Today, more and more, we are beginning to understand that transforming our right to vote to the opportunity to verify voting machines profoundly subverts our democratic elections.
The Magical Brew of HAVA's Election Assistance Commission (EAC)
The HAVA-created EAC, a five-person commission appointed by and reporting to the White House, recently released their 2007 vision for America's elections: the "Voluntary Voting System Guidelines" (VVSG), "voluntary" because the US Constitution empowers the states, not the federal government, to administer elections. Theoretically the EAC can only " recommend" voting system standards to the states.
The VVSG defines technology-centric "verifiable voting," and through the VVSG the EAC keeps the nation's voting systems perpetually aligned to this paradigm.
The EAC recommends "software independent" voting systems (dual systems so the same software doesn't mark and count the ballot), and even goes so far as to suggest completely paperless verifiable systems, where one computer will check (verify) another. (24)
In the EAC paperless verifiable voting scheme, the voter is so incidental as to completely disappear.
The VVSG is the EAC's authorized blueprint-hardware and software design specifications-for our nation's election systems. The e-voting industry pays scrupulous attention to the VVSG, ultimately using this specifications document for developing their products.
In the 2007 VVSG, the EAC designs paper ballots. EAC Chair, Donetta Davidson, declared at a 2006 meeting: " We must address the problems associated with counting paper ballots. " Ms. Davidson apparently was not thinking about hand counting. In the topsy-turvy world of federal election reform, technology takes precedence over voters.
So the latest version of the VVSG includes design specifications for machine-readable paper ballots (25). The EAC ignores Florida 2000's lessons and the dangers wrought by paper ballots designed to machine, rather than voter, specifications.
The EAC's verifiable voting goal is to enable and promulgate technology-based voting systems.
Accordingly, the EAC's principal recommendation addressing voter needs is for large print signage reminding voters to verify their voting machine's vote.
The EAC and Congress
The Ear's power is further amplified in the uncomfortable confluence of the Commission and federal law (26).
A 2007 version of the controversial election reform proposal known as HR 811 (27) , aka the Holt Bill (and its companion bills in the Senate, sponsored by Senators Nelson and Feinstein) is a perfect example of this.
Hidden within 62 pages of convoluted language HR811 mandates new, complex and expensive technology for every polling jurisdiction in the nation (28). This odd provision did not come out of nowhere. It came straight out of the EAC's 2005 VVSG.
The "voluntary" nature of the EAC's guidelines is transformed into the law of the land whenever any particular congressional representative decides to toss an EAC ingredient into the election reform soup du jour.
