Marc Baber wrote: I tend to agree with Paul-- paper ballots are simple to explain > and have widespread grassroots support. > > > > Mark and Paul, > > We all agree with you. Almost all of us who began election integrity > work 2 or 3 or more years ago, actively fought against DRE adoption > and want DREs to be used as boat anchors or recycled in some > environmentally friendly fashion. > > However, our foremost goal is to ensure election outcome integrity - > i.e. make sure that the right people are sworn into office following > all future elections. > > If we force states to adopt measures like sufficient manual audits to > ensure accurate election outcomes, states will quickly see how costly, > time-consuming and untrustworthy DREs are. > > The US Congress cannot mandate that states throw away their shiny new > toys and the HAVA bill did not outlaw any type of voting system > because that would be unconstitutional. > > For the purpose of ensuring election outcome accuracy, HR550, as > written in the last Congress, is insufficient, counterproductive and > urgently needs to be fixed. > > eg. some HR550 audit flaws included: > > 1. insufficient 2% federal audits would not detect vote miscount that > could cause wrong election outcomes in a large amount, if not a > majority, of races > > 2. audits controlled by the US EAC which is probably unconstitutional, > but also puts audits in the hands of the currently hopelessly > incompetent unqualified group > > 3. federal audits could interfere with state and county-level audits > that were sufficient, like the audit that NM may be putting into place > soon. audits need to be designed at the state level at a minimum, and > preferably at the county level. > > 4. nothing was written into HR550 that would make the federal audit > transparent or verifiable to the public, so it could easily result in > a procedure that could be easily manipulated > > I am half-way between Paul's purists and strategists groups because I > am wholly against the Holt bill as it was written (better to have no > legislation at all). Yet by rewriting Holt's audit provision to make > it verifiable, adequate, and transparent, would soon result in > hand-countable voter verified paper ballot optical scan voting systems > IMO. > > As far as adding printers to DREs like those in MD and GA, my > understanding is (correct me if I'm wrong) that the vendors have > already said it would not be possible or would be outrageously > expensive, and so passage of federal legislation requiring VVPATs in > federal elections would, in MD and GA and perhaps parts of PA, etc. > cause paperless DREs to be scrapped and optical scan systems to be > adopted because, as you point out, they are much less expensive. > > An effective way to force out DREs (besides requiring sufficient > verifiable transparent manual audits) would be to only provide funds > for optical scan paper ballot systems for meeting the new requirement > for VVPATs with every system. > > Another way to force out DREs would be to require a technically > competent US EAC TGDC with backbone, because then the federal > voluntary standards for security could be improved and the EAC and > NASED stopped from approving systems that do not meet even the current > lax standards, all current DRE systems are already technologically > obsolete because they use no modern security technology (deliberately?). > > There are probably more indirect common-sense measures that you can > think of which would result in states' scrapping DREs. > > We all agree. > > Best, > > Kathy
http://ElectionArchive.org
Founder and President of US Count Votes, dba The National Election Data Archive and volunteer for honest, accurately counted elections since 2003. Masters degree in mathematics with emphasis on computer science. Has written numerous academic and scientific papers with computer scientists, statisticians, and mathematicians on election integrity topics, inluding how to calculate minimum manual audit amounts necessary to ensure election outcome integrity.
"The US Congress cannot mandate that states throw away their shiny new toys and the HAVA bill did not outlaw any type of voting system because that would be unconsitututional."
Constitutional right now is whatever Bush and the corrupt cronies he put on the Supreme Court say it is. HR6200 mandates smaller precincts and hand-counted paper ballots for federal elections, but states usually combine federal and state elections to save money, so if they have to use HCPB for federal elections, they'll probably use them for state elections also.
As for the shiny new expensive voting machines, what we need is a lemon law, the same sort of thing that we have for cars. If machines do not meet certification standards (none of them do) or perform as advertised (none of them do), taxpayers should get their money back.
We need to get rid of HAVA. Some of the people who pushed it through, I believe, are already in prison or under indictment for corruption. And we need to support HR6200.
by
Mark E. Smith (21 articles, 30 quicklinks, 100 diaries, 1325 comments)
on Sunday, November 19, 2006 at 11:52:50 AM
I am troubled by Dopp, as always, with her attempts to even reference "optical scans: or "scaMs" ~~ as we have pointed out elsewhere ( find out about it ). Optical Scams are realy the Fifth Column of voting, and have been for decades, going back to early 80s "elections." And, by extrapolation, their predecessors, punch cards, since they were also linked to computer software in the counting of "the sacred ballot." Crooks have no problem erasing democracy, because they do not have consciences that are alive enough to know the seriousness of their crimes. The Mark Radkes of Diebold, Wally O'Dells, David Bears, Bob and Todd Urosevich ( forgive me, now I'm really digging deep into the bottom of a skanky barrel ) and all the other cronies and contributors to Bush Family crimes and atrocities, are the serial killers, the mass murderers of democracy. Like child molesters, they are so sick they don't even realize the gravity of their high crimes, but we need to bring them up to speed, here, or in a slammer ( the sooner the better, a la Skilling and Lay ).
But, as we are now seeing, "do the crime, and you do the time." DeLay, Kenny Boy Lay ( well, doing time elsewhere, no doubt ) and Bob Ney. I wrote them all two years ago, and J. Kenneth Blackwell, telling them they would go down for their most savage High Treasons. We are seeing swift justice, and I hope it's compounded, not out of animosity, but simply to protect the world from such unwitting perps, such soul-lessly hapless monsters................
What disturbs me to no end about Dopp is she continues to adjust her position, her perspective, in reference to the groundswell for the only secure system, Hand Counted Paper Ballots, all whilst inserting a PLUG, above, for optical scam machines. The semantics, of what she wrote here, are completely compromised. There is no middle ground here. You either get rid of private software, and machines altogether ( by extension ) without the public's ability to monitor it and protect their interests, or you continue to slip fatally on the slippery slope of private interests presuming rights to our PUBLIC elections.
OK???
Private rights to public "elections." That has got to be the oxymoron in Guinness Book of Records for the oxymoron to end all oxymorons. If you have private interests interpreting the results of the vote to us, or even CIA backed interests ( as we now have, which I'll be happy to document ) you have NOTHING: no vote, no result, no elections. Not a known quantity at all, but ZERO. "Whatever." We need to get rid of optical SCAM machines altogether, easily manipulated, with any number of back doors opening all the way back onto the bogus elections of the 'Sixties ( in their close cousins, punch cards, read by computers ).
We need to junk all these machines, as a life or death issue.
And, while we're at it, we need to jettison the Dopps of this encounter, because she simply knows enough to know better, but is unable to help herself: so I would call her a clear case of "Fifth Column" infiltration. She's welcome to prove otherwise...............
Judging by what she "wrote" above, she simply can't. She's a "clear and present danger" to this fight, NOT between democracy and fascisim: but between order ( protection of the public ) and......"WHATEVER....." !!!
~~John E
by
muservin (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 42 comments)
on Sunday, November 19, 2006 at 6:57:17 PM
I am troubled by Dopp, as always, with her attempts to even reference "optical scans: or "scaMs" ~~ as we have pointed out elsewhere ( find out about it ). Optical Scams are realy the Fifth Column of voting, and have been for decades, going back to early 80s "elections." And, by extrapolation, their predecessors, punch cards, since they were also linked to computer software in the counting of "the sacred ballot." Crooks have no problem erasing democracy, because they do not have consciences that are alive enough to know the seriousness of their crimes. The Mark Radkes of Diebold, Wally O'Dells, David Bears, Bob and Todd Urosevich ( forgive me, now I'm really digging deep into the bottom of a skanky barrel ) and all the other cronies and contributors to Bush Family crimes and atrocities, are the serial killers, the mass murderers of democracy. Like child molesters, they are so sick they don't even realize the gravity of their high crimes, but we need to bring them up to speed, here, or in a slammer ( the sooner the better, a la Skilling and Lay ).
But, as we are now seeing, "do the crime, and you do the time." DeLay, Kenny Boy Lay ( well, doing time elsewhere, no doubt ) and Bob Ney. I wrote them all two years ago, and J. Kenneth Blackwell, telling them they would go down for their most savage High Treasons. We are seeing swift justice, and I hope it's compounded, not out of animosity, but simply to protect the world from such unwitting perps, such soul-lessly hapless monsters................
What disturbs me to no end about Dopp is she continues to adjust her position, her perspective, in reference to the groundswell for the only secure system, Hand Counted Paper Ballots, all whilst inserting a PLUG, above, for optical scam machines. The semantics, of what she wrote here, are completely compromised. There is no middle ground here. You either get rid of private software, and machines altogether ( by extension ) without the public's ability to monitor it and protect their interests, or you continue to slip fatally on the slippery slope of private interests presuming rights to our PUBLIC elections.
OK???
Private rights to public "elections." That has got to be the oxymoron in Guinness Book of Records for the oxymoron to end all oxymorons. If you have private interests interpreting the results of the vote to us, or even CIA backed interests ( as we now have, which I'll be happy to document ) you have NOTHING: no vote, no result, no elections. Not a known quantity at all, but ZERO. "Whatever." We need to get rid of optical SCAM machines altogether, easily manipulated, with any number of back doors opening all the way back onto the bogus elections of the 'Sixties ( in their close cousins, punch cards, read by computers ).
We need to junk all these machines, as a life or death issue.
And, while we're at it, we need to jettison the Dopps of this encounter, because she simply knows enough to know better, but is unable to help herself: so I would call her a clear case of "Fifth Column" infiltration. She's welcome to prove otherwise...............
Judging by what she "wrote" above, she simply can't. She's a "clear and present danger" to this fight, NOT between democracy and fascisim: but between order ( protection of the public ) and......"WHATEVER....." !!!
~~John E
by
muservin (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 42 comments)
on Sunday, November 19, 2006 at 6:59:34 PM
3 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
