OpEdNews » EAC for Dummies: How the White House has designs on your elections

Support OEN
With Your
Tax-Deductible Donation

Tags for This Article:

Populum Tag Cloud Control Panel
	Fine tune your search to access content

Articles	Links
Diaries	Products
Events	All

All time
Last 6 mos
Last month
Last week
Last 24 hrs

From:
Month Day Year

To:
Month Day Year

Alphabet Popularity	Count ON Count OFF
This Level	Sub-levels

Tag(s): Corporations Voting Machine; Election-Voting Issues News; Government; Voting; Voting Integrity; Voting Laws Federal HAVA; Voting Machines; Voting Reform; Voting Technology
Add to My Group

August 31, 2007 at 10:03:03

EAC for Dummies: How the White House has designs on your elections

by Nancy Tobi Page 2 of 3 page(s)

www.opednews.com

SAVE FAVORITES

VIEW FAVORITES

View Ratings | Rate It

They point to people like Buster Soaries. They love him. Great guy. They forget that the first thing he wanted when appointed Chair of the EAC was the power to cancel U.S. elections in case of "terrorist threats". They point to ex-Commissioner Ray Martinez. Another great guy. Recently purportedly caught on video in an interview attesting to the fact that he doesn't think paper ballots are all that necessary.

Ray's comments are not surprising to those of us who have studied the EAC beast, attended its meetings, delved into its evil belly.

The EAC's self-declared goal as of its Standards Board meeting of February 2007 is to create "completely paperless verifiable voting systems."

The common meme among mainstream journalists and many election activists is that the EAC is a bumbling government agency, controlled by partisan cronies, which, if only the right people were in charge, could really do some good.

It can't.

Ever.

The real power of the EAC is in their "Voluntary Voting Systems Guidelines" (VVSG) program.

This is a nice benign name for a program which in fact has the White House agency designing the nation's voting systems.

With the VVSG, the EAC designs the software and hardware specifications, hands them off to the industry, and then the industry builds these products to the EAC specifications.

The EAC also hands their voting system designs to Congress and the Senate, who then try to encode them into Federal law, effectively removing the "voluntary" nature of their "guidelines". Even if, by some miracle, we manage to effectively kill HR811 and SB1487 this year, these will not be the last attempts to buoy the power of the EAC this way. It's so easy to do, after all.

Because nobody knows what is really going on.

The outcome of the little arrangement described above is this: the voting systems available for use in the nation will soon all be EAC-designed. Or, put another way, designed by the White House.

The pure market reality is that this takes the "voluntary" out of the guidelines. It's kind of like if a bunch of bureaucrats on the FDA sat around designing aspirin and said, this is the only FDA-approved aspirin now. What would American drug stores stock and sell? Federally-designed drugs. Nothing more, nothing less.

This is the same thing, only we are talking about the machinery of our elections.

Think about that for a moment.

When that has settled in, consider this last little caveat: The EAC is now in the business of designing all voting systems, not just computerized. Paper ballots too. They want all paper ballot systems to be "machine-readable" and they've put the specifications for this into their latest round of "voluntary" guidelines. You can read about that here:

1 | 2 | 3

Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
It's time to abolish the EAC

Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers

Nancy believes in the principles embodied in our Constitution, and that groups like Election Defense Alliance and DFNH can play a unique role by empowering ordinary people to do extraordinary things.

	Contact Author
	Contact Editor
	View Other Articles by Author

Bookmark this page: (what's this?)

(More...)

11 comments

Progressive Activist
FritsonProgressive Activist

Posted it on DIGG.com

Great article. Posted it on DIGG.com: Warning: A White House Executive agency (EAC) designs all voting systems!

by Nancy Tobi- This White House Agency (EAC: Election Assistance Commission) was slipped into the 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA) in a late night, behind closed doors meeting, by the Republican Congressman Bob Ney (now a convicted criminal). Executive agency composed of four White House appointees with the power to control the nation's elections!

by Fritson (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 11 comments) on Friday, August 31, 2007 at 9:48:42 PM

Dr. John Moffett is an active research neuroscientist in the Washington, DC area, who has published over 45 scientific articles on the nervous and immune systems. Dr. Moffett is also the author and webmaster of the political opinion website www.Factinista.org, and is a Managing Editor at OpEdNews.com.
John R MoffettDr. John Moffett is an active research neuroscientist in the Washington, DC area, who has published over 45 scientific articles on the nervous and immune systems. Dr. Moffett is also the author and webmaster of the political opinion website www.Factinista.org, and is a Managing Editor at OpEdNews.com.

Nancy

What is your solution? I want the exact same voting systems used in every state because I think that the system with the best record, and lowest error rate, should be universal (optical scan, whatever).

Would it be possible to set up a US Election Board made up of people from Academia, who are not running for office, who determine what systems are used and how they are used? Leaving this up to individual states insures that different states will have different standards and voting systems, and that partisan politics will come into play.

What is the solution?

by John R Moffett (82 articles, 17 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 646 comments) on Saturday, September 1, 2007 at 9:34:18 AM

Writer from California
john de herreraWriter from California

aren't you the guy who

didn't want a constitutional convention because it would destroy the constitution and the republic? well look what you get--what you fear happening at a convention.

yet at a convention, nothing is ratified, in the meantime, folks like nanci would be able to propose common-sense solutions before the nation.

http://www.foavc.org

http://www.articlev.org

by john de herrera (36 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 158 comments) on Saturday, September 1, 2007 at 10:25:54 PM

Me?

You got the wrong person, I'd love to see a bunch of constitutional conventions!

by John R Moffett (82 articles, 17 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 646 comments) on Sunday, September 2, 2007 at 7:38:51 AM

Nancy Tobi is cofounder, former Chair, website editor for Democracy for New Hampshire (DFNH), and Chair of the NH Fair Elections Committee. Nancy is the author of numerous articles on election integrity, including "The Gifts of HAVA: Time to Ask for a Refund," "What's Wrong with the Holt Bill," "We're Counting the Votes: An Election Preparedness Kit," and "Hands-on Elections: An Information Handbook for Running Real Elections, Using Real Paper Ballots, Counted by Real People". Her article about...

to see more of bio, click on member name
Nancy TobiNancy Tobi is cofounder, former Chair, website editor for Democracy for New Hampshire (DFNH), and Chair of the NH Fair Elections Committee. Nancy is the author of numerous articles on election integrity, including "The Gifts of HAVA: Time to Ask for a Refund," "What's Wrong with the Holt Bill," "We're Counting the Votes: An Election Preparedness Kit," and "Hands-on Elections: An Information Handbook for Running Real Elections, Using Real Paper Ballots, Counted by Real People". Her article about...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Here is a solution

The EAC's website defines their responsibilities. The Standards Board consists of the top state and local election officials from every state. It is a representational board.

Here is a reallocation of EAC responsibilities after we eliminate the Commission:

Generate technical guidance on the administration of federal elections. – HAND OVER TO NIST & STANDARDS BOARD WITH CITIZEN REPRESENTATION

Produce voluntary voting systems guidelines. – HAND OVER TO NIST & STANDARDS BOARD WITH CITIZEN REPRESENTATION

Research and report on matters that affect the administration of federal elections. – HAND OVER TO STANDARDS BOARD WITH CITIZEN REPRESENTATION

Provide information and guidance with respect to laws, procedures, and technologies affecting the administration of Federal elections. – HAND OVER TO STANDARDS BOARD WITH CITIZENS REPRESENTATION

Administer payments to States to meet HAVA requirements. – HAND OVER TO GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

Provide grants for election technology development and for pilot programs to test election technology. – ELIMINATE THIS FUNCTION.

Manage funds targeted to certain programs designed to encourage youth participation in elections. – HAND OVER TO DEPT. OF EDUCATION

Develop a national program for voting machine testing – HAND OVER TO NIST & STANDARDS BOARD WITH CITIZEN REPRESENTATION

Maintain the national mail voter registration form that was developed in accordance with the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA), report to Congress every two years on the impact of the NVRA on the
administration of federal elections, and provide information to States on their responsibilities under that law. – HAND BACK TO FEC

Audit persons who received federal funds authorized by HAVA from the General Services Administration or the Election Assistance Commission. – HAND OVER TO GSA, USING INSPECTOR GENERAL

Submit an annual report to Congress describing EAC activities for the previous fiscal year. – HAND OVER AS APPROPRIATE TO ENTITIES PICKING UP FUNCTIONS AS DESCRIBED ABOVE

Certification, recertification and decertification of voting machines - DELEGATE TO THE STATES

by Nancy Tobi (71 articles, 4 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 53 comments) on Sunday, September 2, 2007 at 9:24:57 AM

Election Issues Committee Chairman for the Pinellas County, FL Democratic Executive Committee. I want to put a link to your site on our homepage, and I'm working on getting permission to do so.
GitarChrisElection Issues Committee Chairman for the Pinellas County, FL Democratic Executive Committee. I want to put a link to your site on our homepage, and I'm working on getting permission to do so.

NIST corrupted already

I would not trust the the NIST. They have hundreds of pages backing up the administration on 9/11. Then I saw a video of the guy who designed the NIST computer model which was supposed to test theories on how the buildings in NYC fell on 9/11/01. He said he had to tweak the model three times to get the buildings to fall. He had to keep weakening the strength of the outer walls while maintaining the weight they had to support. After the third "weakening" the "model" towers finally fell.

Forget trusting the NIST while Bush controls it. Forget the EAC all together, and fight to have the Holt bill tabled.

Then we can start fighting, on the very local level, to hand count our own votes. If we can do that, than we can save ourselves.

by GitarChris (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 124 comments) on Monday, September 3, 2007 at 1:28:13 AM

Mandate Hand Counts

The only way we will ever get back to elections results we can trust is to hand count our paper ballots. In the precinct, immediately after the polls close, in front of any interested observers. What we save by not buying machines would pay for the counters, at least the first time.

The only role the Federal Govt. should have is to mandate paper ballots and hand counts. Otherwise, Amendment 10 should be followed to the letter. This is a state issue, and the Feds should have nothing to do with it.

by GitarChris (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 124 comments) on Monday, September 3, 2007 at 1:16:44 AM

Born in 1942 in NE Oklahoma, educated and raised in NE California, joined the Navy at 17 and was shipped to Yokosuka, Japan. There I was able to buy all the books that were banned in the USA. Married & divorced twice, AA degree in Lib. Arts. Now disabled w/ COPD, I live in the house that my mother left me and spend a lot of time on the computer and reading.
Chuck GarnerBorn in 1942 in NE Oklahoma, educated and raised in NE California, joined the Navy at 17 and was shipped to Yokosuka, Japan. There I was able to buy all the books that were banned in the USA. Married & divorced twice, AA degree in Lib. Arts. Now disabled w/ COPD, I live in the house that my mother left me and spend a lot of time on the computer and reading.

Well you should ask, John R.

One thing for sure, is the idea that optical scanners or any kind of computerized voting maching can be part of the "solution". It is this kind of ignorance that perpetuates the continued control of our elections by the voting machine industry, owned and operated by Republicans, dedicated to Karl Rove's dream of permanent Republican control of the U.S. This is obviously a subject that you know nothing about, but you're not alone. Please read Michael Collin's http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0706/S00165.htm, Election 2004: The Urban Legend. Hands-on elections, HCPB Now!

by Chuck Garner (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 118 comments) on Saturday, September 1, 2007 at 12:48:07 PM

This doesn't answer my question

What is the solution? I want everyone to use the same exact voting system, whether paper or not.

How do we come to agreement on a gold standard voting system with the lowest possible error rate? If every county is using different methods, then the votes won’t be counted the same.

by John R Moffett (82 articles, 17 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 646 comments) on Sunday, September 2, 2007 at 7:37:38 AM

57Yo m I'm a "been there, done that! Bought the tee shirt,to hide the scars!" type of person Ive workedï¿½many jobs fromï¿½a chicken slaughterer to managing a branch of a multinational and many jobs in between.Raised in colonial PNG Left School 16,Grad Hi school 22 Night School, University 36ï¿½ BBus (majored in Psyche and Marketing), Dip Comp prog and project Mmnt.at 50 I've been in 48 different community org ,23 on board with 18 prez or deputy prez.First social campaign at 17 for the aborigine...

to see more of bio, click on member name
Andris57Yo m I'm a "been there, done that! Bought the tee shirt,to hide the scars!" type of person Ive workedï¿½many jobs fromï¿½a chicken slaughterer to managing a branch of a multinational and many jobs in between.Raised in colonial PNG Left School 16,Grad Hi school 22 Night School, University 36ï¿½ BBus (majored in Psyche and Marketing), Dip Comp prog and project Mmnt.at 50 I've been in 48 different community org ,23 on board with 18 prez or deputy prez.First social campaign at 17 for the aborigine...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Federally controlled elections aren't all bad per sec

Nancy,

The problem isn’t with federally controlled elections per sec there are many countries around the world that do and don’t suffer shenanigans the US does. Australia is one such country. One problem as we see it is that it is who in the Federal Government that controls the election. Much of Australia’s politics is as every bit dysfunctional as yours in that they are both dominated by partisan politics both major parties believing they are the one true god and the other the devil incarnate. In truth they are both nearer the latter option than the first.

We have a quasi independent Public Service (Australian Electoral Commission) that promotes from within, no board seats for political stooges. If the govt. of the day disposes of one head the next is just as likely to be as apolitical. In this way the Govt of the day can’t control elections.

Each seat (district) boundaries are set and new seats created by our electoral commission. They constantly monitor the number of registrations/voting trend and when creating new seats it ensures that the mix is about even. (We have mandatory voting).

The AEC controls the voting processes. The AEC conduct all (including State and council elections). No Florida stealing the vote here.

Consistant methods and systems make tampering difficult.You are cursed with different systems in different states all over seen by a politically biased individuals.

Add to this a dysfunctionally uneven College allocation System that favours the paries not the individuals all add up to a system in dire need of remedial change in order to maintain the democracy it was intended to engender.

Things have changed dramatically since the founding fathers deliberations.

The parties have changed, extreme religion (money), corporations' influences are all new factors that pervert democracy and must be taken into account today none of which were even in the founding father's comprehension of the time.

The Australian electoral Act is an act of both houses of parliament and difficult to change.

I repeat the problem is who in a federal system controls the act. The best thing for your country would be to create an Electoral Commission but make it independent of the executive. Make it an amendment to your Constitution answerable to the joint houses. The act could be sufficiently clear as to limit its power to the apolitical administration of elections. Most important though is that the head is a bureaucrat not an elected (politically compromised) official.

by Andris (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 531 comments) on Sunday, September 2, 2007 at 3:28:12 AM

The "Gold standard" exists...

but you still don't have a clue, or you wouldn't be making stupid statements like "whether paper or not" because no paper implies that you find electronic votes acceptable. THEY ARE NOT. It also implies that you think the tabulation of ballots by computers is okay. IT IS NOT OKAY. Just tryin' to help you out here, John. In view of the huge body of literature that exists on this subject (and growing everyday) it's difficult for me to believe that you're just now becoming aware of the problem. How about global warming? Is that also a subject that you know nothing about? Maybe it's just a coincidence, but most republicans are unaware of any problems in these two areas, so, unless your role is that of a fifth columnist in the employ of the voting machine industry, I'd advise you to get crackin' on your education in these two fields. There's a companion piece to "Election 2004: The Urban Legend", titled "Sludge Report #177- Bigger Than Watergate II", found at:

http://www.scoop.conz/stories/HL076/S00164.htm/

but as I said, you have a whole lot of catching up to do.

by Chuck Garner (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 118 comments) on Sunday, September 2, 2007 at 3:08:03 PM