3
2
2
So when Congressman Holt says we don't have to worry about what the software does when it's counting the votes, because after all, we have the "audits," we're hit with a double whammy: Audits that are actually just spot checks of ballots with no proof of where they came from (with insiders pre-warned as to which location will be spot checked), and concealed original counts controlled by insiders.
Now, someone will pop in here and say that the locations to be spot checked are selected after the counts are announced. No matter -- everyone knows there will be spot checks and they don't get counted instantly. You can bet they'll be in there burning the midnight oil in places where there is something to hide. They've done it before. Why wouldn't they do it again? This is old-school paper ballot fraud, from Recount 101.
Is part of the difference of opinion the difference between compromising on incremental change and demanding the whole enchilada?
The problem is that the two camps disagree on the end goal. Holt Bill proponents do not see restoration of public elections as the end goal, and most Holt Bill proponents are fine with continuation of concealed vote counts. Some of them do envision next steps, like "better audits" or getting open source software (which still conceals the counting of the vote).
But because the two sides do not share a common belief as to what the end goal is, opinions about what is "incremental" improvement do not match.
Those of us who see public elections as a human rights issue don't find it meaningful to authorize concealed counts with some hand-picked cronies looking at a tiny percentage of ballots that may or may not be the real ones, with the public standing behind a rope looking on. Yes, this concept has paper ballots that are spot-checked (no guarantee that they are even the original ballots). But no, this does not really bring us any closer to public ability to authenticate the count.
The Holt Bill offers a sense of false confidence. That's dangerous and will only stall and confuse the end goal, which is restoration of public ability to see and authenticate every step of the election.
Let's pause here. When we return for the conclusion of our interview, Bev will discuss how other countries have dealt with electronic voting and how to move towards restoration of public elections. I hope you'll join us.
***
Part Two of my interview with Bev
BlackBoxVoting.org website
Black Box Voting: Ballot Tampering in the 21st Century by Bev Harris (free online version)
1 | 2
