Television footage released during the week by opposition supporters showed Oil Minister Rafael Ramirez telling workers of state oil company Petroleos de Venezuela SA (PDVSA) to back Chavez or give up their jobs. The opposition said it was proof of political coercion which violated rules against the use of state bodies as campaign tools.

Chavez, a staunch critic of President Bush and his administration, is running for re-election on Dec. 3.

Meanwhile, opposition presidential candidate Manuel Rosales led 16-mile march through the capital on Saturday, drawing tens of thousands into the streets to endorse his candidacy. More than 1,000 police were deployed along the route to prevent clashes between Rosales supporters and "Chavistas" who gathered on street corners, shouting "Viva Chavez!" and "Oh, No! Chavez Won't Go!" as marchers passed.

On Friday, Chavez defended Ramirez, saying he agrees workers must be loyal to his Bolivarian Revolution movement.

"Of course PDVSA is revolutionary," Chavez said as he inaugurated a new subway line outside Caracas. "Petroleos de Venezuela workers are with this revolution, and those who aren't should go somewhere else. Go to Miami."

Chavez accused opponents of plotting coups against him and said the military - like the oil firm - must be totally committed.

"Venezuelan soldiers are in this revolution, and I have told them: anyone who isn't had better leave here," he said.

He also accused some private TV channels of fomenting conspiracies against his government and warned in a televised speech: "Don't be surprised if I say there are no more concessions to some TV channels," when their licenses expire in March.

The state oil company, the country's single largest employer with a 40,000-member work force, has been heavily pro-Chavez since the president dismissed nearly half its workers to end an anti-government oil strike in 2003.

But aides to Rosales cite electoral rules that prohibit using the oil company and other branches of the government to further a candidate's campaign.

Already this week, Chavez opponents complained of vote-buying when the government paid early Christmas bonuses to public workers. The opposition also complains that state-funded advertising and TV time are giving the incumbent an illegal edge.

Rosales' campaign says electoral officials can impose a maximum fine of $7,800 on Ramirez if it finds campaign rules have been broken. It also is demanding an investigation by prosecutors.

Ramirez told the Venezuelan daily newspaper Ultimas Noticias that he did nothing to violate campaign rules because there was no explicit call "to vote for one candidate in particular but rather we backed President Chavez as head of state." He said more internal videos would be released to quell any doubts.

With violence and chaos escalating in Iraq, with Iraqi police infiltrated by murderous pro-Iranian militia, with more than 20% of the Iraqi army on leave at any given time, the fact is: American troops are doing even more of the work that Iraqis should do and more will be sent to Iraq unless the policy changes.

The American people should demand full and complete disclosure, prior to the election, of any plans for new recalls of our Guard and Reserve units.

The American people should demand full and complete disclosure, prior to the election, of any plans for policy changes that will include new waves of involuntary recalls, of our Guard and National Reserve units.

The American people should demand, prior to the election, plans for stop loss policies or any other form of involuntary or surprise troop rotation hardships, about to be imposed on those who serve in the United States Army and Marine Corps.

The American people should demand, prior to the election, the full budget cost of the Iraq war for the coming year, which is being kept secret until after the vote.

The American people should demand, prior to the election, public disclosure of a summary of the pending National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq. This estimate undoubtedly descibes the major deterioration into chaos, which is driving the coming wave of involuntary calls ups being kept secret from the American people.

On Monday the Military Times will call for the firing of Defense Secretary Rumsfeld in a couragous act that demonstrates the failure of the policy and the urgent need for change.

The Army Times, Marine Corps Times, Navy Times and Air Force Times are the most informed sources of information and truth about what our commanders and troops believe, in fact.

The truth is, to implement the current failed policy, without change, there will be a clear need for more Americans in uniform to serve in Iraq almost immediately. As a pure military judgment, if the policy continues unchanged, more troops will be urgently needed and more rotation abuses and involuntary call ups will be force fed to those who serve and their families.

As the Military Times publicly suggests and our commanders privately believe, there is an urgent need for a new policy that will be more successful and will not require such unacceptable abuses.

Military families and all Americans should consider this:

If the Democrats were in control of Congress, there would be public hearings and an informed discussion about upcoming policy changes regarding involuntary recalls and rotation abuses.

If Democrats were in control of Congress, national intelligence officials would be called to public hearings, and Americans would have a clear and honest understanding of the failures of the policy, and the destructive implications for those who serve.

If the Democrats were in control of Congress, the President, Congress and both parties would sit down and the policy would change.

It is shameful and wrong to have these abuses of troop rotations and these endless policy changes of involuntary recalls which are kept secret from the people, and forced by the failures of the policy.

It is time for the practices of secrecy and deceit to end. They violate the basic notion of American democracy, they violate the most basic rules of common sense, they violate the trust of our troops, their families and the American people.

We should demand full and immediate public disclosure.

We should demand full accounting of what force structures and budgets our military will need and work on a bipartisan basis to meet those needs of the Army, Marine Corps, Guard and Reserves with no further abuses of rotations and recalls.

We should end permanently these constant abuses that have done so much damage to the mission and to those who serve with such bravery and honor, and deserve better from our government.

The truth should be disclosed before the election. The coverup of coming recalls must end.

A Nation of informed voters would then have the chance to elect a Congress in the election, to bring about change after the election.

Brent Budowsky served as Legislative Assistant to U.S. Senator Lloyd Bentsen, responsible for commerce and intelligence matters, including one of the core drafters of the CIA Identities Law. Served as Legislative Director to Congressman Bill Alexander, then Chief Deputy Whip, House of Representatives. Currently a member of the International Advisory Council of the Intelligence Summit. Left goverment in 1990 for marketing and public affairs business including major corporate entertainment and talent management. He can be reached at brentbbi@webtv.net .

Jose Rizo, from the Constitutionalist Liberal Party, remained third with 19.51 percent while Edmundo Jarquin, fielded by the Sandinista Renovator Movement, got 6.98 and Eden Pastora, of Alternative for Change, scarcely 0.27.

CSE data were rejected by Montealegre, who says that parallel vote counts by other entities, whose results are still unknown, take to a runoff.

In Nicaragua a nominee can be elected president with 40 percent of the valid votes or with 35 percent, but in this case the electoral law says that the winner must have five points over the runner-up.

A third CSE report will be ready in the next hours.

But probably the biggest news last week regarding electronic voting machines, for US and Venezuelan voters, is the U.S. government's current investigation of Smartmatic and rumors that the voting machine manufacturer may potentially have links to the Venezuelan government. Smartmatic is the privately owned Venezuelan parent company of Sequoia Voter Systems, one of the oldest and top voting machine manufacturers in the United States. Smartmatic itself provided the machines for the 2004 Venezuelan Referendum, and is in charge of providing the voting machines for the Venezuelan Presidential elections, which are set for December 3.

The investigation taking place in the U.S. Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) stems from allegations that the Venezuelan government once held stake in a software company partially owned by two of the owners of Smartmatic. Rumors take the claims even further, attempting to prove that Smartmatic machines used in the 2004 Referendum against Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez were rigged, thus leading to the President's "illegitimate" win with 59% of the vote.

There is an understandable growing consensus of citizens on both the right and the left, in the United States and in Venezuela, who believe that electronic voting machines are a bad idea. With "error-prone" and "tamper-friendly" machines, a laundry list of malfunctions, and with close to 90% of the United States now voting on electronic machines, high-profile people such as Maryland Governor Robert L. Ehrlich have even made the call to go back to paper ballots.

With major machine malfunctions and an undeniable conflict of interest between all major voting machine manufacturers and their private interests, it appears that the rumors of possible links between Smartmatic and the Venezuelan government should be the least of U.S. voter's worries.

Regardless of the findings of the Commission, the investigation appears to have been more than welcomed by Smartmatic and Sequoia officials, who announced last Sunday that "contrary to reports... we have voluntarily filed with CFIUS to put to rest the baseless but persistent rumors about our ownership."

"We expect that when the investigation is complete, these questions about ownership and baseless allegations and conspiracy, will be put to rest," said Michelle Shafer, Communications Vice President of Sequoia Voting System last Monday evening.

According to Sequoia, confusion regarding the involvement of the Venezuelan government in Smartmatic's software pseudo-sister company, Bizta, stems from a $150,000 loan the company received in 2003 by the Venezuelan Industrial Credit Fund (Fondo de Credito Industrial) - the equivalent of the U.S. Small Business Administration. "Bizta pledged 28% of its shares as a guarantee for this routine loan. The loan was paid in full in 2004 prior to the Recall Referendum."

Conversly, the Miami Herald reported in 2004 that the Venezuelan government actually owned 28% of the company for a period of time just before the 2004 Referendum, thus apparently proving a conflict of interest between the Venezuelan government and the pair of Smartmatic owners with shares in Bizta.

Of course, Smartmatic officials deny this hypothesis, but it highlights just one of the many points that the Venezuelan opposition has consistently turned to, to claim that the 2004 Referendum was fraudulent, Chavez' victory "illegitimate" and the Smartmatic machines, suspect.

Lou Dobbs, CNN, and 2004 Venezuelan Smartmatic Fraud?

On June 6th, Lou Dobbs, aired on CNN one in a series of elections pieces. Unfortunately, in this particular report, entitled Democracy at Risk, he did an excellent job as a mouthpiece for the Venezuelan opposition, in their attempts to call foul play in the 2004 Referendum and the Smartmatic machines-attempts that have been completely discredited by the Organization of American States, the Carter Center and various international studies and reports.

CNN Correspondent, Kitty Pilgrim, reported on the show, "Many experts say those voting machines were manipulated in Venezuela to give President Hugo Chavez a victory. Exit polls done by the U.S. firm Penn, Schoen & Berland had Chavez losing 41 percent to 59 percent. But the next day, Chavez declared victory, reversing the score, saying he won 59 percent of the vote."

This has been a long-standing hypothesis held by members of the Venezuelan opposition. However, with a further in-depth investigation, the theory simply doesn't hold water.

First off, the elections were certified as legitimate by international observer delegations from the Carter Center and the Organization of American States (who, far from being Chavez supporters, some consider to be influenced by the United States). A week after the referendum and a post-election partial audit of the electronic voting machines-comparing the paper ballots produced at the time of each electronic vote with those same electronic tallies-the Carter Center again declared, "The automated machines worked well and the voting results do reflect the will of the people."

Independent studies where further carried out by experts from the University of California (Berkeley), Johns Hopkins, Stanford University, and the University of Utah, which showed "no statistical evidence of fraud."

As for the Penn, Schoen & Berland (PS&B) poll. It is now fairly widely known that the firm paid members of the opposition to carry out their survey. According to the Associated Press story from August 19, 2004, entitled "U.S. Poll Firm in Hot Water in Venezuela," election observers declared that members of the partially US-funded, Venezuelan opposition group, Súmate, were doing fieldwork for the poll. A Súmate official further verified that PS&B "supervised" the exit poll carried out by Súmate.

This was not the first time that the company had released suspect polling results during a controversial election. Among others, there are claims of PS&B's work in the 2000 Mexican elections and the Serbian elections that same year. The Washington Post reported on September 19, 2000, that as part of a $77 million US campaign to get rid of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic,

"U.S. aid officials and contractors are working to strengthen Serbia's famously fractured democratic opposition. They have helped train its organizers, equipped their offices with computers and fax machines and provided opposition parties with sophisticated voter surveys compiled by the same New York firm that conducts polls for President Clinton [PS&B]."

A report released on August 19, 2004, by the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) in DC, further took on PS&B's declaration that their Venezuelan Referendum poll carried a percentage of error of 1%. According to CEPR, "The chance of a properly constructed survey resulting in such an error [of 1%] is incomprehensible- far less than 1 chance in 10 to the 490th power."

"Given that international observers found no evidence of fraud, the methodology of this exit poll must be called into question," continued the report. "It is nearly impossible that this result could have been obtained through sampling error."

CEPR director, Mark Weisbrot, who has researched the topic extensively, further challenged the Dobbs report, by highlighting that "the sources that appeared and were cited by the [Dobbs] piece were all part of the Venezuelan opposition and/or paid by the Venezuelan opposition."

"There is as much doubt about the results of the [2004] referendum, as whether Ronald Reagan beat Walter Mondale in 1984," said Weisbrot in an interview this week, "What this Lou Dobbs segment reported on the Venezuelan referendum is akin to a report on the September 11 attacks based only on the research and testimony of conspiracy theorists who claim that the Pentagon was not hit by a plane and the towers were demolished by internal explosions."

While voicing the concerns of many, Dobbs also incorrectly characterized the Venezuelan machines when he said, "Well, let's be clear. It is absolutely demonstrable that with the use of electronic voting machines, in which we do not have verifiable receipts and a way of independently auditing those votes-democracy is at risk anyway as we approach the midterm elections."

Fortunately for Venezuelans, all Smartmatic machines used in Venezuela, including those used during the 2004 Referendum, are required to produce a "verifiable receipt," in order to "independently audit those votes." It was with these paper receipts that international observers where able to carry out the post-election audit of the Referendum. In the United States, however during the 2004 Presidential elections, only one state, Nevada, required its voting machines to produce a paper receipt (known as Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail technology). According to Sequoia officials, who supplied the machines to Nevada in 2004, there are now 27 states in the US that require the verifiable paper receipts.

Voting Machine Troubles

As Bev Harris pointed out on Democracy Now! last week, the voting machines in the U.S. are "error-prone... tamper-friendly and that the companies that make them are in cover-up mode."

Jim March, board member of BlackBoxVoting.org, pointed out last Thursday that in fact, "with in the last thirty days, there have been reports of manipulation of Sequoia machines," referring to the so-called "yellow button problem" where certain Seqoia machines come equipped with yellow button on the back of the machine that, when held down, allows voters to vote more than once. According to March, the only "saving grace" is that there "would be an audible chime with each vote," hopefully coming to the attention of the poll workers. This is just one of a number of various malfunctions which have surfaced in almost every voting machine on the market.

March stated that he and Harris have mainly focused their investigations on voting machines from the manufacturer Diebold Election System because of their lack of security, which allowed 40,000 private company files to be open to the public. Nevertheless, according to March, all of the voting machine companies have problems.

March additionally explained that the failures go further than just the machines and the manufactures. In the United States, he said, there is supposed to be Federal oversight of the voting machines and the companies that manufacture them. However, he has documented several cases involving Diebold, where this oversight process failed.

"If the Federal oversight process failed with Diebold, did it do any better with the others?" March asked. "The latest evidence says no."

Conflict of Interest

Bev Harris says she began investigating electronic voting machines, when she "discovered a Republican senator from Nebraska [Chuck Hagel] who was running for office had ownership in the company that was counting his own votes."

According to Harris, in an Alternet article from October, 2003, the main owner of the company, Election Systems & Software, is a company owned by Senator Chuck Hagel's campaign finance director, Michael McCarthy. Hagel owned shares in both of the companies and "Hagel was the CEO and Chairman of the voting machine company while it built the machines that counted his votes."

According to Jim March, all three of the original founders of Global Election Systems-the Canadian company that was bought out by Diebold in January, 2002-were convicted felons in investment and stock fraud. March hypothesizes that they wanted to use the voting machines as a form of insider trading, since they could potentially rig the election.

Speaking of Diebold, an article by the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported on August 28, 2003, that Walden O'Dell, chief executive of Diebold Inc., "told Republicans in a recent fund-raising letter that he is 'committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year.'"

According to the same article, Republican Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, "said Diebold is not the only company with political connections - noting that lobbyists for voting-machine makers read like a who's who of Columbus' powerful and politically connected."

Harris reported in 2003 that "O'Dell sponsored a $600,000 fund raiser for Dick Cheney in July. Diebold director W.H. Timken is also an avid Bush supporter."

The list goes on, but the picture is clear. Every one of the major voting machine manufacturers has a conflict of interest with the impartial and fair election that they are supposedly attempting to carry out. Furthermore, according to Jim March, there is no oversight committee to regulate who owns what, who is supporting who, and who should or should not be allowed to receive the voting machine contract for a region in which there may be a conflict of interest.

It is good that Smartmatic is under investigation. Regardless of what the results of the commission may turn out to be, the voters have a right to know who is in control of the system they are using to decide the fate of their country. They also deserve to know that their vote is being counted. But it is important to keep in mind that Smartmatic is but one company, and the other major voting machine manufacturers also have their major defects, their owners, and their own potential conflicts of interest, which should also be under Federal investigation by the United States government.

Demonizing Chavez has become de riguer ever since the Venezuelan leader called Bush "the devil" while addressing the United Nations General Assembly in New York. Chavez was prompted to go on his rhetorical offensive after enduring years of strong-arm U.S. interventionist tactics in his nation's internal politics (for a more detailed explanation of these issues see my recent book, Hugo Chavez: Oil, Politics, and the Challenge to the U.S., published by St. Martin's Press).

According to the Miami Herald, Maloney expressed concerns regarding Smartmatic's purchase of Sequoia last year and a possible connection between the Venezuelan government and Smartmatic through the software company, Bizta- which is operated by two of the same people who own Smartmatic.

At one time, the Venezuelan government owned 28% of Bitza. But, Sequoia claims this part "ownership" in Bizta merely added up to collateral for a $150,000 loan that Bizta had received in 2003 from the Venezuelan Industrial Credit Fund, which is the equivalent of the U.S. Small Business Administration.

Smartmatic is owned by three Venezuelans; they are being investigated by the Feds in an effort to ascertain whether Caracas has any control or influence over Smartmatic. Company officials strenuously deny any link, as does the Venezuelan government.

By calling for an investigation, Maloney gets to look tough on the issue of voter technology. "The government should know who owns our voting machines -- that is a national security concern," she remarked. "Having a foreign government investing or owning a company in this country that makes voting machines could raise a question about the integrity of the elections," she added.

Maloney, who voted for the Iraq war in 2002 but who now seeks to redeploy the troops "at the earliest practicable date," specializes in fishing for safe issues that make her look strong on national security. She recently sought to outflank the Bush administration by calling for reform of the CFIUS process that allowed Dubai Ports World to acquire a British company that controlled operations in several key U.S. ports.

Now Maloney seeks to enhance her standing on national security matters by suggesting that the Bush administration is failing to protect us from the likes of the Venezuelan government.

"Just as the Dubai ports deal was a priority security issue," she remarked, "any potential foreign influence on our elections system is vital to our national security and deserves at least a look. It doesn't seem that the deal for Sequoia was vetted by our government, and I want to know why."

By raising the red flag on Venezuela Maloney gets into the good graces of the mainstream media, which has been condemning Chavez ever since his inflammatory appearance at the United Nations.

CNN's Lou Dobbs, a nationalist xenophobe, has long been a leading Chavez critic. Not surprisingly he lavished praise on Maloney, remarking on his show that "we have to give just extraordinary credit to Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney. She focused on this issue, she brought it to the attention of the public, and our hats are off to her."

As the ranking member on the Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade and Technology Subcommittee, which has jurisdiction over CFIUS, Maloney has the right to call for investigations as she sees fit. The problem, however, is that the Democrats have not been consistent on the issue of voter technology.

Sequoia is actually the smallest of the three top vendors of e-voting machinery; the others are Diebold, Election Systems & Software (ES&S), and Hart InterCivic.

According to Robert Kennedy Jr., writing in Rolling Stone magazine, ES&S was at one point chaired by Chuck Hagel, a Republican Senator from Nebraska.

Tom Hicks, an investor in Hart InterCivic and a GOP stalwart, bought the Texas Rangers from George Bush in 1998. The purchase made George Bush a millionaire.

Diebold has contributed at least $300,000 to GOP candidates since 1998. Up until recently, Walden O'Dell was Diebold's CEO; prior to the presidential election of 2004 he pledged to deliver Ohio to George Bush.

In Ohio in 2004, observers reported widespread problems and irregularities with ES&S machines. Following the election in Ohio, Democratic Congressman John Conyers of Michigan wrote a report about flawed computer voter technology and raised the issue on the floor of Congress, but received little support from Democrats in the Senate.

The Nation's John Nichols remarked, "the dramatic imperfections in the 2004 presidential election in Ohio, as detailed in a new report...circulated by Representative John Conyers Jr.... deserve a more serious response than they received from the majority of Congressional Democrats."

When Congress reviewed the Electoral College result, Conyers objected to the certification of the Ohio result. But in the end, only 31 Democratic House members and one Senator voted against electoral certification.

Going into the November 7th election, voters are uneasy about the security of touch-screen voting machines and other electronic elections systems. According to officials, nearly 40 percent of voters on Election Day next week will be using paperless touch-screen machines which leave no paper trail and are vulnerable to hackers. According to Newsweek magazine, Diebold machines display grave vulnerabilities. Experts say that the software on Diebold machines can be altered very easily. Diebold, unlike Smartmatic, is not owned by Venezuelans but Americans.

The Democrats must systematically address the issue of electronic voting machines and companies across the board. Failure to do so will give the distinct impression that the party is trying to score easy political points by bashing Chavez and lacks the necessary commitment to preserve our electoral democracy.

Nikolas Kozloff is the author, most recently, of Hugo Chavez: Oil, Politics, and the Challenge to the U.S. (St. Martin's Press)

The poll suggested that the judgment of undecided voters would be crucial to the outcome of many congressional races this year, with as many as 19 percent of voters saying that they now only leant to a candidate or were flatly undecided.

Democrats needed to add 15 seats in the 435-member House and six in the 100-member Senate to regain control of both chambers of Congress in the Nov. 7 elections.

Republicans had made major gains among independent voters, the poll suggested. As recently as mid-October, 47 percent of independent voters said they would vote for the Democratic candidate in their district, compared with 29 percent who favored the Republican. Currently, Democrats led by 44-33 percent among independent voters.

President George W. Bush's political standing had improved in the final week before the election, with his job approval rating among registered voters rising from 37 percent in early October to41 percent. However, a majority of voters, 53 percent, still disapproved of the president job performance, according to the poll, which was conducted among 2,369 registered voters from Wednesday through Saturday.

Another poll, conducted by ABC News/Washington Post among 1,205 adults from Wednesday to Saturday, also showed a narrowed lead of Democrats over Republicans, 51-45 percent among likely voters.