The Devil's Excrement

I just sent this letter to Prof. Johnathan Taylor of Stanford University

(Use links in text, line links don’t work)

Dear Prof. Taylor:

On Aug. 16th. Venezuelan opposition analysts began charging that there
were some surprising numerical coincidences in the number of SI votes
within voting centers in Venezuela. The Carter Center and the
Electoral Board said on the 18th. that there were only 402 and this
was reasonable.

But this was not what the opposition was charging, the 402 repetitions
were across the “mesas” (tables) and not across the machines. Thus,
apparently the Carter Center had consulted on the  wrong problem.

In my blog, I explained the difference on Aug. 18th.:

http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/2004/08/18.html#a1702

pointing out that a center may have a number of mesas, but that each
mesa may have a variable number of “cuadernos”. In centers with
electronic voting, each cuaderno is equals to one machine. Thus, the
lowest equivalent unit is the cuaderno (machine) not the mesa.

On the 22nd. I reiterated the issue:

http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/2004/08/22.html

pointing out that the 402  SI coincidences at the mesa level, became
805 coincidences at the center level with 1879 machines involved in
these coincidences.

Elio Valladares took a first stab at the mesa problem:

http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/2004/09/01.html#a1732

reaching conclusions that you now agree with.

However, it was not until yesterday that Elio solved the problem in
what I believe is the correct way, he did his simulations at the
cuaderno (machine) level and from there calculated the coincidences
for the SI vote at the mesa level. His results (attached) indicate

<!– D(["mb","that the probability of the number of coincidences reported is about 1\
in 10,000 when the problem is considered at the machine (cuaderno)\
level. Certainly a worrisome result given what is at stake.\
\
While no mathematical study will prove that there was fraud, it\
certainly seems suspicious that these coincidences apparently have\
such low probability, that a statistical study of exit polls by Prof.\
Sanso and Prof. Prado of the University of California at Santa Cruz:\
\
\http://blogs.salon.com/0001330\/2004/08/26.html#a1720\\
\
also finds very little probability of those exit polls matching the\
vote at each voting center and that the live audit of comparing 199\
ballot boxes the night of the vote was never completed.\
\
The Carter Center, based on your earlier conclusion disregarded the\
problem of coincidences. I believe it is only fair that you calculate\
the same problem Elio Valladares calculated at the machine level and\
using your conclusions help decide whether the Carter Center and the\
OAS should or should not reopen the case for fraud in the Venezuelan\
recall vote.\
\
Respectfully.\
“,1] ); //–>
that the probability of the number of coincidences reported is about 1
in 10,000 when the problem is considered at the machine (cuaderno)
level. Certainly a worrisome result given what is at stake.

While no mathematical study will prove that there was fraud, it
certainly seems suspicious that these coincidences apparently have
such low probability, that a statistical study of exit polls by Prof.
Sanso and Prof. Prado of the University of California at Santa Cruz:

http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/2004/08/26.html#a1720

also finds very little probability of those exit polls matching the
vote at each voting center and that the live audit of comparing 199
ballot boxes the night of the vote was never completed.

The Carter Center, based on your earlier conclusion disregarded the
problem of coincidences. I believe it is only fair that you calculate
the same problem Elio Valladares calculated at the machine level and
using your conclusions help decide whether the Carter Center and the
OAS should or should not reopen the case for fraud in the Venezuelan
recall vote.

Respectfully.

I guess I was not the only one paying attention, here JorgeRodriguez says they talked to Prof. Taylor and he saw the same text I posted, but now Taylor is being pressured. Meanwhile Jennifer MCoy continues skirting the issue and now talks about other experts, without realizing that they have not even solved the correct problem. They even issue a new report and now side with Rubin’s data. This is now getting interesting as I added in the note below, Elio Valldares has solved a more complete problem and he gets a probability of one in 10,000 for the coincidences observed. Tulio Alvarez, the lawyer preparing the case, now says the Carter Center played the role of useful idiots. The attempts today by the Carter Center to me are more irresponsible than idiotic.

I think both Taylor and Rubin, should work on the real problem at the machine level to calculate what Elio Valladares did and shut up the Carter Center for once and for all. Enough!

I guess I was not the only one paying attention, here JorgeRodriguez says they talked to Prof. Taylor and he saw the same text I posted, but now Taylor is being pressured. Meanwhile Jennifer MCoy continues skirting the issue and now talks about other experts, without realizing that they have not even solved the correct problem. They even issue a new report and now side with Rubin’s data. This is now getting interesting as I added in the note below, Elio Valldares has solved a more complete problem and he gets a probability of one in 10,000 for the coincidences observed. Tulio Alvarez, the lawyer preparing the case, now says the Carter Center played the role of useful idiots. The attempts today by the Carter Center to me are more irresponsible than idiotic.

I think both Taylor and Rubin, should work on the real problem at the machine level to calculate what Elio Valladares did and shut up the Carter Center for once and for all. Enough!

This week two things happened that reminded me of one of the most perverse things that goes on in this country and nothing ever gets done about it: Government pensions. The two things that happened were the resignation of Minister Hector Navarro from the Ministry of Higher Education and the issuing of new pension rules at the Venezuelan Central Bank.

Navarro, who has been a Minister from day one of the Chavez administration, quit his position in order to go back to his duties at Universidad Central de Venezuela and retire in one and a half years. Navarro is in his late forties or early fifties and will take advantage of the generous pensions in Venezuelan Universities which allow you to retire after 25 (twenty five) years at full salary and benefits, without ever contributing to a pension fund. Moreover, the system is such that when the salary of Professors is increased, retired Professors get the increase too. Additionally, if you die, the same benefits are transferred over to your widow until her death.

Similarly, the Central Bank issued new ¨tougher¨ rules on pensions from that institution. by which men wanting to retire will now need 20 years of service if they are 60 years old, 20 if you are 55 years old or 35 years of service. For women, they can retire after 20 years of service if they are 55 years old. All of these pensions are automatically adjusted if the person holding your last position receives a salary increase. Thus, all former Presidents of the Central Bank who have retired, and there are a few around receive the same pension, all without ever having contributed to a pension fund.

This extremely absurd system has been in place for a long time. No country, however rich can sustain a pension system like this one. There have been two attempts to change it; one was changed at the last minute. The second one took place during Caldera’s last year, led by Tal Cual Editor´s Teodoro Petkoff and was supposed to take effect on the year 2000. That bill established both Government and private pension funds which would be by contribution only. Additionally, it established uniform criteria for retirement, either 65 years of age or 35 years of service. In addition to providing a healthy pension system, it wouldprovide a pool of savings that could invest in Government bonds, solving two problems at once. The perversity had been supposedly eliminated from the system; much like Lula did in Brazil in his first year in power.

When Chavez got to power he named a commission to study the new law and gave it six months to make changes. Then he extended it six months. He gave them an additional six months and, unfortunately, that was the last we heard of the issue.

The commission made a big deal out of the fact that the laws allowed the banks to get into the pension fund business. The way I understand it however, was that most of the members of the Commission were either revolutionary academics that felt their future pensions were threatened by the Bill, or MVR or PPT politicians who saw their extremely generous Assembly pensions in danger.

The result was typical Venezuelan: do nothing. Unfortunately, only a few will continue to benefit from this indecision, in a manner which I find both obscene and perverse. But this is not a political issue, for either side.

This week two things happened that reminded me of one of the most perverse things that goes on in this country and nothing ever gets done about it: Government pensions. The two things that happened were the resignation of Minister Hector Navarro from the Ministry of Higher Education and the issuing of new pension rules at the Venezuelan Central Bank.

Navarro, who has been a Minister from day one of the Chavez administration, quit his position in order to go back to his duties at Universidad Central de Venezuela and retire in one and a half years. Navarro is in his late forties or early fifties and will take advantage of the generous pensions in Venezuelan Universities which allow you to retire after 25 (twenty five) years at full salary and benefits, without ever contributing to a pension fund. Moreover, the system is such that when the salary of Professors is increased, retired Professors get the increase too. Additionally, if you die, the same benefits are transferred over to your widow until her death.

Similarly, the Central Bank issued new ¨tougher¨ rules on pensions from that institution. by which men wanting to retire will now need 20 years of service if they are 60 years old, 20 if you are 55 years old or 35 years of service. For women, they can retire after 20 years of service if they are 55 years old. All of these pensions are automatically adjusted if the person holding your last position receives a salary increase. Thus, all former Presidents of the Central Bank who have retired, and there are a few around receive the same pension, all without ever having contributed to a pension fund.

This extremely absurd system has been in place for a long time. No country, however rich can sustain a pension system like this one. There have been two attempts to change it; one was changed at the last minute. The second one took place during Caldera’s last year, led by Tal Cual Editor´s Teodoro Petkoff and was supposed to take effect on the year 2000. That bill established both Government and private pension funds which would be by contribution only. Additionally, it established uniform criteria for retirement, either 65 years of age or 35 years of service. In addition to providing a healthy pension system, it wouldprovide a pool of savings that could invest in Government bonds, solving two problems at once. The perversity had been supposedly eliminated from the system; much like Lula did in Brazil in his first year in power.

When Chavez got to power he named a commission to study the new law and gave it six months to make changes. Then he extended it six months. He gave them an additional six months and, unfortunately, that was the last we heard of the issue.

The commission made a big deal out of the fact that the laws allowed the banks to get into the pension fund business. The way I understand it however, was that most of the members of the Commission were either revolutionary academics that felt their future pensions were threatened by the Bill, or MVR or PPT politicians who saw their extremely generous Assembly pensions in danger.

The result was typical Venezuelan: do nothing. Unfortunately, only a few will continue to benefit from this indecision, in a manner which I find both obscene and perverse. But this is not a political issue, for either side.

This week two things happened that reminded me of one of the most perverse things that goes on in this country and nothing ever gets done about it: Government pensions. The two things that happened were the resignation of Minister Hector Navarro from the Ministry of Higher Education and the issuing of new pension rules at the Venezuelan Central Bank.

Navarro, who has been a Minister from day one of the Chavez administration, quit his position in order to go back to his duties at Universidad Central de Venezuela and retire in one and a half years. Navarro is in his late forties or early fifties and will take advantage of the generous pensions in Venezuelan Universities which allow you to retire after 25 (twenty five) years at full salary and benefits, without ever contributing to a pension fund. Moreover, the system is such that when the salary of Professors is increased, retired Professors get the increase too. Additionally, if you die, the same benefits are transferred over to your widow until her death.

Similarly, the Central Bank issued new ¨tougher¨ rules on pensions from that institution. by which men wanting to retire will now need 20 years of service if they are 60 years old, 20 if you are 55 years old or 35 years of service. For women, they can retire after 20 years of service if they are 55 years old. All of these pensions are automatically adjusted if the person holding your last position receives a salary increase. Thus, all former Presidents of the Central Bank who have retired, and there are a few around receive the same pension, all without ever having contributed to a pension fund.

This extremely absurd system has been in place for a long time. No country, however rich can sustain a pension system like this one. There have been two attempts to change it; one was changed at the last minute. The second one took place during Caldera’s last year, led by Tal Cual Editor´s Teodoro Petkoff and was supposed to take effect on the year 2000. That bill established both Government and private pension funds which would be by contribution only. Additionally, it established uniform criteria for retirement, either 65 years of age or 35 years of service. In addition to providing a healthy pension system, it wouldprovide a pool of savings that could invest in Government bonds, solving two problems at once. The perversity had been supposedly eliminated from the system; much like Lula did in Brazil in his first year in power.

When Chavez got to power he named a commission to study the new law and gave it six months to make changes. Then he extended it six months. He gave them an additional six months and, unfortunately, that was the last we heard of the issue.

The commission made a big deal out of the fact that the laws allowed the banks to get into the pension fund business. The way I understand it however, was that most of the members of the Commission were either revolutionary academics that felt their future pensions were threatened by the Bill, or MVR or PPT politicians who saw their extremely generous Assembly pensions in danger.

The result was typical Venezuelan: do nothing. Unfortunately, only a few will continue to benefit from this indecision, in a manner which I find both obscene and perverse. But this is not a political issue, for either side.

Judge Jose Ramon Villanueva has just set a new Standard for corruption, stupidity and gutsyness in Venezuela. The judge, who happens to be the one considering the case against Primero Justicia Mayor Henrique Capriles, was caught red handed trying to blackmail none other than the Head of the investigative police (CIPC) Marcos Chavez. Reportedly the judge was handling a case in which Chavez (no relation to the President) was being accused of corruption and asked the Head of CIPC (the equivalent of the FBI) to give him Bs. 15 million (all of US$ 5,000 at the parallel exchange rate) to drop the case.

Judge Villanueva is famous (infamous?) for a number of cases, such as freeing Colombian hijacker Ballestas in 2000 or ordering the detention of the Altamira Square Generals without any accusation from the prosecutor’s office. Two weeks ago he came out and said he could not rule on the Capriles case because he had been sick and had not had time to look at the file for the case. The next day he ruled on it, granting all of the requests of Prosecutor Danilo Anderson. Capriles´ defense accused the judge that day of meeting that evening with three judges who told him how to rule. The judge went on TV to deny this ever happened.

Villanueva was in the initial list to be one of the new additional Supreme Court judges, but did not make the final list. Definitely a gutsy guy to blackmail Chavez, I guess for the good of Venezuelan Justice he will not be judging anyone anymore.