Re: [OVC-discuss] I need your help today -- oppose Holt bill asintroduced

From: Nancy Tobi <nancy_dot_tobi_at_gmail_dot_com>
Date: Wed Jun 24 2009 - 12:03:51 CDT

File a public records request with the NH Secretary of State Barbara. Ask
for communications between their staff and Holt's counsel Michelle Mulder.
You'll find it right there. She cites the V V SG as her source for drafting
her legislation. If you don't want to do this, then just look at the
language between the two documents. I have already done all the documenting
I am going to do on this crap Barbara. I understand that you are on the EAC
Board of Advisors so I expect you can track this stuff down pretty handily.

Best,

Nancy

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Barbara Simons <simons@acm.org> wrote:

> Dear Nancy,
> Could you please document how Holt's office is a conduit for the EAC?
> Regards,
> Barbara
>
> Nancy Tobi wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> Just like the ballot readback feature in Holt's former version of the bill,
> this feature was brainstormed and documented by our genius friends on the
> EAC's TGDC. It is in the last version of the V V SG (whatever they are
> calling it now).
>
> Holt's office is a conduit for the EAC. They come up with the plans, and
> Holt tries to get it federalized into the law of the land.
>
> Nancy
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Jim Tobias <tobias@inclusive.com> wrote:
>
>> Alan, can you provide any background on this specific "no-touch"
>> feature? Was it requested by dexterity-disabled advocates?
>>
>> There are certainly several ways to address this issue *outside* of the
>> technical design, with assistance from a poll worker. As long as the design
>> does not prevent those solutions, it would be compliant with the language
>> below, as I read it.
>>
>> Are there other objectionable provisions that you have not mentioned?
>>
>>
>> ***
>> Jim Tobias
>> Inclusive Technologies
>> +1.908.907.2387 v/sms
>> skype jimtobias
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Nancy Tobi [mailto:nancy.tobi@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 24, 2009 7:51 AM
>> *To:* Open Voting Consortium discussion list
>> *Subject:* Re: [OVC-discuss] I need your help today -- oppose Holt bill
>> asintroduced
>>
>> Nice Alan. I can't believe this crap keeps on coming. And Holt thinks we
>> are so stupid that we miss his multi-billion dollar toss to the unscrupulous
>> e-voting industry with his never ending demands for more complexity, more
>> opacity, more technocrap????
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 3:10 AM, Alan Dechert <dechert@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Below is a copy of what I sent to our announcements list
>>>
>>> ********
>>> Dear Friends of Open Voting:
>>>
>>> I need your help today. As you may recall, US Representative Rush Holt
>>> has introduced several badly flawed voting reform bills in the past few
>>> years. We have opposed them for a variety of reasons.
>>>
>>> Last week, Holt introduced his new one: The Voter Confidence and
>>> Increased Accessibility Act of 2009 (HR 2894)
>>> http://holt.house.gov/voting.shtml
>>>
>>> In general, the bill is not as bad as the previous. Some provisions are
>>> good. Ban DREs, ban wireless, provide some funding for voting software that
>>> would be publicly available. However, overall, the bill is still bad. The
>>> deep flaw with this bill, generally speaking, remains the same: it would put
>>> the federal goverment too much into running the voting system. Holt is
>>> trying to do too much and making a mess of it.
>>>
>>> Parts of it are outrageously bad. The main offending part for me is
>>> where they say the machine for individuals with disabilities must allow the
>>> voter to "independently verify and cast the permanent paper ballot without
>>> requiring the voter to manually handle the paper ballot;" This is
>>> ridiculous. This the proverbial $900 hammer approach. No machine has this
>>> capability currently, and such a machine would be many times more expensive
>>> than necessary. Potential solutions would solve one almost non-existent
>>> problem and create several others -- besides the expense.
>>>
>>> It's the same mentality that led to adding the expensive printing
>>> mechanism to the DRE voting machines. Vendors didn't mind doing it as long
>>> as the government was paying for it. Guess what? Government paid for it.
>>> No wait, YOU paid for it. Now those machines are getting junked. So,
>>> tax-payers underwrote stupid voting architecture. Diebold et al got paid to
>>> develop it and sell it. Now the stupid machines go in the trash and Diebold
>>> keeps the money. It's another example of a very few outspoken "disabled
>>> rights activists" -- people in bed with industry -- creating a very
>>> expensive mandate.
>>>
>>> If we can't get this changed, the bill must be killed. Other parts of
>>> the bill should just be removed rather than fixed. We might support it if
>>> chunks of it were simply removed.
>>>
>>> A here is a link directly to the bill language.
>>>
>>> http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:1:./temp/~c111Uxz8FM:e0<http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:1:./temp/%7Ec111Uxz8FM:e0>
>>> :
>>>
>>> SEC. 102. ACCESSIBILITY AND BALLOT VERIFICATION FOR
>>> INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES.
>>> ...
>>>
>>> (II) allows the voter to privately and
>>> independently verify and cast the permanent
>>> paper ballot without requiring the
>>> voter to manually handle the paper ballot;
>>>
>>> I need your help contacting Congress in opposition to this bill.
>>>
>>> I also need your financial support so OVC can continue to develop and
>>> demonstrate sensible open source voting technology, and defeat crappy
>>> legislation like this.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OVC-discuss mailing list
>>> OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
>>> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
>>> By sending email to the OVC-discuss list, you thereby agree to release
>>> the content of your posts to the Public Domain--with the exception of
>>> copyrighted material quoted according to fair use, including publicly
>>> archiving at http://gnosis.python-hosting.com/voting-project/
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OVC-discuss mailing list
>> OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
>> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
>> By sending email to the OVC-discuss list, you thereby agree to release
>> the content of your posts to the Public Domain--with the exception of
>> copyrighted material quoted according to fair use, including publicly
>> archiving at http://gnosis.python-hosting.com/voting-project/
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> OVC-discuss mailing listOVC-discuss@listman.sonic.nethttp://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
> By sending email to the OVC-discuss list, you thereby agree to release the content of your posts to the Public Domain--with the exception of copyrighted material quoted according to fair use, including publicly archiving at http://gnosis.python-hosting.com/voting-project/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OVC-discuss mailing list
> OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
> By sending email to the OVC-discuss list, you thereby agree to release the
> content of your posts to the Public Domain--with the exception of
> copyrighted material quoted according to fair use, including publicly
> archiving at http://gnosis.python-hosting.com/voting-project/
>

_______________________________________________
OVC-discuss mailing list
OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
By sending email to the OVC-discuss list, you thereby agree to release the content of your posts to the Public Domain--with the exception of copyrighted material quoted according to fair use, including publicly archiving at http://gnosis.python-hosting.com/voting-project/
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Tue Jun 30 23:17:11 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jun 30 2009 - 23:17:20 CDT