ORAL ARGUMENTS ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO BE MADE MONDAY SEPTEMBER 8, 2008 at 2:30 pm - Click Events

---

ALL MOTIONS FROM MARCH AND APRIL 2008 ARE NOW POSTED - Click Legal Suit

---

Georgia E-Voting: Why we believe it is Illegal and Unconstitutional

On July 13, 2006 a group of Georgia citizens, organized by VoterGa.org, filed suit that can benefit all nine million current and future Georgia voters. It contends that our current electronic voting method is illegal and unconstitutional according to state law. The charges may seem overstated to an uninformed observer but this overview of the 7 legal counts reveals the unreported detail:

Machine Accuracy – Georgia law requires that electronic voting machines “…record correctly and accurately every vote cast…” at the time they are used. No procedure was ever implemented to ensure that the machines record the votes accurately on election night when they are used.

Recount Ability – State law provides conditions when candidates are entitled to a recount of votes. Georgia E-Voting made recounts impossible because it removed all direct physical evidence of voter intent from our elections. Voter verified ballots were replaced by voter inaccessible electronic records. Only reprints of previous unverifiable results are now possible.

Ballot Requirement – The Georgia Constitution requires all elections to be conducted by ballot. When E-Voting was implemented in 2002, Georgia law was modified to state that elections “shall be conducted by ballot except when voting machines are used…” State law cannot override a Constitutional requirement. Elections must be conducted by ballot, not by electronic record.

People Participation - The Georgia Constitution defines our “method of voting” as “elections by the people”. Currently, the people cannot see the selections on their own ballots, cannot confirm that their ballots were cast and cannot participate in counting the votes to determine election results. All critical functions of “elections by the people” were unconstitutionally removed from the people.

Equal Protection – The Georgia Constitution states: “No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws.” Georgia absentee voters cast votes on standard ballots that can be verified, audited and recounted. Georgia Election Day voters do not have those same privileges and are denied equal protection of the laws stated above. Specific fineualities exist in ballot verification, recounts, investigation of discrepancies, fraud detection and producing evidence for contested elections

___

The original lawsuit also claims the 2006 audit trail pilot project is unconstitutional and illegal as follows:

Ballot Secrecy – The Constitution requires that elections “must be conducted by secret ballot” so that no one can identify candidates that the voter chose. The newer Diebold pilot project machines roll election results sequentially into a sealed canister. This technique can allow a poll worker or observer who accesses the results to determine precisely what candidates each voter selected. New- In April of 2007, the Secretary of State's office produced a report that corroborated this charge

Machine Accuracy – The newer Diebold pilot machines also cannot meet time of use accuracy requirements because they do not produce individually separated ballots that can be quickly counted and audited once the polls close. The new pilot project law even allows for machine results to be audited AFTER the election results are certified.

____

NEW- During the discovery period additional counts were added to the lawsuit. These involve:

Illegal Acquisition – When voting machines were procured and tested in 2001, the law required that:  “such voting systems have an independent audi trail of each vote cast". The 21st Century Voting Commission, Fulton County, state legislators and authenticated plaintiff Emails also made similar requests  In spite of the law and the recommendations, the voting machines were procured for testing, certified, and acquired through a $54 million dollar contract while the law was still in effect.

Improper Certification – The state has been unable to produce certification reports for voting machines that were procured in 2001, implemented in 2002, updated in 2005 and piloted in 2006. Patches were applied to the voting machines in 2002 after they were certified and the machines were not recertified as required by law. A 12/02 letter from the Secretary of State's office to Diebold indicates that the office was still awaiting impact analysis of the patch and confirmation that a recertification was not required after the 2002 election was conducted. The state's witness has also concurred that with an Election Assistance Commission subcommittee's draft conclusion that states it is not possible to write testable requirements to ensure that electronic voting machine software is correct

Federal Equal Protection – The 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution states: “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the UNited States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due proces of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” The same violations of equal protection previously mentioned for the state apply at the federal level.

. 

Federal Due Process – The county and state servers that count both the Election Day electronic votes and optically scanned absentee ballots are subject to fraudulent manipulation of votes that canot be detected according to admissions by a key state's witness. Enforcement of these servers, and the federal equal protection violations previously stated constitute a violation of federal due process rights of the United States Constitution.

_______

RELIEF - The basic relief that the plaintiffs seek are:

• Statewide external audit trail capabilty for any voting machines used;
• A public audit of at least one randomly selected race at the precinct on election night;
• Allowing the visually imparied to continue to vote independently with whatever solution is implemented 

The could have been accomplished or the problems avoided in 2001 if the law had been followed. Instead, citizens like those in VoterGa who have already spent thousands of hours and dollars on this issue now must file suit to restore voting that can be verified, audited and recounted. The suit is structured to so that we can win the case against current E-voting or the 2006 pilot by winning just one count against each of the technologies. Georgia needs your immediate help so that we can take appropriate legal action to restore voting that can be verified, audited and recounted. Freedom is not free. Please click the Donation button to contribute or mail your contribution to:

Voter GA    P.O. Box 808   Decatur, Ga. 30031

We are a volunteer organization so all money that you give will directly offset the legal expenses of preparing, filing and arguing this suit to preserve the principles of democracy in Georgia.  See the Contribute page for infomration about special gifts for donors. Thank you.