Peter Deutsch – 3/8/06

This page was last updated on March 10, 2006.

Paper ballot backups a must; Peter Deutsch; Beaver County Times; March 8, 2006.

This is at least the third letter from Mr. Deutsch on this topic in less than a year.

Before you read Mr. Deutsch’s letter, consider the following comment he made on the forum (August 23, 2005) for the Beaver County Coalition for Social Justice regarding the voting machine issue: “Perhaps provoking them [election officials] with stretched truths is an apporpriate [sic] tactic. But let’s see it for what it is … a tactic.” When do “stretched truths” become lies? You’ll see below.

For more on this topic, see my critique of Catherine Gatian’s letter.

Below is a detailed critique of the letter.

“Electronic voting machines, specifically DREs such as the iVotronic, conceal the vote tallying from inspection so that they can come out with anything you could want.”

[RWC] False. Most – if not all – DREs can be purchased with a voter-verifiable paper ballot backup just as Mr. Deutsch claims he wants. They were on display at the Beaver County Courthouse last fall and I saw them.

Mr. Deutsch is picking on iVotronic because that’s the system Beaver County chose to replace its previous system.

“We must not allow electronic voting without voter verified paper ballot back up. Otherwise, no recount is possible and we cannot check to be sure that all votes have been counted properly. Paper ballot [sic] can be secured as they have for many years before the 1983 county referendum when electronic voting did not exist.”

[RWC] Where was Mr. Deutsch when lever systems were used? These systems don’t provide “voter verified paper ballot back up.”

Mr. Deutsch wants us to believe paper ballots are inherently secure. Where does he believe the phrase “ballot box stuffing” came from?

I may be displaying my ignorance, but I don’t know what he means about a “1983 county referendum” and what it had to do with voting systems.

“The federal Department of Justice is threatening with prosecution of any county that does not accept these machines. It is desperate to install machines that can be modified without detection or scrutiny in time to transform the outcome of elections. This could turn Pennsylvania into another Ohio or Florida for the next election. It is demanding that all counties roll over and sign a consent decree to machines such as the iVotronic.”

[RWC] Mr. Deutsch finally admitted it; he’s a conspiracy nut!

I believe he is lying and/or ignorant of the law. Why?

First, the U.S. Constitution does not grant the federal government the power to tell the states how to conduct elections beyond the obvious (one person, one vote; no discrimination; no poll taxes; et cetera). The feds have no inherent power to tell the states to use any voting system (paper, punch card, DRE, lever, et cetera).

Second, the law to which Mr. Deutsch refers, the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), provides funding to states that choose to change from punch cards or lever systems to something else. As with many federal laws covering extraconstitutional areas, states don’t have to do change voting systems if they choose not to accept the federal funds. Indeed, Title III, Section 301 says all existing voting systems can meet HAVA requirements.

It’s hard for me to believe a person who apparently spends a lot of time on this crusade doesn’t know the applicable law.

What does electronic voting have to do with either Florida in 2000 or Ohio in 2004? The Florida problems were in Democrat precincts run by Democrats and using punch card ballots developed by Democrats. Likewise in Ohio, the alleged irregularities were in Democrat precincts run by Democrats.

Let’s be honest; Mr. Deutsch’s problem with Florida and Ohio is that both states voted for President Bush. Had the elections gone for Al Gore and John Kerry, Mr. Deutsch would likely not be on this jihad.

“Further, these iVotronic machines will likely malfunction, costing much money that was not originally planned for. They will generate much concern and anguish. There is much about this documented in newspapers and other sources in a wide range of other states.”

[RWC] For whom will the voting machines “generate much concern and anguish,” other than Mr. Deutsch and his fellow conspiracy theorists? I can’t speak for all precincts, but the workers at my polling place liked the DRE we had.

I’ve read many of Mr. Deutsch’s “sources” and most of them are into conspiracy theories.

You’ll note that nowhere in Mr. Deutsch’s three letters has he said one word about voter fraud.