections.

That a special interest group might try to cheat on an election in
the United States is nothing new. Historians tell us how local
political machines from both major parties have in the past used
methods of double counting, ballot box stuffing, poll taxes and
registration manipulation to affect elections. In the computer age,
however, election fraud can occur externally without local precinct
administrators having any awareness of the manipulations - and the
fraud can be extensive enough to change the outcome of an entire
national election.

There is little doubt key Democrats know that votes in 2004 and
earlier elections were stolen. The fact that few in Congress are
complaining about fraud is an indication of the totality to which
both parties accept the status quo of a money based elections
system. Neither party wants to further undermine public confidence
in the American "democratic" process (over 80 millions eligible
voters refused to vote in 2004). Instead we will likely see the
quiet passing of legislation that will correct the most blatant
problems. Future elections in the US will continue as an equal
opportunity for both parties to maintain a national democratic
charade in which money counts more than truth.

Peter Phillips