Agreement reached on bill banning paperless voting

[freelance]

http://pressesc.com/news/79928072007/agreement-reached-ban-paperless-voting

Agreement reached on bill banning paperless voting
Submitted by Adam Thomas on Sat, 2007-07-28 18:50.
Sponsor: X-Treme Geek: USB Missile Launcher

Democrats and Republicans in the US House of Representatives agreed today on a compromise that will push through a bill banning paperless voting machines and requiring a voter-verified paper record for every vote in the country, after government sanctioned hackers showed how they could break into all three of the top voting systems used in California.

The agreement by Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Rep. Rush Holt of New Jersey will advance H.R. 811, the "Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007," (H.R. 811) which amends the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require a voter-verified permanent paper ballot.

"Today's announcement gives Americans renewed hope that Congress will soon put an end to unaccountable, unverifiable, and inaccessible voting," said Ralph G. Neas, president of the advocacy group People For the American Way. "Millions of voters were disenfranchised in recent elections, and millions of others have wondered if their votes were correctly counted. That is intolerable. Given how much is at stake in the coming elections, passing this legislation should be the nation's top domestic legislative priority."

The amendment ensures that by the 2008 presidential elections there will be a paper record for all votes cast in federal elections, and makes the paper ballot the ballot of record for purposes of a recount and puts in place a system of mandatory random audits.

On technical aspects, the bill prohibits wireless devices in voting machines, and makes voting system source code subject to examination should discrepancies arise.

The agreement obligates the provision for emergency paper ballots should voting machines break down or fail in any way, mandates upgrades to provide durable paper records and enhanced accessible technology by 2012.

[inibo]

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:h811ih.txt.pdf

I sort of quickly glanced at. If passed it looks like it would do the trick, at least for general elections. Do primaries count as "federal" elections? Probably not, but I can't image states spending the money required to retrofit e-voting machines and then not using them for primaries.

The only real drawback is that if passed it doesn't go in effect till the 2008 general election and I, for one, would not put it past either Democrats or Republican to attempt stealing the primaries while they have the chance.

[angelatc]

On technical aspects, the bill prohibits wireless devices in voting machines, and makes voting system source code subject to examination should discrepancies arise.

Does that mean no cell phones in the voting booth? How will they enforce that?

[Revolution9]

Does that mean no cell phones in the voting booth? How will they enforce that?

If you climb inside the machine with it I believe that may constitute the prohibition on wireless devices IN the machine.

HTH
Randy

[freelance]

The amendment ensures that by the 2008 presidential elections there will be a paper record for all votes cast in federal elections, and makes the paper ballot the ballot of record for purposes of a recount and puts in place a system of mandatory random audits.

Oh CRAP! I was so excited that I missed the operative phrase in the whole article. OIC, by then we may only have a choice between two selected candidates...how very convenient for the last election before they usher in the NAU!

[Man from La Mancha]

Oh CRAP! I was so excited that I missed the operative phrase in the whole article. OIC, by then we may only have a choice between two selected candidates...how very convenient for the last election before they usher in the NAU!

Nice observation.

No machines period. This bill sucks.

Even if you get a paper receipt -- which is not the case with the new touch screen systems -- so what? You know how you voted with or without a paper receipt. But even if the voter is given a paper receipt, that does absolutely no good with regard to the overall election count.

You, the voter, KNOW how you voted. But how do you know how the 10,000 other voters in your city voted? or the 5 million voters in your state? or the 90 million voters in your nation? You cannot know it -- unless there has been a verified, open hand count at each precinct, as specified in our model legislation proposal. If such a neighborhood precinct by neighborhood precinct count is not done, then ONLY the people who programmed the computer and/or who have access to all the codes -- are in a position to view the results in secret -- and alter them, if such insiders so desire, before they are published for the public to see

above is from
http://www.votefraud.org/election2000_scam.htm
Read sections 11 and 12
Read section 6 on exactly how to run a paper ballot election
it's all interesting but long

[dantheman]

Technology has made great advances in our societies, sure. But the fact of the matter is there's no reason to do away with the paper ballot. And of course they make promises that by 2012 we'll have that. But by then who knows what state our country will be in?! This needs to stop here and now if Ron Paul has a fair chance at winning the election.

We've seen the evidence of how these things can be hacked, how elections can be rigged, and so on. We need the paper ballot so we can do a proper recount, without having our votes drifting somewhere out in cyberspace. If there's no hard copy, there's no way of knowing who actually won the election. We saw the corruption of the 2000 election. We've had men like Clinton Curtis, of Yang Enterprises, admit that programs have been designed to fix elections.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3hUPP_bdOo
(Curtis admitting to creating a program for fixing an election for Tom Feeney)

With all this out there, how can any of us trust these machines when for over 200 years our country used paper ballots and we seemed to do just fine?

One favorite moment of mine is when Bush was interviewed on Meet The Press. Tim Russert asks him if he's prepared to lose. And what does Bush say? What does he muster without a shred of doubt? "Oh I'm not gonna lose." The look on his face... How did he know that John Kerry didn't stand a chance? Could it have been b/c Bush knew he'd win the election the same way he won the last one? See for yourself...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1U-9tO9V4o
(this video has to do more with Bush and Kerry both being in Skull and Bones, the secret society at Yale. just shows how sinister Bush can be, yet out of touch with reality all at the same time.)

We need the system we've always used. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it..." They may seem like a very conservative concept for the likes of this forum, but it's the truth in this case. We can't leave the fate of our country in the hands of technology that could just as easily be used against us...

[freelance]

As much as I LOVE technology, it's being used for all kinds of nefarious purposes.

[Richie]

If this bill makes it through the Senate and onto Bush's desk, do you really think he's going to sign it into law? The man obviously doesn't care what we the people think.

[LibertyEagle]

If this bill makes it through the Senate and onto Bush's desk, do you really think he's going to sign it into law? The man obviously doesn't care what we the people think.

He might, because by 2012 I doubt we'll have a country left if Ron Paul isn't elected.

[Richie]

He might, because by 2012 I doubt we'll have a country left if Ron Paul isn't elected.

That's a good point. He might figure, "Oh what the heck! Last election. Better shut the people up." I'm so glad I wasn't old enough to vote during his two elections, because I would've voted this man into office. I'm so glad I don't have to carry that guilt.

[freelance]

That's a good point. He might figure, "Oh what the heck! Last election. Better shut the people up."

And that's if we even HAVE a 2008 election! I'm not at all convinced we're going to have an election.

[Richie]

And that's if we even HAVE a 2008 election! I'm not at all convinced we're going to have an election.

Especially if Ron Paul keeps gaining supporters.

[Jive Dadson]

I have just started researching this bill, but at first glance it appears to have more holes than a lawyer's face after a Dick Cheney hunting trip. Based on my 22 years working with computer chips and embedded systems, I doubt there is any way to make electronic voting safe. Before implementing such systems, there should an open source review of at least two years. Then we should probably ditch the idea.

What good is having paper receipts if you don't count them? If you count them, what's the point of having an expensive machine to print them?

Paper ballots, hand counted before numerous poll watchers of all political persuasions is the way to go.

Accept no substitute.

[Richie]

I hate to get the constitution involved like Bush and his little marriage amendment, but would it be unconstitutional to pass an amendment banning electronic voting? If we get rid of it now, it will only be temporary unless an extreme measure like this happens.

[freelance]

Especially if Ron Paul keeps gaining supporters.

Richie, I honestly think that is one of the wild cards!


would it be unconstitutional to pass an amendment banning electronic voting?

No, of course it wouldn't be unconstitutional, but that's a whole lot easier said than done!

[Jive Dadson]

I called Ron Paul's congressional office. They are still studying it. The devil, if any, is in the details. And there are a lot of details.

(This is me talking now.) I think it is better than pure electronic voting, but not as good as hand-counted paper ballots. The question is whether or not it is so ineffectual that passage would simply mask the problem.

For what it's worth, the EFF favors the bill. The argument is persuasive. However, nowhere in their argument do they mention the option of going back to hand-counted paper ballots.