In her statement, Ramona said that Nickolaus didn't mention the error until a meeting to brief Ramona on the upcoming press conference. So she wasn't able to witness the error or its correction, and clearly Nickolaus wasn't telling the full story when she said her process was open and transparent. Ramona added, "In retrospect, it seems both shocking and somewhat appalling there was no mention of discovery of this 15,000 vote 'human error' that ultimately had the potential to tip the balance of an entire statewide election. How is this possible?" Ramona also said she told Nickolaus that she doesn't "understand anything about computers" and she "was never shown anything that would verify Kathy's statement about the missing vote." Ramona was told that she wouldn't be speaking at the Thursday evening press conference, but she was put on the spot with little information regarding the error.
Regardless of the outcome of the election, we want to know that our elections are open, transparent and secure. My questions get right to the heart of that desire. We need to know how our election systems work and that they're secure, because these computer systems are the final word. The only thing that trumps them is a recount, but recounts depend upon the original outcome. Even the amount of money that a recount will cost depends upon the results from these computer systems. So, the answers to those questions should matter to you whether you live in Waukesha County or any other county in Wisconsin and whether you're a Republican, Democrat or independent.
We shouldn't need to ask for an investigation to get answers to relevant questions regarding an election system. The Government Accountability Board shouldn't need to go to Waukesha County, and we shouldn't need a recount in Waukesha County to get answers. Our elections must be open and transparent, we deserve to know exactly how mistakes occur, but these questions should be answered now by Nickolaus in duty to her office. Anything less will cost Wisconsin and Waukesha County tax payers more.
Since it's been more than four days and we still haven't been given any further explanation, I'm left with no choice but to continue with the clearest picture I can imagine. Again, here's the latest counts in two different scenarios, one assuming the Brookfield votes weren't originally reported and one assuming the Brookfield votes were originally reported.
These counts are using the latest numbers reported by counties at the completion of their canvass, all can be found at WisPolitics. Only Milwaukee County has yet to complete their canvass, counties not listed here had no net change. Thanks to WisPolitics for keeping an updated tally and keeping us informed of corrections. The counts used for Crawford, Kenosha, Oneida and Sauk counties may not be official, but they are the latest that WisPolitics has received from the clerks' offices.
These are the original numbers provided by the Associated Press.
(In alphabetical order)
| Kloppenburg: | 740,090 |
| Prosser: | 739,886 |
| Kloppenburg up by 204 votes in total | |
Scenario A: Brookfield votes were missing in original count
(In alphabetical order)
| Candidate | Net Gain | Counties |
|---|---|---|
| Kloppenburg | 483 | Brown(1), Buffalo(2), Dane(43), Door(12), Eau Claire(29), Grant(113), Green Lake(1), Iowa(30), Langlade(5), Lincoln(4), Kewaunee(1), Marinette(1), Monroe(2), Pepin(6), Portage(91), Richland(7), Rusk(31), Shawano(64), Sheboygan(1), Vernon(24), Washburn(5), Washington(10) |
| Prosser | 7,991 | Adams(2), Burnett(34), Calumet(1), Chippewa(5), Clark(28), Dodge(1), Dunn(5), Green(2), Jefferson(1), Juneau(1), Kenosha(60), Lafayette(10), Outagamie(1), Pierce(1), Sauk(1), Sawyer(2), Taylor(2), Walworth(2), Waukesha(7582), Waupaca(1), Winnebago(244), Wood(5) |
| Prosser up by 7,304 votes in total | ||
Scenario B: Brookfield votes not missing from original count
(In alphabetical order)
| Candidate | Net Gain | Counties |
|---|---|---|
| Kloppenburg | 483 | Brown(1), Buffalo(2), Dane(43), Door(12), Eau Claire(29), Grant(113), Green Lake(1), Iowa(30), Langlade(5), Lincoln(4), Kewaunee(1), Marinette(1), Monroe(2), Pepin(6), Portage(91), Richland(7), Rusk(31), Shawano(64), Sheboygan(1), Vernon(24), Washburn(5), Washington(10) |
| Prosser | 588 | Adams(2), Burnett(34), Calumet(1), Chippewa(5), Clark(28), Dodge(1), Dunn(5), Green(2), Jefferson(1), Juneau(1), Kenosha(60), Lafayette(10), Outagamie(1), Pierce(1), Sauk(1), Sawyer(2), Taylor(2), Walworth(2), Waukesha(179), Waupaca(1), Winnebago(244), Wood(5) |
| Kloppenburg up by 99 votes in total | ||
Please, Kathy Nickolaus, show us your election system and answer our relevant questions. All we ask is to know how our elections operate and how the mistake was made. Time is of the essence.
I must note that computer election systems such as the one in Waukesha County can be hacked to change results without anyone ever being able to discover the change. So, the fact that the GAB doesn't "see any criminal activity" at this point is not necessarily comforting. A world-renowned security expert, Bruce Schneier, described some of the very real issues with election systems after questions over election security during the 2004 elections. The only way we can avoid situations like the one in Waukesha County is to demand open election systems that give our elections real transparency. A non-profit organization that has been successful in these efforts is the Open Voting Consortium.
If you want to have your voice heard regarding the issues with the Waukesha County election system and the delayed explanation we were given for the missing votes, the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board has a complaint form here: http://gab.wi.gov/node/1282. The election official in this case is Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus.
No comments:
Post a Comment