Re: Paperless voting Re: OVC-discuss Digest, Vol 28, Issue 25

From: Dylan Hirsch-Shell <dylanhs_at_gmail_dot_com>
Date: Wed Feb 14 2007 - 17:05:41 CST

After doing a Google search of noah@moveon.org, I'm pretty sure that this is
Noah Winer's email address. I'm going to send a quick response to that
address urging MoveOn to change their position on this and to contact the
OVC or BBV to find out why Holt's bill adds to the problem rather than
fixing things. Perhaps it's just a waste of time, but it's worth a shot....

On 2/14/07, Nancy Tobi <ntobi@democracyfornewhampshire.com> wrote:
>
> MoveOn - like Common Cause and True Majority (sic) have been contacted
> on this issue for over a year now. They have ignored those of us who
> have been opposing this legislation. Maybe now with some fractures in
> VoteTrustUSA and with John Gideon's VotersUnite withdrwaing support
> they might budge. But my guess is they are in tight with the Dems who
> are promoting this awful piece of micromanaging, antidemocracy
> legislation, and will not budge.
>
> They, like Holt, are like GW Bush: marching forward to their goal with
> blinders on to any realities or citizen outcry along the way.
>
> On 2/14/07, Edmund R. Kennedy <ekennedyx@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello:
> >
> > If there is general agreement about the problems with Holt's bill,
> then
> > someone needs to contact Move-On directly. I've tried to reply to a
> > mistaken receipt from them to ask them to contact OVC and gotten a
> polite,
> > "We'll get back to you." message. I've got a lot of other stuff on my
> plate
> > so I need to hand this off.
> >
> > Thanks, Ed Kennedy
> > --
> > 10777 Bendigo Cove
> > San Diego, CA 92126-2510
> >
> > 858-578-8842
> >
> > Work for the common good.
> > My profile: <http://geocities.com/ekennedyx/>
> > I blog now and then at: <http://ekennedyx.blogspot.com/>
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Richard C. Johnson <dick@iwwco.com>
> > To: Open Voting Consortium discussion list <
> ovc-discuss@listman.sonic.net>
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 2:13:58 PM
> > Subject: Re: [OVC-discuss] Paperless voting Re: OVC-discuss Digest, Vol
> 28,
> > Issue 25
> >
> > VVPB is simply a paper ballot, the official ballot in an election. At a
> > minimum, there will be handicapped voters using touch screens to
> generate
> > ballots, which will then be fed through precinct scanners. Precinct
> > scanners are by far the most popular means of voting in the US and,
> except
> > for handicapped voters, all ballots will be marked by the voter's own
> hand.
> > Using ballot markers for non-handicapped voters is expensive, redundant,
> and
> > rare. I agree with Phil that in almost all instances the ballot should
> be
> > marked directly by the voter.
> >
> > Proprietary software used in precinct scanners, however, is now used to
> > count the paper ballots. So...paper ballots are just the first
> step. The
> > second critical step is to use Open Source software in the scanners and
> > computers. The third step, still some ways off, is to have standard,
> Open
> > Design hardware (computers and scanners) used. Otherwise, in step two,
> the
> > use of COTS hardware helps to insure quality and voting-neutral
> manufacture
> > until step three is feasible.
> >
> > -- Dick
> >
> > Phil Fry <phil@ctcn.net> wrote:
> > I don't know the definition of a VVPB, other than a Voter-Verified
> Paper
> > Ballot. Given the context of the email below, it seems like it is
> something
> > that could be produced starting with a DRE. But there is no way I know
> of to
> > be sure the ballot is verified unless the voter fills it out by hand.
> >
> > The OVC approach produces a ballot that can be hand counted or scanned.
> > But it doesn't force verification. A voter could take the printed ballot
> and
> > put it in the stack/box for scanning, or even scan it him/her self
> without
> > ever verifying the ballot. And in the case where a VVPB is read by an OS
> > device, the voter is not normally (I don't know the OVC plan in detail)
> > given feedback on how the ballot was read by the device. So a second
> > verification step is really called for.
> >
> > Phil
> >
> > Richard C. Johnson wrote:
> > So called "paper trails" have a record of having failed in actual use,
> being
> > defective by design and not liable to fixing. They are flimsy and
> totally
> > inappropriate for any archival record. It is a grave error to see them
> > enshrined in the Holt Bill as a sop to those manufacturers who wish to
> use
> > them to diffuse legitimate criticism. VVPAT is not enough; VVPB is what
> > must be required.
> >
> > -- Dick
> >
> > John Burik <John@caseohio.org> wrote:
> > While Holt II permits voting with paper ballots counted either via
> optical
> > scan or by hand, its minimum standards permits DREs with verifiable
> paper
> > trails of which at best only 10% will be counted in an audit. Its Sec.
> 327
> > permits reliance on machine counts in the presence of clear and
> convincing
> > evidence the paper records have been compromised.
> >
> > I do not support AS WRITTEN.
> >
> > John, CASE
> >
> >
> > On 2/14/07 3:00 PM,
> > "ovc-discuss-request@listman.sonic.net"
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Today's Topics:
> > >
> > > 1. Fw: Ban paperless voting (Edmund R. Kennedy)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Message: 1
> > > Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:44:30 -0800 (PST)
> > > From: "Edmund R. Kennedy"
> > > Subject: [OVC-discuss] Fw: Ban paperless voting
> > > To: Open Voting Consortium discussion list
> > >
> > > Message-ID:
> > <955326.77361.qm@web81911.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> > >
> > > FYI
> > >Dear MoveOn member,
> > > Too many voters are still stuck with paperless electronic voting
> > > machines?machines
> > > that are vulnerable to tampering and malfunction.
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > --
> > John Burik MEd, PCC
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OVC-discuss mailing list
> > OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
> > http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
> >
> > ________________________________
> > _______________________________________________
> > OVC-discuss mailing list OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
> > http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
> > _______________________________________________
> > OVC-discuss mailing list
> > OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
> > http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OVC-discuss mailing list
> > OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
> > http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OVC-discuss mailing list
> > OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
> > http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
>
> Nancy Tobi, Chair
> Democracy for New Hampshire
> DFNH Fair Elections Committee
> PO Box 717 | Concord, NH 03301
> www.DemocracyForNewHampshire.com
> _______________________________________________
> OVC-discuss mailing list
> OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
>

_______________________________________________
OVC-discuss mailing list
OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss

==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Wed Feb 28 23:17:17 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Feb 28 2007 - 23:17:27 CST