Is the difference between a theory and fact the establishment of evidence proving the theory?
So, I'll offer this up to the anti-election fraud crowd a meager little tidbit of evidence that individuals took action to defraud the American Public in the 2004 national election.
This just in from the Government Accountability Office:
more under the fold....
Inquiry finds problems in 2004 election
Thu Jun 8, 4:28 PM ET
WASHINGTON - Many of the voting and counting mishaps of the bizarre 2000 general election were not fixed four years later and brand new problems arose, including a rash of fraudulent voter registrations in some areas, congressional investigators say.
Oh it's just blatant incompetence you say? Read on...
A study of the 2004 election by the Government Accountability Office concludes that paper ballots continued to be used extensively by small jurisdictions, many polling places struggled to manage heavy early voting and new Federal requirements for voter identification were applied unevenly by local officials across the country. The GAO released the study Thursday.
Altogether, 41 states were granted extra time to meet federal requirements to build statewide voter registration lists, meaning most such lists were not in place for the 2004 vote.
WHY THE HELL did 41 states miss the deadline?
Places that adopted newer voting technology since 2000 were not necessarily making the best use of it. Investigators said performance measures "have not been systematically embraced" and they found shortcomings in security and testing procedures.
This is so watered down I almost missed it. Twice. "Shortcomings" in security means "there is no security". "Shortcomings" in testing means "the systems were not adequately tested". In my work, an improperly tested system can hit the bottom line to the tune of thousands of dollars per minute. "Shortcomings" are expensive and given the huge body of practical work on systems testing it is deliberately negligent to have "shortcomings".
The changes got off to a slow start in part because members of the Election Assistance Commission, a new body set up to help state and local officials, were appointed by President Bush eight months behind schedule and not at work until January 2004.
I see a curl of smoke. Bush twiddled his thumbs and didn't do his job, didn't fullfill his responsibility as executive to the People's Laws. Bush delayed for 8 months. And we wonder why he won.
New story from here.
Find the study here Elections: The Nation's Evolving Election System as Reflected in the November 2004 General Election