The “audit trail” bills are intended
to deceive voters into believing that they are verifying the votes that will
decide an election. This is not what these bills do.
Instead, voters would be verifying a secondary
document that: (1) does not necessarily reflect the voter’s choices, (2)
is printed in a form that is excessively difficult for voters to verify and costly
for officials to use for independent counting and (3) is not the official
ballot and will rarely be counted.
The fundamental requirement is this: each
voter must be able to verify that their real votes that will be used to
determine the election outcome are recorded as the voter intends and must be
able to obtain a replacement ballot if they are not. (There are
additional requirements such as: recorded votes must be permanent, every ballot
must be secure and accounted for, and the interpretation of votes must be
unambiguous, but these requirements are not documented here.)
We continue to ask for the following:
Trustworthy Elections Resolution
WHEREAS trustworthy elections are basic to democracy,
WHEREAS trustworthy elections require that each vote is
anonymous, secure, verified by the voter and counted as intended by the voter,
WHEREAS paperless voting machines make it impossible for
us to verify that our votes are correctly recorded,
WHEREAS paperless voting machines make it impossible to
prove that each vote is correctly counted,
WHEREAS a receipt printer on a paperless voting machine
would not solve these problems because the votes printed on the receipt can be
different from the votes stored in the machine, and because votes on the
receipts would rarely be counted,
WHEREAS accurate re-counting requires that the votes on
the original paper ballots be examined and counted, and that the results from a
previous count are not known to the people doing the re-counting,
WHEREAS failure to conduct trustworthy elections opens the
door to undetectable errors and fraud and destroys voter confidence,
THEREFORE, we voters want to hand mark or machine mark our
votes onto full-ballot-text paper ballots, to check our votes before we cast
them, to know that the votes on our paper ballot are what get counted, and to
have access to proof that every ballot is accounted for and that every vote is
correctly understood and counted.
CAMBER
Citizens for Accurate Mail Ballot Election Results
303-494-1540
www.users.qwest.net/~alkolwicz
http://coloradovoter.blogspot.com
From: Andrew G.
Silver [mailto:andrewgsilver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 8:55
AM
To: Pamela Smith
Cc:
lobbyists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
Subject: [stopvotefraud] Re:
[VerifiedVoting.org lobbyists] Ensign Bill S2437
Pamela,
This is terrific
news. Based on 5 minutes' study, I find nothing
wrong with the bill,
except that it does not include provisions of HR
2239 relating to open
source code and mandatory recounts. I think,
and hope, at first
glance, that you are mistaken about the effective
date. the
language appears to be equivalent to that of HR 2239
section 8, on
effective date. I could be mistaken on any point, and
I hope people will
soon have reports on the bill based on a closer
reading.
Senator Ensign is a
Republican. His one co-sponsor so far is Harry
Reid, Democrat, from
the same state,
different spirit of
bipartisanship, even partnership.
Furthermore, one can
hardly doubt Senator Ensign's sincerity. From
his website:
>Ensign cited the
2000 Presidential campaign and the controversy in
>
>for a U.S. Senate
seat was not decided until after a recount in
>
>Verification
Act.
After the fiasco of
the new bill offered by Graham, Boxer, and
Clinton, I hope this
bill provides an opportunity for new direction
and momentum in the
Senate - which then could light a fire under
Ney's committee for HR
2239. I would like to see what other people
think and whether we
should make a major effort to get other Senators
to sign on to this
bill - and, if so, what happens with S 1980?
Therefore I copy to
the stopvotefraud and ncverifiablevoting lists.
>Hello everyone -
>I'm wondering if
you have had a chance to review the newest bill in the
>voter-verified
paper ballot race...
>Introduced by John
Ensign on May 18, S2437 is called the Voting Integrity and
>Verification Act
of 2004.
>
>Other than the
obvious (no 2004 deadline), I wonder what your
>thoughts are upon
>reading the
language (I cut and pasted it below in case you hadn't seen it).
>
>Best,
>Pamela Smith
>Nationwide
Coordinator
>VerifiedVoting.org
and Verified Voting Foundation
>pam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>------------------------------
>
>Voting Integrity
and Verification Act of 2004 (Introduced in Senate)
>
>S 2437 IS
>
>
>108th CONGRESS
>
>2d Session
>
>S. 2437
>To amend the Help
America Vote Act of 2002 to require a
>voter-verified
permanent
>record or hardcopy
under title III of such Act, and for other purposes.
>
>
>IN THE SENATE OF
THE UNITED STATES
>
>May 18, 2004
>Mr. ENSIGN
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to
>the Committee on
Rules and Administration
>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>A BILL
>To amend the Help
America Vote Act of 2002 to require a
>voter-verified
permanent
>record or hardcopy
under title III of such Act, and for other purposes.
>
>
>Be it enacted by
the Senate and House of Representatives of the
>
>
>
>SECTION 1. SHORT
TITLE.
>
>This Act may be
cited as the `Voting Integrity and Verification Act of 2004'.
>
>SEC. 2. PROMOTING
ACCURACY, INTEGRITY, AND SECURITY THROUGH PRESERVATION OF A
>VOTER-VERIFIED
PERMANENT PAPER RECORD.
>
>(a) IN GENERAL-
Section 301(a) of the Help
>15481(a)) is
amended--
>
>(1) in paragraph
(1)(A)--
>
>(A) by striking
clause (i) and inserting the following new clause:
>
>`(i) permit the
voter to verify the accuracy of their ballot (in a private and
>independent
manner), by allowing the voter to review an individual paper
>version of the
voter's ballot before the voter's ballot is cast and counted;';
>
>(B) in clause
(ii)--
>
>(i) by inserting
`discovered on the individual paper version of the voter's
>ballot' after `to
change the ballot or correct any error'; and
>
>(ii) by striking
`and' after the semicolon at the end;
>
>(C) by
redesignating clause (iii) as clause (iv); and
>
>(D) by inserting
after clause (ii) the following new clause:
>
>`(iii)(I) preserve
the individual paper version of the voter's
>ballot, after the
>voter has
certified that the same accurately reflects the voter's intent, as
>the individual
permanent paper record, and
>
>`(II) preserve
such individual permanent paper record at the polling place in
>accordance with
the provisions of paragraph (2)(B)(i); and';
>
>(2) in paragraph
(1)(B), by striking `subparagraph (A)(iii)' and inserting
>`subparagraph
(A)(iv)'; and
>
>(3) by striking
paragraph (2) and inserting the following new paragraph:
>
>`(2) MANUAL AUDIT
CAPACITY-
>
>`(A) IN GENERAL-
The voting system shall produce an individual permanent paper
>record for each
ballot that is cast which provides for voter verification of
>such record in
accordance with paragraph (1)(A) and which meets the
>requirements of
subparagraph (B).
>
>`(B) MANUAL AUDIT
CAPACITY-
>
>`(i) The voting
system shall produce an individual permanent paper record for
>each ballot cast
that is either--
>
>`(I) preserved
within the polling place in the manner in which all other paper
>ballots are
preserved within such polling place; or
>
>`(II) in the
absence of such manner or method, which is consistent with the
>manner employed by
the jurisdiction for preserving paper ballots in general.
>
>`(ii) Each paper
record produced under clause (i) shall be suitable
>for a manual
>audit equivalent
or superior to that of a paper ballot voting system.
>
>`(iii) All
electronic records produced by any voting system shall be
>consistent
>with the
individual permanent paper records produced by such voting system. In
>the event of any
inconsistencies or irregularities between any electronic
>records and the
individual permanent paper records, the individual permanent
>paper records
shall be the true and correct record of the votes cast.
>
>`(iv) The
individual permanent paper records produced under clause
>(i) shall be
>used as the
official records for purposes of any recount or audit conducted
>with respect to
any election for Federal office in which the voting system is
>used.'.
>
>(b) EFFECTIVE
DATE- The amendments made by this section shall take
>effect as if
>included in the
enactment of the Help America Vote Act of 2002.
>
>
>
>--
>This is message
#2.
>**********
>
>To unsubscribe,
send mail to <lobbyists-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>.
>(This may fail if
your address has changed since you signed
>up; if so, or for
other assistance, contact
><lobbyists-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>.)
>
>This list is
hosted by VerifiedVoting.org, Inc.
>For more
information about our work championing reliable and
>publicly verifiable
elections, see <http://www.verifiedvoting.org>
>Donations accepted
at <http://www.verifiedvoting.org/Donate/>
--
Defending Freedom and
Democracy,
Andy Silver
phone/fax: (919)
245-0277 (h)
(919) 380-9860, x2405
(o, 9:30 AM - 6:30 PM)
[Non-text portions of
this message have been removed]
|
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor |
|
|
|
|
|
Yahoo! Groups Links
- To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopvotefraud/
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:
stopvotefraud-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.