Re: The Bill -- version A

From: Alan Dechert <dechert_at_gmail_dot_com>
Date: Wed Jan 25 2006 - 18:22:31 CST

Sorry if I appear delinquent (or am, in fact, delinquent). I didn't know that Goldberg's staff would immediately send it on to legislative counsel (I expected them to work on it for a day or two before doing that). I don't think it's that critical. We have opportunities to improve the bill. I think it would be good to continuing working on it until we have it back from legislative counsel. Then compare what we have with what they give us back -- merge the versions, get approval from all involved and get it introduced.

It will get further work in committees. The most important thing we need to do is work with legislators (and staff) that will be involved. I mean, we could provide perfect language but without the necessary lobbying work, it's just not going to count for anything. Were you around when some ridiculous language was getting thrown into SB1438? We got involved in that especially with EFF and VerifiedVoting to get the language changed (thanks Joe Hall).

We have some problems with the Assembly Elections committee. The committee chair, Umberg, is running for State Senate and may not give us his full attention. We will need to work with Larry Sokol -- his staff guy that will look at this. Also Ethan Jones is the committee consultant. I've met with him but will need to spend significant time with him on this issue. We'll also need support from other organizations. Ultimately, Bowen may wind up as the Secretary of State that has to make this all work. So, we need to work with her and staff -- they're going to have a lot to say about it. Even if we think it's Bowen, we can't ignore the current SoS and staff.

This will also be a campaign issue for the SoS candidates. With luck, it will get mentioned by gubernatorial candidates. "PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY -- that's why I'm supporting Goldberg's bill."

Like messes? That's what we're in.

Alan D.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Ron Crane
  To: Open Voting Consortium discussion list
  Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 3:47 PM
  Subject: Re: [OVC-discuss] The Bill -- version A

  Alan Dechert wrote:

  It still represents progress over what we've got -- as long
as legislators don't get the idea that it "fixes" all the extant
problems with e-voting systems. You should make it clear
that this bill is the first step toward improving e-voting security,
not the last one.

    Absolutely. That's exactly what it is designed to be: an incremental step.
I don't think we can get everything we want all at once. It's a bill that
should pass. As with SB 1438 and SB370, it has limited scope but would be
an important step....

We do have opportunities for improving the language so I encourage people to
provide suggestions. The "bill" has already been sent to legislative
counsel (couple hours ago). It is important to be clearer with the list about deadlines. Your message of 7:39am did not indicate that we had less than 6 hours to produce our own revisions of the proposed bill, and I apparently missed the deadline by 2 hours. Since no one else posted revisions to the list, it would appear that everyone else missed the deadline, too. I don't suppose some people who couldn't work on this until this evening will be all that pleased.

It will look different when it comes back from
there in about a week. Then, we can make changes before it's introduced.
  Good. It's a start, but it needs significant revision to fulfill even its limited mission.

...If someone wants a completely different bill, that's possible too. I think
this language fits pretty well with what Assemblywoman Goldberg wants to do.
I have discussed some things about possible bills with Senator Bowen but
nothing has been decided on that yet. I need specific language more than
general ideas about what we need.
  That's why I attached a .doc containing my revisions. Please comment on them.



  OVC-discuss mailing list

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 Jan 8 20:24:34 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jan 08 2007 - 20:24:39 CST