by Allen Williams
An Open Letter to Arkansas Senator Kim Hammer:
I am writing you about Arkansas Senate Bill 250 which seeks to regulate paper for a
proposed paper
ballot election system. https://www.fayettevilleflyer.com/2023/03/01/arkansas-senate-committee-advances-bill-to-regulate-paper-ballots/
First making the counties pay for their paper
is draconian
and an attempt to usurp the will of the people forcing them to use
a voting method
that is questionable at best and criminal at worst I
would further note that your legislation is particularly
disturbing given the
wealth of data suggesting rampant machine problems but the most disturbing report is from Dominion itself:
"In 2018
email
cited by the defense in voting machine company’s defamation suit
against Fox
News, Dominion director of product strategy and security
acknowledged the
company’s technology was marred by a “*critical* bug leading to
INCORRECT
results.” You can read this report yourself at https://beforeitsnews.com/crime-all-stars/2023/02/key-dominion-exec-admitted-company-products-riddled-with-bugs-days-before-2020-vote-fox-lawyers-so-judges-are-deliberately-ignoring-the-machines-defects-2494799.html
Next there is the data presented by Computer
scientist Alex
Halderman revealing the many vulnerabilities of the machines which
you can read
for yourself here: https://www.c-span.org/video/?463480-4/washington-journal-j-alex-halderman-discusses-election-security.
Just for the record, it is
naive at best
to assume that none of the vulnerabilities determined by
Halderman have not
already been taken advantage of and at worst downright reckless to
assume that
machine selections are secure.
I saw a presentation of your objections on
Lindell TV last
night regarding the paper ballot election system. I think it's clear that you have little to no understanding of machine driven
elections which
I hope I can clarify via some mathematical graphs as to why these
devices are
unacceptable.
I'll begin by presenting several election
results charts by Dr.
Douglas G Frank, a world-renowned physicist with sixty
peer-reviewed
scientific publications. He
has been
working to illustrate how the voting machine algorithms manipulate
voter data
in essentially a 'black box' environment. This series of plots was done
by Dr. Frank, the
first one is from Clement County and the second is Arkansas county
during the
2020 election.
The first
graph is Clement
County, Arkansas. Frank
presents
some six curves representing the voter response. The Legend on the right
describes the graph's
colors and the data represented in each of the colors in the two
graphs.
The
first thing to
note is that the total
registrations
exceed the population of the county (grey line at top of the
curve) and (grey
curve) on the right side about halfway down. The second area of concern is
the turnout at
89.8 percent which is abnormally high across all age groups. Notice the light colored blue
line is a
prediction of what the red-black curves would look like. The most revealing statistic
is Frank's prediction
of the active registrations and ballots recorded (Light blue line)
which is not
only maintained throughout Clement county but is essentially
identical
(correlation factor = 0.998) throughout all Arkansas counties. The
correlation ratio measures how well Frank's estimation of the
active
registrations matches the votes recorded in each county which is indicative of machine manipulation as every
registered voter
doesn't always vote and certainly not at a 0.998 correlation.
The second graph analysis is from Arkansas
County. The machine didn't
exceed the total population
in this county but the same general pattern found in Clement
county is
repeated. Again the
extraordinary
turnout of 91.2 percent of all age groups is highly improbable. How many of these people are
over 90 years
old? The revealing mathematical predictor curve Dr. Frank shows
estimates how
well the active registrations (black line) matches the total
ballots recorded
(red line) with a correlation factor of 0.994. It is impossible
for these two
lines to have a high correlation basis in county after county
which supports his premise
of machine manipulation.
Once a
ratio of
Candidate -A to Candidate -B is determined, you can successfully
predict the county 's winners. It
is impossible
for a candidate to win by the same percentage margin in every
county in the state. This is indicative of fraud.
These graphs show Arkansas has more people on
the voter roles
than live in the state. Isn't that illegal? These kind of
discrepancies allow
machines to vote the voter database names which leads me to ask
why isn't this a concern to
you? Are
you even aware of this possibility?
There is no reason to use electronic voting
machines given
the flaws that have been found in these and
other analyses; it is simply a means
to
game elections. It doesn't
matter which vendor
machine the state uses, ES&S, Hart or Dominion, they all work
the same and are all
connected to the internet, if
they weren't how else would the vote tabulations be reported?
There is no reason to use machines given the flaws that have
been found in the machine that
disenfranchise
Arkansas voters who don't want them
My conclusions are (1)
that your Senate Bill 250 will unjustly keep the Counties from using the
election method of
their choice so that a machine vs paper count results is not
possible thereby preserving
the black box secrecy. (2)
You have arbitrarily determined to punish counties voting for
paper ballots because
election integrity is not as important as the ability to fix an
election. (3) There is
some financial
benefit either from the
machine vendors
or other independent sources that will reward you for forcing
electronic voting.
If this
bill should
become law it must immediately face a court challenge as the
Senate cannot
abrogate the election process by legislative fiat.
