Re: Rebuttal to Dill's support for HR811 on oped

From: Nancy Tobi <ntobi_at_democracyfornewhampshire_dot_com>
Date: Sat Apr 28 2007 - 07:12:06 CDT

I am advocating for the honest benchmark for any election reform being
whether or not it supports citizen oversight. However, in the piece I did
state very clearly with a public proclamation that if Holt's bill actually
did what it said it does - mandate paper trails - that I would support it.

There may be some dissonance in my position due to an intentional strategic

Holt's people are marketing their bill as a "paper trail" bill and saying we
NEED this NOW.

I am calling them on their shit.

If that's what we NEED NOW - then offer up a paper trail bill and nothing
else, and I will work to get it passed.

How the paper gets counted is not something I believe needs to be or should
be mandated by the Feds. And whether or not the case can be made for paper
trails meeting my benchmark for citizen oversight is not important to me
either in this specific case because what is important is that the Dems are
bound and determined to pass something this year, and if it is Holt as
written we are in deep doo doo. If if is Holt as marketed we can live with

On 4/28/07, Arthur Keller <> wrote:
> At 1:03 PM -0400 4/27/07, Nancy Tobi wrote:
> Just curious - did you read my piece as a suggestion that the Feds mandate
> hand count systems? Because I did not intend it that way at all. I thought I
> made it clear that if holt had two items: paper ballots and audits, it would
> be fairly universally accepted, but I did not specify those paper ballots
> should be mandated hand counts.
> Pardon my confusion, but how does this square with the following bit of
> hyperbole?
> At 11:37 AM -0400 4/27/07, Nancy Tobi wrote:
> Avery bright voting rights activist in California stated to me the other
> night, "we did away with the literacy test as a right to vote a long time
> ago!"
> <>
> *And we will fight just as hard to do away with the computer literacy test
> embedded in our current technoelection nightmare, embraced and supported by
> HR 811.*
> If you are advocating paper ballots that can be hand-marked or computer
> marked/printed and that are directly counted by humans or computers (with
> hand-count audits afterwards), so am I. I've never liked the audit trail
> under glass idea, but agree it is far better than DRE's without audit trails
> at all.
> Best regards,
> Arthur
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA 94303-4507
> tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424

Nancy Tobi
Co-Founder, Democracy For New Hampshire
Chair, NH Fair Elections Committee
Legislative Coordinator, Election Defense Alliance

OVC-discuss mailing list

= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Mon Apr 30 23:17:16 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Apr 30 2007 - 23:17:17 CDT