Help File Evidence for CA Investigation of Prop. 8

On Election Night, 2008, one or more members of the EDA Election Data Analysis Working Group downloaded the CNN screenshot of unadjusted exit poll results for CA Proposition 8 that is now the catalyst for a rapidly growing statewide call for an official investigation.

Election Defense Alliance is calling on any California voter who witnessed or otherwise has evidence indicative of miscount in the Proposition 8 contest to please file a formal complaint with the CA SoS office so it can be entered as evidence in an official investigation we have been told may be initiated as early as this Wednesday.

See sample complaint letter lower in this post, and click this link to download the CA election fraud complaint form.

EDA is asking for collective public review of the complaint and evidence, and any additional comment or correction you would recommend be added to the complaint and evidentiary letter (see below) sent to the CA SoS office, citing the EDA exit poll evidence.

EDA Director Dan Ashby is in communication with Sharon and Richard Tamm who filed the original complaint and letter of supporting evidence, (reproduced below) to which the CA SoS office has affirmatively responded.

EDA is prominently mentioned in that original complaint as the source for the most compelling single piece of evidence calling the official Prop. 8 vote count into question.

The CA SoS office has responded with a request for as much supporting evidence as possible to be submitted by Monday November 24 using the CA election fraud complaint form.
You can scan the completed form and any supporting documents and e-mail them to:

However, evidence will continue to be accepted beyond Monday, so please do file additional reports when you can, but as soon as you can.

Please Forward this page by clicking the E-mail This Page link below or by using the Share Page webtools, upper right column.

Click the Read More link to read the rest of this post and how you can help bring an investigation into the Prop. 8 vote count.

Election Verification Exit Polls May Also Turn Up Evidence

Additionally, EDA conducted citizen exit polls in 19 precincts in Los Angeles County and precincts in Alameda and San Francisco counties. This evidence may also be brought to bear in questioning the veracity of the official machine count on Proposition 8.

If you have been involved in analyzing any of the CA voting results, and specifically anything to do with Proposition 8, please contact the CA Secretary of State's Election Fraud Investigation Unit:

1500-11th STREET, 5th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814

English: 1-800-345-VOTE (8683)
Spanish: 1-800-232-VOTA (8682)

On the telephone menu, press option 2 to record a report of election fraud.

Please also send a copy of your complaint or other information to Info[at]ElectionDefenseAlliance[dot]org with "Prop. 8" in the Subject line.

Collect Evidence of Machine Error for HAVA Sec. III Complaints

Additionally, you will see that the second page of the CA election fraud complaint form refers specifically to any indication that HAVA Sec. III has been violated.

Sec. III concerns standards of acceptable error rates in voting machines (which as we know, in practice are widely ignored).

This is an opportunity to cite evidence (such as EDA Council member Judy Alter has documented in L.A.) of machine read error rates in excess of the HAVA standards, as additional grounds for investigating the Proposition 8 vote count.

With enough public pressure, we may be able to bring about official recounts at the precinct, county, or even statewide level. If you have any knowledge of violations of HAVA voting machine accuracy standards, please include that in your letter of complaint too.

A list of the voting machines in every CA county is attached for download.

Excerpts of Announcement Calling for Investigation of Prop. 8 Vote Count

Election Defense Alliance and other election fraud watchdogs found a greater than 8% discrepancy between exit polls and reported results for Proposition 8. This is a key indicator of possible vote fraud and should be investigated by the Secretary of State. In order to do this she needs to receive Election Complaint Forms from California registered voters.

[Click to download CA election fraud complaint form.]

Final elections returns must be submitted to the Secretary of State's office by December 9th and will be certified on December 13th so we don't have much time.
They will combine all similar complaints into one investigation and the more citizen complaints they have the better.

I am going to drive my complaint (and any others that are ready) to Sacramento on Monday morning 11/24 so they can assign an investigator by the Wednesday before Thanksgiving.

--Sharon Ryals Tamm [filer of initiating complaint]

Otherwise mail it to the address listed on the second page of the form which is also listed below.

Or you can scan the completed form and any supporting documents and email it to:
or you can call a complaint into the numbers listed.

1500-11th STREET, 5th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814

English: 1-800-345-VOTE (8683)
Spanish: 1-800-232-VOTA (8682)

When naming the "Person(s) and Organizations Against Whom Complaint is Brought" cast as wide a net as possible and include anyone and everyone you can think of who might be involved in, liable, responsible or accountable for possibly fraudulant elections results on Proposition 8. I have included how I filled out my complaint form below.

There is more evidence coming out from that should be included but this was the best I could do for now.

The line for victims on the form could include names of California citizens whose right to marry was eliminated by Prop 8. Obtain their permission first.

Text from Initiating Election Complaint Form Submitted by Sharon Ryals Tamm

PAGE 1: ELECTION COMPLAINT FORM brought by Sharon Ryals Tamm

National Exit Polls (NEP aka Edison/Mitofsky); CNN; all companies whose election systems are used in the State of California including but not limited to ES&S, Sequoia, Hart Intercivic, and Premier Election Solutions (aka Diebold), all elections officials and elections personnel of the State of California, including all County Registrars' Offices and the Secretary of State's Office and their respective staff including temporary workers.

Date(s) and time(s) alleged events occurred: 11/04/2008—11/05/2008 including but not limited to the hours of 6am 11/04/08 to 1am 11/05/08 PST
Location(s) of alleged event(s): The State of California, all polling places, precincts, county and state elections and elections equipment locations, including those where votes were counted or machine tallied, especially in Los Angeles county.
Names and phone numbers of witnesses or other victims: Richard Tamm, 510-524-4608. Emily Levy 831-429-8946. Dan Ashby 510-233-2144.

DESCRIBE YOUR COMPLAINT (if necessary attach additional sheets):
Attached is initial evidence of a greater than 8% discrepancy between exit polls and tabulated results for Proposition 8. Recent elections history has shown this type of discrepancy is a key indicator of possible election fraud requiring further investigation. Please employ all means necessary to acquire and examine all data, equipment and persons that could possibly account for such a discrepancy; in particular, all raw poll data procured by National Exit Polls (NEP-aka Edison/Mitofsky) including which precincts they polled, the testimony of polling personnel, and exactly how NEP revised poll data later to match results reported on CNN. In addition to any California Elections statutes and regulations that may apply please review under the HAVA Title III Section attached and any other section relevant to the issues brought in this complaint. I request that regional hearings be held throughout the state on these concerns.

Text of Supporting Evidentiary Letter Provided to CA SoS Office by Richard Tamm

To the Honorable Debra Bowen et al:

I am writing to you to request that the Office of the Secretary of State of California launch an election fraud investigation into the vote count of Proposition 8 based on the following evidence.

I received the following as part of an email from Mark Crispin Miller who passed it on from Velvet Revolution:

'"Around the world, exit polls are used to determine the need for investigation of elections. In the U.S., the National Exit Poll (NEP, also known as Edison/Mitofsky) now adjusts results to match vote counts before issuing its final polling numbers. Election Defense Alliance downloaded NEP numbers from the internet on election night, however [around 8 PM, as told to me by Dan Ashby of EDA], before poll results were changed to match the official vote count.

This is the exit poll from early in the evening of election night.
There were 2,168 respondents, and they break down as follows (a "yes" vote is a vote against same-sex marriage):

[I rearranged the percentages reporting to the following format.]

Prop 8: Yes: No:
Males: 48% 52%
Females: 48% 52%

View actual screen capture

This is the exit poll from later in the evening. There were 2,240 respondents -- 72 more respondents than in the earlier poll -- and they break down in a very different way:

Prop 8: Yes: No:
Males: 53% 47%
Females: 52% 48%

View actual screen capture

This discrepancy should be ringing alarm bells. Something doesn't add up."

If you view the screen captures, you see they are from CNN, which I would consider to be a fairly reputable organization. The shift in percentages does NOT add up. Here's why:

Using the above percentages and respondent numbers, and assuming that Male and Female respondents are approximately 50% each, the shift can be seen this way:

Prop 8, Males and Females: Yes: No: respondents:
About 8 PM: 48% 52% of 2,168

Later in the evening: 52.5% 47.5% of 2,240
Percentage change: + 4,5% - 4.5%

Based on the number of respondents, percentages convert (without exit poll adjustments) to:
Prop 8, Males and Females: Yes: No: respondents:
About 8 PM: 1,041 + 1,127 = 2,168
Later in the evening: 1,176 + 1,064 = 2,240
Respondents change: + 135 - 63

For the percentage changes in the later exit poll reports to make sense, with the addition of 72 more respondents, we would have to see a change of + 135 for a Yes on Prop 8, and - 63 for a No on Prop 8.

My question is: How does the addition of 72 respondents to the later exit poll cause an increase of 135 votes for Prop 8 and a decrease of 63 votes against Prop 8?

Exit polls are done with people who just voted, telling how they had just voted. And exit polls have, traditionally, been extremely accurate, so much so that a number of European countries that still do hand-counted paper ballots use their exit polls to declare the winner before the hand-count is complete.

I request that the Secretary of State of California launch an election fraud investigation to get to the bottom of this. As time is of the essence, while final vote counts are still being tallied, you can immediately at least demand all relevant material from the National Exit Poll (NEP, also known as Edison/Mitofsky), and start a larger hand-counted paper-ballot audit of some selected precincts/counties.

Please consider this information and request with the utmost seriousness and urgency. And, if I can be of any further assistance, do not hesitate to contact me.

Thank you very much,

Richard Tamm

CA_fraudcomplaint_form.pdf50.66 KB
CA_Co_votesystems070308.pdf38.98 KB