Re: Taskforce on Federal Legislation

From: Jerry Lobdill <lobdillj_at_charter_dot_net>
Date: Fri Nov 17 2006 - 14:03:15 CST

I am all for discussion of these issues. How will what we discuss be
used to influence the authors of the bills? The area of audits is one
in which the proposed legislation needs a lot of work. I have been
working extensively in that area since July. Consensus is extremely
difficult to obtain.

Jerry Lobdill

At 12:45 PM 11/17/2006, you wrote:
>From: Ginny Ross <Ginnypdx@comcast.net>
>Precedence: list
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: Open Voting Consortium discussion list <ovc-discuss@listman.sonic.net>
>References:
><20061117165532.23303.qmail@web413.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
><455DED14.6090804@comcast.net>
> <p06240834c183afdc6679@[10.0.0.51]>
>In-Reply-To: <p06240834c183afdc6679@[10.0.0.51]>
>Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 10:45:29 -0800
>Reply-To: Open Voting Consortium discussion list
> <ovc-discuss@listman.sonic.net>
>Message-ID: <455E0349.1040904@comcast.net>
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="------------000000060306040400070701"
>Subject: Re: [OVC-discuss] Taskforce on Federal Legislation
>Message: 3
>
>This sounds terrific! How would it get started? --- is it a program
>like "Mailman" or some sort of forum software? I am trying to be a
>fast learner, but I am a tax-geek turned political activist, so I do
>not have the software accumen of the leaders on this list. I asked
>Bev Harris what "forum" software she is using for BBV. That seems
>like a good one to me. But I also like the simplicity of an email
>list --- I think we may have to go that route for speed's
>sake. Thanks for the help!
>
>Ginny
>
>Arthur Keller wrote:
>>I would be happy to host such a list at Sonic.net, including an
>>automatically generated publicly available archive that can be
>>searched by Google. Ginny can be the person who approves people
>>who request to subscribe, as well as maintains the list. The
>>OVC-discuss list in maintained at Sonic.net that way, although it
>>has an external archive.
>>
>>Plus, there's no advertising! And turnaround is much faster.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Arthur
>>
>>At 9:10 AM -0800 11/17/06, Ginny Ross wrote:
>>>Thank you for this idea, Dick. I agree. Do you have a software
>>>based solution? Can you recommend a forum software
>>>perhaps? Trying to learn all this is, itself, like the proverbial
>>>firehose drink! :-)
>>>
>>>Ginny
>>>
>>>Richard C. Johnson wrote:
>>>>I appreciate Ginny's call for a more central source of
>>>>information for those interested in election issues. I believe
>>>>two steps are needed: (1) a central email discussion list and
>>>>(2) a means of searching/filtering that list. Most personal and
>>>>business email allows search of subject and address if not also
>>>>content. A central list will accumulate a vast amount of
>>>>information and, without search capability and filters, we will
>>>>be trying to drink from the firehose. IMHO.
>>>>
>>>>-- Dick
>>>>
>>>>Ginny Ross <mailto:Ginnypdx@comcast.net><Ginnypdx@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>Dear EI Leaders,
>>>>
>>>>A new and increasingly urgent concern for all of us is federal EI
>>>>legislation and the pros and cons of HR 550 and HB 6200.
>>>>
>>>>I feel caught up in a whirlwind of discussion on legislation in
>>>>the various EI leaders lists I participate in. There are likely
>>>>many others feeling the same.
>>>>
>>>>I believe it is vital for our movement to unify under common
>>>>principles. Our main differences could likely be understood and
>>>>perhaps resolved with concentrated, open, collaborative
>>>>efforts. Then we could push together, as a movement, for passage
>>>>of urgently needed paper ballot legislation that will not be
>>>>burdened with a battle royale or intra-movement conflict over the
>>>>other features of HR 550.
>>>>
>>>>I do not know the answers, but I know that we are racing the
>>>>clock in an all out sprint to save democracy from these DRE's before '08.
>>>>
>>>>Therefore, I would like to propose a unified discussion/action
>>>>list that will allow all voices to be heard in a fair and open
>>>>forum. As a simple starting point, I feel the main discussions
>>>>fall into 4 general areas:
>>>>
>>>>1) Paper Ballot / Record requirements
>>>>2) Audit/Verification of machine votes and counts
>>>>3) Oversight & Transparency issues / Vendor Involvement in Certification
>>>>4) Strategy as to how to approach the new Congress (Amend HR 550
>>>>/ HB 6200, other approaches)
>>>>
>>>>Maybe there is another way to outline the tasks, or I have
>>>>omitted something important. My goal is to stay very simple.
>>>>
>>>>I propose the formation of a single Yahoo group on this vital
>>>>topic, inviting all serious activists concerned with federal EI
>>>>legislative issues and all who wish to listen. I volunteer to
>>>>create the list and help moderate to prevent any disruption in
>>>>this vital work. The information discussed could be freely
>>>>shared, and therefore allow participants to use the information
>>>>to inform their own legislators. I believe in free, viral
>>>>transmission of information in the situation (such as now) when
>>>>we are in a very dangerous, high speed, fast track approach to HR
>>>>550. I do not feel alone in expressing near panic that the bill
>>>>might be passed without the major (not too time consuming) overhaul it needs.
>>>>
>>>>The core lists I would build the
>>>><mailto:EILeg@yahoogroups.com>"EILeg@yahoogroups.com" list would
>>>>draw from VTUSA, ElectionIntegrity, BBV, CEPN, EDA, USVotecounts,
>>>>OregonVRC, CASE_OH, PDA and OVC. I may be missing something
>>>>important, I don't know. This is not an exclusive list, just a
>>>>practical starting point. I feel that on all these lists, there
>>>>is a GOLDMINE of legislative discussion and strategy. I believe
>>>>in consolidating, collaborating, and treating this goldmine as
>>>>our treasury of future power. We need to capture and use this
>>>>power effectively if we, as a movement, hope to have a
>>>>compelling, rapid and undeniable influence upon the federal
>>>>legislative efforts that are now on the immediate horizon.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Your comments and ideas on this topic, or offers to assist or to
>>>>manage the project, are welcome.
>>>>
>>>>Sincerely,
>>>>Ginny Ross
>>>>Portland, OR
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>OVC-discuss mailing list
>>>><mailto:OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net>OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
>>>>http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
>>>
>>>(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
>>>distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
>>>interest in receiving the included information for research and
>>>educational purposes. ProgressiveNews2Use has no affiliation
>>>whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is
>>>ProgressiveNews2Use endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
>>>
>>>"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our
>>>readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as
>>>originating pages are often updated by their originating host
>>>sites, the versions posted on ProgressiveNews2Use may not match
>>>the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.

_______________________________________________
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 Thu Nov 30 23:17:08 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Nov 30 2006 - 23:17:19 CST