Ban Touchscreen Voting - Sign Our Petition
-
Bob FertikWant to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!
Do you remember the Stolen Elections of 2000 (Florida) and 2004 (Ohio)? We will never forget them, because we fought hard after both elections to "count every vote."
And now we can finally do something about it by passing Rep. Rush Holt's "Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act."
Sign our petition to Congress:
http://democrats.com/ban-touchscreen-voting
In 2000, the Republican Supreme Court blocked a manual recount of 175,000 never-counted paper ballots and appointed George Bush as President, with disastrous consequences for our nation and the world. And in 2004, many disputed Ohio votes were cast on touchscreens, so a manual recount was impossible.
After 2004, grassroots activists across the country fought to ban touchscreen voting and to require full manual recounts in close elections. Thanks to activists, the closest race in 2008 - the Minnesota Senate battle between Al Franken and Norm Coleman - used paper ballots which were recounted entirely by hand. This careful and precise manual recount changed the result from a Coleman lead of 477 on Election night to a Franken lead of 312 today.
But a Minnesota-style recount would be impossible in one-third of the U.S. because of paperless touchscreen voting. That's why Congress must pass Rep. Rush Holt's "Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act" to ban touchscreen voting and require manual recounts in close elections.
Sign our petition to Congress:
http://democrats.com/ban-touchscreen-voting
- Bob Fertik's blog
- |
- Login or register to post comments
- |
-
- |
Top Actions
-
23,210 of 30,000
-
42,758 of 60,000
-
94,686 of 100,000
Comments
Holt's bill does NOT "ban touchscreen voting"
Dear Bob, I agree with your goal; but the Holt bill does not really take us there. In your first paragraph, you add the word "unverifiable". That's crucial. Rep. Holt's bill supports what he regards as "verifiable" touchscreens with paper trails. This touchscreen voting equipment frequently breaks down or switches the voter's choice, either by accident or design. But research has shown that most voters do not double-check their vote on the hard-to-see paper trail.
Worse yet, the Holt bill does not even get rid of Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines.
Jurisdictions which had DRE touchscreens with paper trails in 2008 are grandfathered to do their invisible vote counting until 2016.
The Holt 2009 bill also prevents citizen scrutiny of voting machine software. Only "qualified" experts who sign a nondisclosure agreement (NDA) would be allowed to look at the software, and any facts they revealed could put them at risk of criminal penalties. They could also be forced to defend themselves in civil lawsuits brought by voting machine vendors--costly attacks even if the charges were untrue.
Will the Holt bill be amended to correct these defects? Before supporting it, I'd want to know.
The Holt bill bans DRE voting machines
All direct-recording electronic voting machines are gone by 2014, and every vote must be cast on a voter-marked paper ballot.
About software disclosure: if a person gets access to the voting system software under a non-disclosure agreement, the person has broad rights to report on failures, as well as vulnerability to tampering and errors.
Most importantly, the bill allows states to go further and establish full public disclosure requirements. The code must be disclosed to a person who has signed a non-disclosure agreement, OR a person who is allowed access to the code under the laws of the state in question. Don't like the Holt bill's requirements for voting system technology disclosure? Lobby the heck out of your state Legislature to take it a step further.
Holt's Bill Seriously Flawed
It would make only requiring counts in close elections, national law. All the criminals would have to do to steal an election, would be to tamper in a way that exceeded the margin defined in the bill. I can't sign this petition, and I'm disappointed democrats.com is hosting it.
Holt bill: people with disabilities left out again
Three separate national commissions looked at the flawed 2000 Presidential election in Florida. They differed on the impact on voters of color and those with many other characteristics.
All three agreed that people with disabilities were the most disadvantaged and disenfranchised by the Florida flaws. The Help America Vote Act (HAVA)was supposed to rectify that situation. In most states, it hasn't. In most states, people with disabilities were treated as intruders, raising issues others considered distrations, even when they went to the heart of our exclusion as voters.
In New Jersey, I had to appeal to the governor's office to get the attorney general to appoint a person with disabilities to represent our interests on the HAVA Advisory Committee and got stuck with the job for my troubles...and I do mean troubles. Most of the public hearing sites were innaccessible and the advocates I invited had to spend more time outside protesting than inside making constructive contributions.
The first Holt bill did not safeguard our right to vote adequately and the notion of doing away with touch-screen voting would significantly disenfranchise many of us.
As a life-long activist for social justice, I oppose voter fraud as much as anyone. However, any measure that deprives a significant number of us (we are 54 million strong) of the opportunity to vote, distorts election results as significantly as other forms of fraud and must be guarded against as vigilantly.
ClearEye, hand-count audits are exempted ONLY when...
...a candidate receives 80% or more of the preliminary vote tally.
The criminals would have to see to it that their favored candidate received 80% or more of the initial vote tally. Otherwise there will be a hand-counted audit of at least 3% of the precincts in the election.
I'd rather see audits no matter what, but I am not worried about stolen elections with this provision. When has an even remotely competitive federal election shown the winner receiving 80% plus?
And don't forget, states can always do better. This bill establishes a floor, not a ceiling.
why I'm really ticked off about this
I am not an afficianado of this topic but feel now that I got hood-winked into signing--from someone who is REALLY on top of this, to whom I sent the message to sign, these are her comments and she is very experienced here in LA about voting:
(What's more, I searched and searched all over the home page and couldn't find ONE place to send this comment to the general mailbox--I'm pretty disgusted at this point.
from friend:
You are welcome. The bill makes secret vote counting on proprietary
software permanent. It helps counties get scanners and so the vendors get
more money and do not count accurately.
This is a giant shell game.
Hard to be well in this climate. You are right, but I am o.k., just tired.
Judy
On 5/31/09 1:08 AM, "Ruth H. Strauss MD"
wrote:
> THANKS SO MUCH JUDY--I GUESS I DIDN'T READ THE FINE PRINT WELL--I THOUGHT THE
> BILL WAS TO BAN TOUCHSCREENS, SO I THOUGHT THAT WAS A GOOD THING--I WILL NOT
> ONLY PASS ON YOUR INFO TO MY LIST BUT TO DEMOCRATS .COM ALSO--I FEEL TOTALLY
> HOOD-WINKED-- I THOUGHT THAT THIS WAS AGAINST THE VOTING W/ TPUCH SCREENS--AS
> USUAL, YOU ARE A FOUNT OF IMPORTANT INFO AND I WILL DEFINITELY PASS THIS ON
> AND HAVE ANYTHING I SEND OUT ON VOTING EVER, VETTED BY YOU!!!
>
> HOPE ALL IS WELL (ha ha-THAT'S A LAUGH WHEN IT COMES TO OUR STATE OF POLITICS
> AND ELETIONS, HUH?!)
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Judy Alter
>> Sent: May 31, 2009 2:39 AM
>> To: "Ruth H. Strauss MD"
>> Subject: Re: Signed: Ban Touchscreen Voting
>>
>> Hi Ruth,
>> The new version of Rush Holt's bill really does not ban touch-screens, just
>> insists that they have the (bogus) paper trail and offers states money to
>> buy scanners for paper ballots. These scanners use secret software and the
>> new bill gives yet more money to the same vendors who have sold counties the
>> touch-screen machines. So it give more profit to these same companies who
>> have stolen and rigged elections for over 10-12 years. There are other
>> serious flaws with this bill so the folks at Democrats.com have not done
>> their homework. The bill keeps tabulators that secretly add totals from
>> precincts, keeps the EAC, etc. it is not a good bill and perhaps you should
>> not forward this message to your list.
>> Judy
>>
>>
With all respect, Ms. Alter is not correct about banning DREs
All DREs, even those with a paper trail, are gone as of 2014.
Contact Rush Holt's office or, even better, contact Voter Action. If you know anything at all about Voter Action, you know they would NOT support a bill that did not ban DREs.
http://www.voteraction.org/contact
Here's a link to their statement.
http://www.voteraction.org/news-article/2009/voter-action-statement-supp...
May 29, 2009
Voter Action strongly endorses the Holt Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act, soon to be introduced in the United States House of Representatives by Representative Rush Holt (D-NJ). This bill will create a federal mandate for verifiable and accessible voting systems in federal elections with paper ballots marked by voters by hand or through the use of non-tabulating ballot marking devices. It will ensure that voters in every precinct across the United States are guaranteed the right in a federal election to cast their votes using paper ballots. It will require election audits for every federal election where the winning candidate receives less than 80 percent of the vote.
The past several election cycles have demonstrated that electronic voting systems present a serious threat to the integrity of our elections. Direct Recording Electronic voting machines (DREs) have proven to be unreliable and insecure for the counting and recording of votes. Further, DRE systems repeatedly malfunction during elections, causing long lines and disenfranchising thousands of voters. And DRE systems provide no opportunity to conduct a meaningful recount or audit of an election. As a result, voters throughout the country have lost confidence in the accuracy of reported electoral outcomes in jurisdictions using DRE systems.
More than a century ago, the United States Supreme Court stated in the case of Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370 (1886), that the right to vote is “a fundamental political right” which is “preservative of all rights.” The Holt Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act is a critical measure for helping to protect this most basic right. Voter Action applauds Representative Holt for his leadership on this important matter and urges the United States Congress to pass this bill.