Updates
Download, print, and distribute brochures about the insecurity and lack of transparency
regarding elections in SC.
CALL, TEXT AND WRITE YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVE ABOUT SPONSORING H4935 - THE SAVE (SECURE, ACCURATE, AND VERIFIABLE ELECTIONS) ACT. Go to https://www.scsafeelections.org/updates/action-alert/ for more information.
Print and deliver or email this document plus a personal letter requesting support for legislative actions to protect the integrity of our elections to your state representative, senator, and governor.
Why should we concerned about the safety of electronic voting?
September 19, 2024 -
Judge ruling on voter rolls:
A federal judge ruled yesterday that voter rolls in SC are public. See this article. This is nothing new for SC citizens. What is new is that it solidifies that they are available to individuals and organizations out of state. The lawsuit was brought about by the Public Interest Legal Foundation, which claims that the increased voter roll transparency would increase voter confidence in ERIC, an organization that already receives voter rolls from partnering states. South Carolina is one of them. See the PILF website explanation.
We have been looking for an option other than the secretive, globalist-leaning ERIC to compare our voter rolls with other states' and remove ineligible voters. Perhaps this is a step in the right direction. It also may give us some ammo to have them lower the cost of voter rolls, which is now $2500, and/or provide the inactive lists which they typically don't make available.
But the SEC could just as easily decide that they need to raise the cost.
This ruling is odd, however, in that our state law does say that only citizens should receive the rolls. The judge in the CVR lawsuit interpreted what he believed were the intentions of the legislators rather than the letter of state election law to rule that Cast Vote Records were not to be made public, thereby contriving his own law and ignoring our constitution. It appears this is another elections case where it is acceptable to modify the intention of the law and constitution to get the desired result.
Explanation of Judge Daniel Coble's ruling on the CVR lawsuit: Video Explanation
Judge Daniel Coble dismissed the case so that it would not go to trial and then, at the bidding of the State Election Commission (SEC), ruled in their favor. His summary judgement was that CVRs and CVR reports are not subject to FOIA and that the SEC acted in good faith when they denied these records to the public. The ruling was based upon these opinions:
If this judgement is allowed to stand, we have indeed lost our Republic and no effort made to protect SC from complete incorporation into the New World Order by the lords of the United Nations will prevail. Even if we were to wake up the sleeping masses, we fail to be a free nation if we give our courts the ability to strip us of our constitutional right to a free and fair election. This "court" is declaring fealty to the SC Constitution's provision that the ballots be cast in secret while admitting that it is not secret; that even the general public, without the technological savvy of the CIA, DHS and CIS, can identify who cast which ballot. At the same time, the court is COMPLETELY ignoring the second part of Article II Section I - that the ballots cannot be counted in secret.
When a group of Spartanburg residents canvassed about 800 homes in 2021, they not only found ineligible voters but missing voters on the voter rolls. People were aghast that their participation in the 2020 general election was not recorded!
Discuss these ideas on how to rectify the situation with your state legislator:
Judge ruling on voter rolls:
A federal judge ruled yesterday that voter rolls in SC are public. See this article. This is nothing new for SC citizens. What is new is that it solidifies that they are available to individuals and organizations out of state. The lawsuit was brought about by the Public Interest Legal Foundation, which claims that the increased voter roll transparency would increase voter confidence in ERIC, an organization that already receives voter rolls from partnering states. South Carolina is one of them. See the PILF website explanation.
We have been looking for an option other than the secretive, globalist-leaning ERIC to compare our voter rolls with other states' and remove ineligible voters. Perhaps this is a step in the right direction. It also may give us some ammo to have them lower the cost of voter rolls, which is now $2500, and/or provide the inactive lists which they typically don't make available.
But the SEC could just as easily decide that they need to raise the cost.
This ruling is odd, however, in that our state law does say that only citizens should receive the rolls. The judge in the CVR lawsuit interpreted what he believed were the intentions of the legislators rather than the letter of state election law to rule that Cast Vote Records were not to be made public, thereby contriving his own law and ignoring our constitution. It appears this is another elections case where it is acceptable to modify the intention of the law and constitution to get the desired result.
Explanation of Judge Daniel Coble's ruling on the CVR lawsuit: Video Explanation
Judge Daniel Coble dismissed the case so that it would not go to trial and then, at the bidding of the State Election Commission (SEC), ruled in their favor. His summary judgement was that CVRs and CVR reports are not subject to FOIA and that the SEC acted in good faith when they denied these records to the public. The ruling was based upon these opinions:
- The judge doesn't have to admit evidence from the plaintiffs or hold court to make the decision because the case does not require the services of a fact finder. p. 6
- The services of a fact finder are unnecessary because the AG wrote an opinion already on the issue and his opinion is as good as gold. p. 7
- The General Assembly did not intend for CVRs or CVR Reports to be subject to FOIA p.7-8 (CVRs are included in the list of records which are "required by law to be closed to the public". This is a complete fabrication.)
- In his opinion, IF the General Assembly had wanted voted ballots included in FOIA when it passed in 1978, it would have expressly said so. p. 8,9 (This argument, if it stands, can be used to block every FOIA request.)
- Even if CVRs are "public record" under FOIA, (appears he is waffling on his prior conviction) they are exempt because of privacy laws. p. 9-10 (He based this judgement upon the AG opinion and the depositions of HOWARD KNAPP, DATABASE SUPERVISOR JAMES POSEY AND PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER CHRIS WHITMIRE, each one of whom testified that releasing CVRs for public inspection could result in an individual elector's votes being identified.)
- all other FOIA requests subject to the SEC's counterclaim resulting in this judgement are also not subject to FOIA because they are overly broad, unduly burdensome, vague, repetitive and submitted for an improper purpose. p. 11-12
If this judgement is allowed to stand, we have indeed lost our Republic and no effort made to protect SC from complete incorporation into the New World Order by the lords of the United Nations will prevail. Even if we were to wake up the sleeping masses, we fail to be a free nation if we give our courts the ability to strip us of our constitutional right to a free and fair election. This "court" is declaring fealty to the SC Constitution's provision that the ballots be cast in secret while admitting that it is not secret; that even the general public, without the technological savvy of the CIA, DHS and CIS, can identify who cast which ballot. At the same time, the court is COMPLETELY ignoring the second part of Article II Section I - that the ballots cannot be counted in secret.
When a group of Spartanburg residents canvassed about 800 homes in 2021, they not only found ineligible voters but missing voters on the voter rolls. People were aghast that their participation in the 2020 general election was not recorded!
Discuss these ideas on how to rectify the situation with your state legislator:
- On page 3 of the AG Opinion from September of 2020, a case is clearly documented where the outcome of an election was declared null and void by the SC Supreme Court because the voter could be identified by the ballot. Therefore, it is reasonable to ask that all elections decided by the use of our current election system which does not provide for the secrecy of the ballot - by the SEC Director's own admission - should be declared null and void. I am guessing the plaintiff must have sufficient standing, which should include anyone elected to office or any elector using the system. The plaintiffs of the CVR case and grassroots donors contributed about $100K to never be actually heard by the court. At this point, it is clear that any chance at a prevailing lawsuit would come from the legislature.
- The SEC should be sued for allowing elections to be conducted without providing for the secrecy of the ballot and for the transparency of the counting.
- The SEC should be sued for providing CVRs with personally identifiable information to Clear Ballot - a private auditing company.
- FOIA law should be strengthened in SC to prevent continued denial of records requests ... this is happening across the board.
- Bills, budgets, and regulations should NOT be passed which further limit public involvement in the audit of the vote. On July 11th, Knapp requested $24 million from the SEC for new electronic equipment to perform risk limiting audits, replacing hand count audits of the vote. Don't allow this.
- Have the Legislative Audit Council actually present the results of the audit to the general assembly.
- Pass a bill to close the backdoor to county election records via Albert sensors through CIS EI-ISAC. Our very own Marci Andino serves as Sr. Director at CIS EI-ISAC. The effort to allow early tabulation of early voting results could be used to control election day voting outcomes. Once these early voting results are uploaded onto the internet, the federal Center for Internet Security will have access to them, the electronic poll books, and tabulators.
- Pass a bill to demand transparent, random hand count audits of election results in SC along with easy, inexpensive public access to Cast Vote Records and Voter Rolls such as the Election Transparency Act introduced late in the last session.
SC Constitution Article II, Section I "All elections by the people shall be by secret ballot, but the ballots shall not be counted in secret."
"...what is extraordinarily important is this - who will count the votes, and how." - Joseph Stalin