OpEdNews Op Eds

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

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 2 of 3 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It


Become a Fan
  (8 fans)
- Advertisement -

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.


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.

- Advertisement -

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.

- Advertisement -

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:

Next Page  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 is best known as a national leader in the voting rights movement for her seminal work exposing the dangers and fallacies in various election reform efforts past, present and future.

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

NH recounts no check and balance for its privatized corporate-controlled elections

Summary of the Stimulus bill - Don't look half bad to me

NH Secretary of State: "Citizen Election Observers Threaten Election Integrity"

The Myth of Verified Voting: How GOP strategists & J. Abramoff transformed America's elections & the reform movement

2009 Holt Bill. E-Voting: Making a bad system worse

Time to review NH Ballot Law Commission approval of Diebold optical scanners


The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
7 people are discussing this page, with 11 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)
Great article. Posted it on DIGG.com: Warning: A W... by Fritson on Friday, Aug 31, 2007 at 9:48:42 PM
What is your solution? I want the exact same votin... by John R Moffett on Saturday, Sep 1, 2007 at 9:34:18 AM
didn't want a constitutional convention becaus... by john de herrera on Saturday, Sep 1, 2007 at 10:25:54 PM
You got the wrong person, I'd love to see a bu... by John R Moffett on Sunday, Sep 2, 2007 at 7:38:51 AM
The EAC's website defines their responsibiliti... by Nancy Tobi on Sunday, Sep 2, 2007 at 9:24:57 AM
I would not trust the the NIST.  They have hu... by Guitar Chris on Monday, Sep 3, 2007 at 1:28:13 AM
The only way we will ever get back to elections re... by Guitar Chris on Monday, Sep 3, 2007 at 1:16:44 AM
One thingĀ for sure, is the idea that optical scan... by Chuck Garner on Saturday, Sep 1, 2007 at 12:48:07 PM
What is the solution? I want everyone to use the s... by John R Moffett on Sunday, Sep 2, 2007 at 7:37:38 AM
Nancy,The problem isn’t with federally contr... by Andris on Sunday, Sep 2, 2007 at 3:28:12 AM
but you still don't have a clue, or you wouldn... by Chuck Garner on Sunday, Sep 2, 2007 at 3:08:03 PM