Follow up to the email:
Paper Ballots -- Our Last Chance

Dan Gutenkauf, with observations from Victoria Collier (her website is

Dan Gutenkauf responds: (you can email Dan at )

Hi again Victoria,

Thank you so much for your nice comments. You are certainly welcome to post my comments on your website. I apologize for the length, and I trust your journalistic instincts to know how to condense and edit it down to best effect.

I have no residual hard feelings about our passionate exchange of ideas in Cincinnati in 2000. The whole atmosphere was surrounded with a lot of passionate emotions from many of the participants, who had a variety of experiences and persuasions. But there was still an underlying foundation of unity on the vote fraud issue, in spite of the diversity of political and religious persuasions. I really commend Jim Condit Jr. for the monumental effort he made to pull off that Vote Fraud Convention.

I think the important thing is that you and I were able to meet personally, subsequent to having telephone communication after Jim's passing. We communicated our feelings on a variety of issues, and yet are still able to respect each other's right to their opinion and experience. Hopefully we can agree to disagree on some issues, without being disagreeable.

I was so pleased that your Dad and Ken finally received an expression of recognition that they so richly deserved, even if it was posthumous. I was pleased to meet you and Phyllis, and pleased that you were there to accept Jim's award personally on his behalf. It was a very emotionally moving experience for me. I doubt that I would have ever gotten involved in this battle, if it were not for seeing Jim's passion and dedication on this issue.

As you have correctly stated previously, the vote fraud issue transcends personal political and religious positions. As you can see from my last email, I am trying to stay on point and focus on what we share in common, without getting into emotional issues that could divide us.

I will add a couple items that I forgot to include in the last email.

One of the reasons I focus on getting information to the decision makers in public office is that the Supreme Court has ruled that "It is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error."

I agree with you that in some cases, the decision makers in government will not help because they are in on the game, or that they don't feel the issue has enough popular support or interest. I experienced the latter in my several meetings with the previous Sec. of State. But I don't feel that we can afford to completely dismiss the decision makers either. If we automatically assume that they will not be sympathetic to our position, then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. It may be a lost opportunity. The seed may fall on rocky ground or it may fall on fertile ground. Our job is just to be faithful to plant the seed.

I feel blessed that my choice for Sec. of State was elected. I cultivated a relationship prior to her election. Her Democratic opponent was "Mr. Digital Democracy", who wanted to go full speed ahead with internet voting.

But I certainly agree with you that an educated citizenry is also vital to this battle. That is why I spoken to many local groups over the last few years, and have done talk radio interviews, because it is essential to disseminate this info to the common man on the street. Like you, I have also seen a lot of apathy, but we both understand that apathy is not an acceptable solution. We can't allow the apathetic and intellectually lazy citizens to discourage us from getting the message out. The stakes are too high when it comes to our freedom.

One of the significant items I forgot to include in my last email was the most recent discovery that Dennis and I made during the overtime processing of the ballot count for the 2002 Governor's race. As we toured the central counting center with video camera, we discovered and documented three instances of violation of election law. We found solo election workers reading AND duplicating the "bleed -through ink ballots".

The statute for ballot duplication, Arizona Revised Statutes Title 16, section 621 (A) requires that the ballot duplication process is done "in the presence of witnesses." Maricopa County Elections Department's own press release to the Tribune newspaper on election day contained a flow chart which specified that each "team" of ballot duplicators is required to be composed of a member from each political party. So having solo duplicators, reading the original ballot AND copying the duplicate ballots, was clearly illegal, without "witnesses" to verify an accurate and unbiased ballot duplication process.

It is interesting to note that the margin of victory for Democrat Janet Napolitano was less than 20,000 votes. That fell within the margin of total mail- in ballots (23,000) that had to be duplicated. So in my mind, the result was highly open to question. There is no discretion on the part of the election department to deviate from their mandatory, ministerial duties. I did report this violation to the press, and two subsequent news articles were printed.

So I really think, Vicki, that spreading our information involves a 4-prong attack. . . . educating the decision makers, the legislators, the citizenry, and the media. I know often times the media is simply the 4th branch of government and will not expose these issues of fraud. Again, I think it is important to cultivate personal relationships with public officials in both Elections and the Legislature, as well as the media. Seven years ago we couldn't get any sympathetic media attention. After 2000, it seemed like the rest of the country finally started to catch on to the validity of Jim's message and to the importance of our battle.

Dennis and I have had numerous adversarial encounters with County election officials over the last 7 years. It is not my job to make friends with those arrogant officials who don't and won't do their duty properly. I make a point of reminding those individuals that they work for me and the public. We are the master, they are the "public servant". According to Arizona's Administrative Procedures Act, they can be removed for malfeasance and dishonesty. That is a powerful tool of accountability over the public servant. I let them know that I know the law, and that I will hold them accountable. At times, it is amazing to see the results of their attitude adjustment.

Another point: As Jim and Ken understood from their experiences, we can't count on the judiciary to do the right thing. Jim told us we had an excellent lawsuit and didn't see how we could lose, UNLESS we got a corrupt judge. His words were prophetic! But even if are chances are slim for victory in the courts, we can always go to the court of public opinion. We still have to litigate if possible, even if we lose, sometimes just to get the issue into the public arena. I am so pleased and proud of Susan Marie Weber's courage and efforts to step up to the plate with filing her lawsuit concerning use of the Touch Screens.

I know that you and I both have other interests and activities to pursue. I appreciate that you took an entire day to write on this issue, just as I took an entire late evening to write my thoughts. We don't get paid for this stuff. We do it because we are both patriots at our own level and degree of passion. We have no other choice but to raise our voice and spend our personal resources of time and energy. If we don't, who will? If not now, when ? When we re-examine the sacrifice that our forefathers made to secure our freedoms, how can we not step up to the challenge to keep our democratic republic from being stolen?

I really appreciate you, Victoria, for your intelligence, your passion, and your dedication. I know your Dad is watching and is very proud of you, too! Please let me know if there is ever any way that I can assist you.

Best regards,

Dan Gutenkauf

And then from Victoria Collier :

I hope everyone takes the time to read Dan Gutenkauf's
email. Dan, I would like to post it on my website. It's long
and could be edited down to article length, but I think you
state the problem clearly, and I know you have done meticulous
work in this field for years. I agree -- almost completely -- with your
position (though I know we don't agree on other subjects, if I correctly
recall our heated debates in Ohio!), and I have much respect for all
you've done in the area of election law. 

I think the only point I would raise is that if you
focus on educating the decision makers -- people already in positions
of power-- to the exclusion of the citizenry, you find yourself
in the position Jim and Ken found themselves in for 25 years.
Most of the decision makers will not help you --either because
they are in on the game, or they don't feel the issue has enough
popular support or interest, or they're scared of opposing those
who have more power than they do. It seems to me that we
need-- and have always needed-- an awakened populace who
understand how their elections are being subverted and demand
a safe, accurate, verifiable, system.
Unfortunately, the ignorance and apathy and lack of political interest of
the American people has reached near-mythic proportions, which is
what has allowed the corruption to grow such deep roots. In the end, we
need to work on all levels to combat what is nothing less than the
destruction of this country -- and I know that you are a true patriot, Dan,
probably moreso than I.
(Editor's note: see Victoria Collier's website here)

back to the Gutenkauf research page.

Back to home page