The county should check its voting machines

Thank you for reporting the Onorato administration's opinion that it cannot verify the software running on our voting machines ("County Says It Can't Audit Voting Machines," Oct. 4). It is not trying very hard.

County Executive Dan Onorato bought black boxes without a clue as to what was inside them, and the commonwealth feels it cannot possibly drop a copy of the software program into the mail for the county to check out. But the National Institute of Standards and Technology should be able to get the county a copy. In 2006, NIST said these machines "cannot be made secure," so NIST should want to help us.

Pennsylvania counties bought these systems using the state's suggested contract form and relying on state "certification" of the machines. County officials made no contractual demand to receive software copies, instead relying upon the single state-contracted "examiner" to look over the system and on the federal-level reviewing agency (paid by the machine vendor) -- and on blind faith that we'd be shipped a reliable product.

As for there not being enough time before the election to "bid out contracts," save time and, more important, money! Mr. Onorato should trust only county employees to verify our voting software. Hearing his excuse that the county also has no method of verification even if provided the software, VoteAllegheny has offered him detailed procedures, free of charge.

Look, with plenty of advice to the contrary, there was no reason for our county to purchase one of the most shrouded, clouded, unrecountable systems available. Better systems would have cost much less money, time and worry. But let's start now to verify our software. It wouldn't give us complete security, but it would help.

AUDREY N. GLICKMAN
Greenfield

The writer is secretary/treasurer of VoteAllegheny and VotePA.

---

Credit Clinton

Let's give credit where credit is due. Our current financial problems started in 1999 when then President Clinton signed into law a sweeping overhaul of Depression-era banking laws. The law removed barriers allowing banks, securities firms and insurance companies to merge and to sell each other's products.

At the time President Clinton was quoted as saying, "This legislation is truly historic ... We have done right by the American people." The law repealed parts of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act and the 1956 Bank Holding Company Act to level the domestic playing field for United States financial companies and allow them to compete better in the evolving global financial marketplace.

BILL HOAGLAND
Whitehall

---

Affluent to blame

Ruth Ann Dailey opines that the "subprime mortgage mess is primarily the result of left-wing wishes becoming political practice" ("Conservative Funk? Here's the Way Out," Oct. 6). Ms. Dailey argues that the Clinton administration forced lenders and guarantors to back loans to uncreditworthy buyers. Translation: The crisis was caused by the poor being encouraged by liberals to buy homes that they could not afford.

It is true that President Clinton encouraged lending to Hispanics and African Americans because banks had been discriminating against them when they applied for a loan to buy a home. Not mentioned by Ms. Dailey, however, is the fact that in 2005 and 2006 about 40 percent of homes were purchased for investment or as vacation homes by those taking advantage of easy credit. Home prices more than doubled between 1997 and 2006. Many home-owners refinanced their homes to get cash to spend. Refinancing, and investment and vacation purchases, were undertaken by the affluent, not the poor.

Overbuilding was not demanded by the "left-wing." There is plenty of blame to go around, but blaming liberals for being primarily responsible for the credit crisis is the "failed thinking" Ms. Dailey attributes to others.

JOHN A. PILLAR
Mt. Lebanon

---

Politicians as bullies

Tony Norman, in his barely coherent Oct. 7 rant regarding Sarah Palin ("Sarah Palin, the Classic Schoolyard Bully") contends that Ms. Palin engages in behavior typical of "demagogues." Fine. She "talks tough when she's surrounded by people of like mind ... ." Great. She "subscribes to the same strain of American anti-intellectualism and fake populism as Huey Long." Kind of a stretch, but at least Mr. Norman is earning his keep.

But Mr. Norman, at the very least be honest with yourself and admit that this type of "schoolyard bully" behavior is typical of almost all successful politicians and others in the public eye. There's a reason that these people are successful and much of it is perception-based and coldly calculated and arranged, much like the actions of a schoolyard bully, if you really want to make that comparison.

Mr. Norman is delusional if he believes that Sarah Palin has introduced a whole new level of evil or deception to the political scene. Are Spiro Agnew and Huey Long the only specific examples he can come up with to compare Sarah Palin to? How many thousands of other politicians can be included in the "media-savvy scoundrels" he lumps together?

And guess what, Mr. Norman, they're not all just from the last century. At least mention a few more. Maybe even some that Mr. Norman agrees with and may have even voted for. I have come to expect more intellectual depth from Mr. Norman through the years. Now I realize I've wasted my time.

JIM SAINT
Murrysville

---

Where are dads?

Eighty-odd years ago my grandparents came to this country with three children in tow. My grandfather didn't ask, "What can you do for me?" He said, "Thank you for letting me raise my family here." He got a job cleaning the streets of Downtown Pittsburgh with a broom and a cart.

In four short generations the pride of raising and being responsible for one's family has gone by the wayside. I truly believe there are families who desperately need help, but I have seen more and more hands out with an attitude of "give me what I can get for nothing." I'm referring to deadbeat dads.

Somehow the words "help" and "free" have the same meaning. Whatever happened to the family structure where the father was head of the family? Today they walk away and the state is now head of the family. Children move home with children and the grandparents are raising a second family.

We need to be stricter with these dads, help where it's needed and make it free when there is no other solution. I wonder what that little gray-haired Italian with his broom would think about this?

VIRGINIA DeMARCO
Brookline

---