Showing posts with label HR 811. Show all posts
Showing posts with label HR 811. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Rep. Rush Holt HR 811 Avante International Questions

coming across more food for thought with Avante's response to criticisms and Mercuri's piece.

Are we still unsure whether Kevin Chung met Rush Holt at any time prior to creating the Avante Auto-trakker voting method? Well of course we are...

The following postings were taken from Holt Paper-Trail Election Bill Dead? -- UPDATE: Not Dead Yet By Kim Zetter July 18, 2007 | 11:01:02 PM

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/07/holt-paper-trai.html

visit that site for how the conversation online unfolds. Revisit Rebecca Mercuri's piece as well.

See specifically, Avante's response which contains a link to

http://www.avantetech.com/uploads/pdf/Clarification%20of%20AVANTE%20voting%20system%20position-FINAL.pdf

Read that in its entirety.

There is no doubt the former Holt Bill HR 811 continued to permit the use of DREs and with the voter verified paper audit trail would have been acceptable to use in an election.

Black Box Voting discussed the issue at quite some length.

As for Pennsylvania and Marybeth Kuznik's reply in the Wired posting, while it provides a good argument about PA laws requiring a secret ballot which the paper trails wouldn't have met, it's likely to qualify for the monies from HR 811, the state would have rushed to adopt some form of paper trails for the DREs.

See our previous posts in the sidebar, or conduct a search from the top left of the page.

It's important to put things in perspective. When election integrity people speak, we have to wonder, who are they? Why do some want paper ballots only counted by hand, when others find it acceptable to provide for the voter verified paper audit trail?

We're just following along, sharing our findings here in the interest of truth.

Note: Paul Lehto mentioned:

BLOGGED BY John Gideon ON 7/12/2006 12:54PM
BREAKING: Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia Sued By Competitor for Patent Infringment!
Avante International Technology Corporation Files Suit Against Use of Paper Trail Printer, Op Scan Technology by Voting Machine Giants...

Inventor of Electronic Voting Verification System Takes Industry Giants to Court for Patent Infringement Wednesday July 12, 11:19 am ET

SimmonsCooper Files Lawsuit on Behalf of AVANTE International Technology Corporation

"AVANTE isn't the only victim here," said Paul Lesko, the SimmonsCooper lawyer representing AVANTE. "Local governments, acting in good faith in determining which electronic voting system would serve the needs of their districts, also have every reason to be upset at these companies.

"We believe the evidence will show that these companies sold infringing equipment to public officials, and that they did so consciously, with knowledge of AVANTE's intellectual property," added Mr. Lesko.

SimmonsCooper is seeking damages and an injunction on behalf of AVANTE.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3061


See our past posts.


The following contains posts excerpted from:

Holt Paper-Trail Election Bill Dead? -- UPDATE: Not Dead Yet
By Kim Zetter July 18, 2007 | 11:01:02 PM

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/07/holt-paper-trai.html


Rep. Holt is not being an honest broker in this debate. He has ties to (and an office next to) Avante International which will reap millions in profits if the Holt Bill passes.

http://markcrispinmiller.blogspot.com/2007/07/rush-holt-hr-811-and-avante.html

Paper trails don't fix the problem, and none of the DRE companies are going to turn over their source code. You can’t have honest elections with proprietary, for-profit DRE companies running the show.

This bill is a band aid that won't make the elections more honest.

Posted by: Dr. John R. Moffett | Jul 19, 2007 11:48:04 AM


The bill, if passed, would give PA paper trails instead of paperless DREs and it would be easy as pie to steal 3 to 5% or more of the vote and it would pass all the Holt audits or any other audit or recount, because paper will be equal to electronic. Only with Holt passed, even many activists would be fooled.

Some know of what I speak, some don't. Those who know of the studies that suggest or show that this can be done and support HR 811 or any other "audit" proposal ought to be deathy curious to fund studies to disprove somehow the existing studies that the paper trails don't work to properly capture voter INTENT. Moving forward to pass the bill in the face of about 3 uncontradicted studies is reckless like racing down a mountain road after seeing a sign that says "road damage ahead; caution."

Any hacker or rigger would have to be a COMPLETE IDIOT to do anything other than make paper MATCH electronic, especially when they know there will be audits. So auditing to see if paper matches electronic is like nailing down one corner of the picnic tablecloth on a very windy day.

Posted by: Paul Lehto | Jul 19, 2007 2:23:03 PM

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/07/holt-paper-trai.html


Paul Lehto said, "The bill, if passed, would give PA paper trails..."

WRONG, Paul. If HR 811 as it came out of Committee passed today the bill would give PA 100% Optical Scan, because there is NOTHING ELSE currently available that will both comply with the bill AND comply with our PA State Constitution.

Paper trails as they currently exist are ILLEGAL in Pennsylvania.

Posted by: Marybeth Kuznik, VotePA.us | Jul 19, 2007 5:00:09 PM

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/07/holt-paper-trai.html


For those care for the truth and facts, please read our reply to these unfounded smearing between Holt and AVANTE.

http://www.avantetech.com/uploads/pdf/Clarification%20of%20AVANTE%20voting%20system%20position-FINAL.pdf

For those that are too busy to read, here is the summary:
AVANTE’s positions and actions:
1. AVANTE has deep respect for the tireless efforts by the election integrity activists, academics and technology experts. Their efforts have contributed to the many and continuous improvements of the voting systems and processes.

2. AVANTE respects the desire to have open sources in election system or having the voting system as transparent as possible. Our company software is always available for scrutiny. We differ in the feasibility of having ALL of the source codes made available for at least in the near term of five to 10 years without dramatic lowering in the voting system accessibility requirements in HAVA.

3. AVANTE believes that the current problems in electronic voting systems are related to the design and engineering rather than the solution and concept. AVANTE have proven that all of the specific problems known and caused tremendous constellation have a solution.

4. AVANTE affirmed that it is suing all of the largest competitors for patent infringements. However, we also continue to offer licensing whenever they are ready.

5. AVANTE is located in Mercer County NJ. The company has never donated to any national parties or political leaders. All of the company’s founders and stockholders have not donated to any national elected officials with more than $100.

6. AVANTE does not belong to any trade lobbying organizations and has not joined the Election Technology Council or its predecessor ITAA. AVANTE continues to maintain its independence and voice of supports to the those promoting election integrity.

7. AVANTE believes that current optical scan voting systems and processes are much less than equal to the integrity required by the current EAC 2005 voting system standards dictating the DRE with VVPR. They lack the ability to prevent tampering once the ballots have been submitted.

8. AVANTE continues its commitment and efforts in selling its paging and full-face DRE with properly engineered and designed VVPR.

9. AVANTE continues its commitment and efforts in selling its ballot marking device as well as precinct-based optical scan system that captures the digital image of each ballot and show the voters as exactly how the system is registering their ballots not just having over-voted or under-voted contests.

Posted by: Kevin Chung, CEO, AVANTE | Jul 21, 2007 6:28:33 PM


Avante quoted me -- a little out of context. Here's what I wrote in response:

http://gnosis.python-hosting.com/voting-project/July.2007/0027.html

Posted by: Alan Dechert | Jul 25, 2007 7:31:11 AM

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/07/holt-paper-trai.html


More and related

DRE systems offered by AVANTE feature redundant ballot result storage devices whose data can be verified against voting machine printed "cut-and-drop" paper records previously verified by the voter. The records are then dropped into and secured inside a uniquely designed voter verified paper audit trail (VVPAT) printer ballot box

http://www.avantetech.com/products/elections/dre/


Clarification of AVANTE’s position on Election and Voting System Integrity
(Rev. A June 18, 2007)
AVANTE International Technology, Inc., Princeton Junction, New Jersey 08550
www.vote-trakker.com
In recent weeks, AVANTE found itself being cited as an unwilling participant of a national debate on voting system

http://www.wheresthepaper.org/AVANTEclarifiesPosition070618.pdf


On the issue of AVANTE being located in Mercer County, New Jersey, the home State of Congressman Holt
AVANTE, as a company has not contributed any money to any politician including Congressman Holt. None of the owners have donated more than $100 to any national figure or party.
The fact that the company and Congressman Holt happen to reside in Mercer County NJ is coincidental. The coincidence also applies to Mercer County based Princeton University and many of their professors involved in election integrity. For the record, the company and its founders have been residing in Mercer County for at least 27 years and more than 37 years in the State of New Jersey.
As a company, we have not received any favorable treatment from our home State of NJ or from any national elected officials. This fact is self-evident.
For the record, AVANTE intentionally keeps an arm-length relationship with those involved in election integrity as to avoid potential allegations such as those we are seeing today. We will continue to provide help to those that make requests. That includes things like loaning a DRE with VVPR and facilities free-of-charge for a Newsweek article on Ms Rebecca Mercuri when she was a pro DRE with VVPR expert few years ago...

http://www.avantetech.com/uploads/pdf/Clarification%20of%20AVANTE%20voting%20system%20position-FINAL.pdf

Thursday, April 05, 2007

Rush Holt Bill Due to come up for vote sometime soon as early as April 16, and be aware, there is still opposition to it due to what are perceived flaws in the bill - from non-partisan and even liberal quarters...

Net the Truth Online posts the controversy about the new Holt legislation HR 811 for your information.

As proposed currently, the Holt bill appears to have enough opposition and detailed concerns about security and integrity - and the auditing process as proposed - from those within the election watchdog and voting security community to warrant holding off on the passage of the legislation in its current form. The sad thing would be for the bill to pass as is, over the objections of election community activists, and then have it touted as the final solution to everything related to election problems in the United States.

Just read our coverage of a legal challenge to a candidate's nomination petitions and you can see a big problem remains with the voter registration lists.

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2007/03/clean-up-voter-registration-rolls.html

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/search?q=voter+registration

The Holt bill does nothing about inaccurate computerized voter registration rolls in every state. Without those being updated and clean of voters who have moved to another state, or are deceased, how can anyone trust the outcome of any election? The debate may rage on for years concerning whether electronic (touchscreen) voting machines malfunction, are tampered with and frauded, or encounter human error as seen in the programming of the wrong date on the machines in Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania which necessitated an overhaul of the machines on election day 2006.

But there should be no debate about inaccurate voter registration rolls.

No election is safe if even a handful of names of electors remain on the voter rolls which should not be there for being illegal, deceased, moved, changed address, etc.

Rush Holt website
http://holt.house.gov/voting.shtml

Q: What are the bill’s fundamental requirements?
http://holt.house.gov/HR_811.shtml

Statement

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:-s7tDXhH-u8J:www.verifiedvotingfoundation.org/downloads/HR%2520811%2520Statement%2520to%2520Elections%2520Subcomm%2520March%252023%25202007%2520-%2520final.pdf+rush+holt+hr+811+vote&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=17&gl=us

GovTrack.us. H.R. 811--110th Congress (2007): Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007, GovTrack.us (database of federal legislation)

(accessed Apr 5, 2007)
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-811

Sponsors and co-sponsors

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR00811:@@@P

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR00811:@@@X

Mark Up

http://www.topix.net/us-house/rush-holt/2007/04/election-reform-bill-gets-committee-action

Press Releases:: March 23, 2007
Subcommittee on Elections Conducts Hearing on the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007 (H.R. 811)
H.R. 811 Promises Optical Solution to Election Reform; Leaves Many in the Dark


http://gop.cha.house.gov/MediaPages/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1450

National Conference of State Legislatures
Office of State-Federal Relations
March 27, 2007


URGE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO OPPOSE H.R. 811, THE “VOTER CONFIDENCE AND INCREASED ACCESSIBILITY ACT OF 2007 “
The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) urges you to speak to members of your congressional delegation during the spring recess and tell them to oppose H.R. 811, which amends the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) and preempts state laws governing paper trails for voting machines and post-election audit procedures. This bill would also create an unfunded federal mandate for states because it requires states to pay for completely new or retrofitted voting machines as well to meet the conditions of the bill. H.R. 811 will be marked up in the House Committee on House Administration on Thursday, March 29 and could reach the House floor as early as April 16...

IT IS CRITICAL THAT STATE LEGISLATORS CONTACT THEIR HOUSE DELEGATIONS AND URGE THEM TO OPPOSE THE VOTER CONFIDENCE AND INCREASED ACCESSIBILITY ACT OF 2007...

For more information, please contact Susan Parnas Frederick or Hirsh Kravitz at NCSL at 202-624-5400...

http://www.ncsl.org/standcomm/sclaw/ActionAlertHR811.htm

People for American Way pro Holt Bill

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=23548

Avi Rubin OK with Holt Bill Plugs his new book
Saturday, February 17, 2007
H.R. 811, the new Holt bill

Earlier this month, US Congressman Rush Holt (D, NJ) introduced H.R. 811, a bill to amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require a voter-verified paper ballot. I have read the bill, as well as some of the criticism by various activists.

In my opinion, passage of the Holt bill would be the single most positive development in this country this decade to ensure the security, integrity and verifiability of elections. As a federal law, this legislation would establish a baseline for all states that would exceed the security and audit of elections in most states today.

http://avi-rubin.blogspot.com/2007/02/hr-811-new-holt-bill.html

Overall supportive discussion of Holt Bill HR 811

Vote PA

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VotePA/

Includes podcast interview

John Bonifaz makes the case for amending Holt's HR 811
February 22, 2007


http://www.pdamerica.org/articles/news/2007-02-22-13-11-02-news.php

Holes in HR 811 Charted No Leaky Buckets

http://noleakybuckets.org/holt811/holt811detail.shtml

Black Box Voting forum dissects HR 811 and provides links to more material

http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/46591/46591.html?1174411717

Serious flaws in the Holt Bill includes link to Bev Harris What's Wrong with Holt more Bruce O'Dell, Nancy Tobi...

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:DKC6MliVScYJ:electionarchive.org/ucvInfo/release/Release4ElectionReformProposal.pdf+rush+holt+hr+811+congress+vote&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=40&gl=us

Same as above with links

Four Election Integrity Groups Release a 'One-Page Concept Proposal...
PRWeb March 29, 2007


- Leaders in four election integrity organizations are delivering a proposal to the Congress calling on the members to sponsor better election reform legislation.

According to leaders of The National Election Data Archive, Black Box Voting, Democracy for New Hampshire, and Citizens' Alliance for Secure Elections, OH, there are serious flaws in current election reform proposals proposed by U.S. Congressman Rush Holt and Senator Bill Nelson (HR 811 & S559) and by Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones and Senator Hillary Clinton (HR1381 & S804).

Some election officials agree. Douglas A. Kellner, Co-Chair of the New York State Board of Elections in a March 20, 2007 email correspondence said: 'Congress got it wrong when it passed the Help America Vote Act in 2002 and there is a high probability that HR 811 in its current form could create another form of expensive mischief that could interfere with efficient administration of elections.'

The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) and the National Association of Counties (NACo) have also written a joint letter on March 19, 2007 urging members of Congress to oppose HR811/S559.

Yet, federal election reform legislation is critically needed in early 2007 if it is to be in effect in time to assure the accuracy and truth of 2008 federal elections.

http://www.topix.net/content/prweb/2120470182058150523124222284333460296205

Coalition for Visible Ballots issues opposition statement to new Holt Bill
New Version of Holt Bill: A Giant Step Backwards: Position Statement from Coalition for Visible Ballots


http://www.democracyfornewhampshire.com/node/view/3467

www.coalitionforvisibleballots.org

Election Integrity: Fact & Friction

Sunday, March 4, 2007
H.R.811: Fact & Friction -- Part I
Posted by Howard Stanislevic at 10:18 PM


http://e-voter.blogspot.com/2007/03/hr811-fact-friction-part-i.html

Wednesday, March 28, 2007
H.R.811: Fact & Friction – Part III
Posted by Howard Stanislevic at 3:28 PM
By Mark Lindeman, Ph.D. and Howard Stanislevic, Research Consultant


http://e-voter.blogspot.com/2007/03/hr811-fact-friction-part-iii.html

Saturday, March 10, 2007
H.R.811: Fact & Friction -- Part II
Posted by Howard Stanislevic at 2:28 PM
Guest blogged by Mark Lindeman, Ph.D.*


http://e-voter.blogspot.com/2007/03/hr811-fact-friction-part-ii_10.html

I still fail to understand why these organizations continue to promote the idea that the United States is a democracy. It isn't. It is a republic, a nation of laws... just aggravating, since otherwise the material is useful...

Voters Unite
Participate in Protecting Our Democracy!
Help Amend HR 811 to prohibit "electronic ballots."

This page lists a variety of materials you can use, and actions you can take, to work toward informing Congress and others of the reasons why electronic ballots must be prohibited in the United States -- NOW.
These materials are aimed at amending Congressman Rush Holt's bill ("Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007") to ban electronic ballots.

http://www.votersunite.org/info/HR811AmendmentResources.asp

Where's the Paper

http://www.wheresthepaper.org/HR811.html

Discussion on blog

Freedom to Tinker
Protect E-Voting — Support H.R. 811
Monday March 12, 2007 by Ed Felten


http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1134

Edward W. Felton Testimony link

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1137

My Supplemental E-Voting Testimony
Friday March 30, 2007 by Ed Felton

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1140

Dan Wallach testified before the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration on February 7

http://accurate-voting.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/dwallach-senate-testimony-7feb07.pdf

http://accurate-voting.org/2007/04/02/other-recent-housesenate-testimony/

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/doc/2007/Felten_evoting_testimony.pdf


More discussion


Use care in reading comments on Brad Blog as many posters just have one-train of thought on Republicans - too bad, as that simply diminishes any arguments they have on the issue of the Holt bill for or against...

Brad Blog

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4316

No comments links to material, articles (better)

Rush Holt Election Reform Bill (HR 811)

http://www.bradblog.com/?page_id=4194

Just one more, promise cause you gotta enjoy reading those comments that are so-o conspiratorial ...

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4317
Continue to use the search feature on Net the Truth Online for more information on this issue

Friday, February 09, 2007

Rush to Voting Security Flawed?

Congressman Rush Holt has reintroduced legislation called Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act in the U.S. House of Representatives which according to Holt's press release posted on his site would require voter-verified paper ballots and random audits in elections across the United States.

clip

The Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act would require a voter-verified paper ballot for every vote cast, which would become the ballot of record in the event of any recount or audit. It would require routine random audits of paper ballots by hand count in a percentage of voting precincts in each Congressional District. It would also take steps to make elections more publicly transparent by allowing for the inspection of voting system software. It would require documenting a secure chain of custody for voting systems and prohibit conflicts of interest involving vendors. It would keep the election process accessible to voters with disabilities, and authorize federal funding to help states meet the requirements...

http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/nj12_holt/020607.html




The legislation, this Congressional session known as House Resolution 811, however, has met with swift and steadfast opposition from national election integrity activist organizations.

In a Feb. 8, 2007 group message entitled: Beware of the Bandwagon -- A concise list of problems with Holt Bill HR 811, Black Box Voting's Bev Harris posted a listing of organizations that oppose the 2007 legislation as it is currently proposed. Harris posts a listing of co-sponsors of the bill whom she suggests should be contacted, indicating her opinion:

here are those that probably didn't read the bill very carefully and signed on as co-sponsors.

http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/46667.html?1170961452

The BBV Forum site continues to critique and dissect every line of the Holt legislation in what can only be termed by supporters a tireless and dedicated effort to gain legislation that fixes, rather than accepts, vulnerabilities in electronic voting identified by an array of experts across the country.

The BBV Forum has also discussed Paper Ballot Act of 2006 HR 6200 IH introduced in the 109th Congress by Dennis Kucinich, a Democratic lawmaker.

The bill states: ...require States to conduct Presidential elections using paper ballots and to count those ballots by hand, and for other purposes.

That legislation would have applied to presidential elections and required hand counting of the paper ballots.

The full bill remains posted on the site.

http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/72/46645.html?1171027586

The opinion of many on the BBV Forum group leans to exclusive use of a paper ballot with hand counts.

Meanwhile, in a message posted to the VotePA message board, founder of the Pennsylvania organization, Marybeth Kuznick, presents explanations for support of the Holt legislation.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VotePA/message/2757

Kuznick guested on KDKA's radio programming Morning News with Larry Richert on Friday to discuss the Holt legislation.

Responding to a series of VotePA discussion messages alternating between raising concerns and supporting the Holt legislation, according to Kuznick, in part:

Holt is NOT a bad bill. It is not a perfect bill either. I think it
is basically an ACHIEVABLE bill and that is the key.

It is a bill that contains input from dozens of local, state, and
national groups along with concerns for what happened in the 2006
primaries and general elections. Filtered, yes. A compromise in many
cases, maybe. But something that genuinely has a chance of actually
PASSING.

There are major national organizations supporting this bill
(VoteTrustUSA, Common Cause, PFAW, VerifiedVoting, etc.)
Approximately 25 state election integrity groups endorse it (and
another half dozen or more that endorse it provisionally meaning they
want to see it with amendments.) Know that Brad Friedman, John Bonifaz, John Gideon, etc. are NOT against this bill per se. They want to see amendments.

Well there WILL be amendments. That is the process...

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VotePA/message/2757


Kuznick noted in the posting she was attending DC hearings on the new legislation, and would clarify further.

Meanwhile, Nancy Tobi, (Chair, Democracy for New Hampshire) strongly rejects the Holt legislation as unveiled, noting a feature to employ text conversion process and engenders consolidation of Executive power and federal control over elections
Tobi calls "treasonous."

February 7, 2007 at 19:14:17

New Version of Holt Bill: A Giant Step Backwards

Article by Nancy Tobi, Chair, Democracy for New Hampshire and co-author of "Request by Voters" letter...

You can keep arguing the merits of this audit method or that, this paper trail or that, but the Holt Bill has two poison pills in it that can not be argued away:

1) huge unfunded mandate for text-to-audio conversion technology

2) consolidation of Executive power and control over Federal elections.

We must fight this treasonous bill and call it for what it is: ANTI-DEMOCRATIC.

It is bad enough that the authors of this bill, two years following the NASS resolution to sunset the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), and after more than a years' worth of activist pleadings to get rid of this growing little monster, the EAC, cement it as a permanent Executive agency in his new bill.

Bad enough that the authors of this bill are comfortable handing over control of federal elections to the White House. This is treasonous in and of itself.

But on top of this unseemly and anti democratic motion, the new Holt bill insinuates a whole new technoelection industrial toy into every polling place in the nation...

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_nancy_to_070207_new_version_of_holt_.htm



Additional developments

Feinstein hearings on electronic voting: testimony submitted to offset witness bias
By Andrea T. Novick, Esq.


Dear Mr. Ambrogi and Ms. Price,

I understand the public has 5 days from the Hearings held today (February 7, 2007) to submit comment which will be accepted by the committee. Please advise if I am incorrect about that.

I listened to the Hearing this morning and while I greatly appreciate that someone is finally paying attention to what will one day be seen as the greatest crime in the history of this country, I was deeply dismayed by many of the comments from those you'd called to testify...
http://www.democracyfornewhampshire.com/node/view/3436



Holt Reintroduces Voting Integrity Bill
Bill Would Require Voter-Verified Paper Ballot and Random Audits


Washington, D.C. --- Rep. Rush Holt today reintroduced the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act, landmark legislation that would amend the Help America Vote Act to protect the verifiability and accessibility of elections.

“Until we require that voting systems produce a voter-verified paper ballot, the results of our elections will always be uncertain,” said Rep. Holt. “All Americans deserve to be confident that their vote will be counted, and it is my hope that the 110th Congress will act soon to pass legislation that will ensure elections are fair, accessible, and auditable.”

The Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act would require a voter-verified paper ballot for every vote cast, which would become the ballot of record in the event of any recount or audit. It would require routine random audits of paper ballots by hand count in a percentage of voting precincts in each Congressional District. It would also take steps to make elections more publicly transparent by allowing for the inspection of voting system software. It would require documenting a secure chain of custody for voting systems and prohibit conflicts of interest involving vendors. It would keep the election process accessible to voters with disabilities, and authorize federal funding to help states meet the requirements.

Holt first introduced legislation requiring that electronic voting machines produce a voter-verified paper ballot in the 108th Congress. In the 109th Congress, the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act (H.R. 550) had the support of 222 bipartisan cosponsors, more than a majority of the U.S. House of Representatives. Despite this fact, it was not brought to the House floor for a vote.

Holt called on Congress to pass his legislation soon, in order to assure enough implementation time for the 2008 presidential election...
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/nj12_holt/020607.html



H.R.811 : To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require a voter-verified permanent paper ballot under title III of such Act, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Holt, Rush D. [NJ-12]
(introduced 2/5/2007) Cosponsors (182)
Committees: House Administration
Latest Major Action: 2/5/2007 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d110:9:./temp/~bd2ICd::|/bss/d110query.html|

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.811:

Holt legislation dissected section by section at Bev Harris' Black Box Voting...

http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/46591/46591.html?1170977768

Several election integrity and security organizations and activists noted in opposition to the 2007 legislation in its current form.

http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/46667.html?1170961452

online at BBV Forum in pdf

Holt Bill: pdf version

http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/46591/46643.html?1170881278

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/HOLT_2-5-07.pdf

For sampling pursposes only... material is cohesive and well-documented

The bill's audits are insufficient (to detect and correct errors and fraud), give officials far too much discretion, and are anything but transparent. I have very little hope of remedying those defects, but there are some major legal defects that we should try to remedy.

First, sec.2(a)(2)(B)(iii) says:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/46591/46643.html?1170881278



Pg.1 Lines 1-5 -- Section 1: Holt Bill description
"Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007"


from Paul Lehto:

quote:
The "new" Holt bill is a deceptive and fraudulent bill.

Why?

It uses the term "Ballot" to mean nothing much more than the old-fashioned "paper records" under the original "old" HR550 --- in other words in the "new" Holt "ballot" actually means something that will NEVER get counted on the FIRST count. Under the "new" Holt bill, just like under the old one, they will still count the electronic votes FIRST and release those as the results on election night, and the paper "ballots" only count (again just like the old Holt bill) if the audits show discrepancies...

http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/46591/46599.html?1170977768


Also see

Paul Lehto Retained By Election Integrity Advocates In San Diego
Breaking!
Guest blogged by Emily Levy of the California Election Protection Network and the CA-50 Action Committee


http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3113

Ben Olasov Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2007 - 05:44 pm:
What's especially concerning about this isn't just the number and severity of the flaws - or the cost, it's the lack of anything resembling a meaningful public debate on the issues. Specifically, why isn't the review process for a bill like this /required/ to engage election integrity advocacy groups like BBV in the first place?? Just basic common sense says you want to know about any design flaws in the bill /before/ it comes up for a vote. This is like starting a large-scale construction project without doing an environmental impact study - only worse. Is anyone pushing for change in the protocol for reviewing bills like this?

http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/46649.html#POST33039


More

Discussion Nancy Tobi piece including

TEXT-TO-AUDIO TECHNOELECTION TOY TIMELINE:

August 2005

The EAC Standards Board meets to review the recommendations for the 2005 Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG), which will become the basis for federal recommendations, testing, and certification of e-voting equipment.

In the link here you will find the resolutions from the EAC Standards Board August 2005 meeting, in which they recommended removing all language referencing text conversion from the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG):...

December 2005

http://www.eac.gov/VVSG%20Volume_II.pdf


http://www.bbvdocs.org/EAC/Standards-Board-Final-Resolution-As-Amended.pdf

http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/46649.html?1171062318


http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/46591/46615.html?1170942304

Dopp letter and signers

http://electionarchive.org/ucvInfo/US/Letter2Congress.pdf

VotersUnite.org news and postings and BradBlog news and postings regarding the Holt legislation

John Gideon presents a case for the necessity of amendments

Daily Voting News
By John Gideon, VotersUnite.org
February 07, 2007

As related by John Bonifaz of Demos and the National Voting Rights Institute, in a blog on BradBlog.Com, “[Yesterday], Congressman Rush Holt introduced H.R. 811, a bill trumpeted as requiring “a voter-verified permanent paper ballot.” But before we all jump on this train as the new guarantee that our votes will be properly counted in future elections, we ought to beware of the warning flag. A paper trail from DRE (Direct Recording Electronic, usually touch-screen) machines cannot protect the integrity of our elections.” And “the Holt bill tries to say it is requiring a paper ballot even for DREs, but, in the end, a DRE "paper ballot" is nothing more than a paper trail, which requires voters to verify their votes after they have cast them in the DRE machines...

http://votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogsection&id=2&Itemid=1032




By John Gideon, VotersUnite.org
February 06, 2007

Today has been a huge news day. Two bills were filed in Congress; one that we support (HR-756) and one that we don’t. HR-811 (the new HR-550) was filed, with 168 co-sponsors, and became the new Holt Bill. Newspapers began writing editorials and voicing their opinions before any of them could have read the bill. Many groups tripped over themselves in a race to endorse the bill; some without ever having read its contents. One group began, two weeks ago, asking their members to begin making calls to support the bill which was then changed more than once in the ensuing period. VotersUnite will not support this legislation because of its allowance for the continued use of DREs and its corruption of “paper ballot”. At this time, we will also not work against those groups who wish to support the bill. Instead we will stand neutral and report the facts, and an occasional opinion, as we have always done.

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2247&Itemid=1032




BLOGGED BY John Bonifaz ON 2/6/2007 3:51PM
Why the Holt Election Reform Bill Must be Amended to Guarantee a Real Paper Ballot
Guest Blogger and Constitutional Attorney John Bonifaz on Concerns About Holt's 'Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007' (HR 811)


Today, Congressman Rush Holt introduced H.R. 811 [PDF], a bill trumpeted as requiring “a voter-verified permanent paper ballot.” But before we all jump on this train as the new guarantee that our votes will be properly counted in future elections, we ought to beware of the warning flag. A paper trail from DRE (Direct Recording Electronic, usually touch-screen) machines cannot protect the integrity of our elections.

Here’s the bottom line: The DRE technology is fundamentally flawed for recording and counting our votes. The Holt bill, unless amended, will further codify into law the use of this technology, piling onto the disaster of HAVA (the Help America Vote Act of 2002) a new disaster...
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4125



Velvet Revolution and Others Call on Congress to Enact Paper Ballot Legislation!
Paper Ballot Campaign Letter Specifies 'Paper Ballots,' Not 'Paper Records' or 'Paper Trails'

Groups Seek Your Endorsement--Email Congress Now!
VoterAction.org, VotersUnite.org, VelvetRevolution.us, National Voting Rights Institute, Demos, TrueMajorityAction and the Dolores Huerta Foundation, along with dozens of other election integrity groups across the nation, today call upon Congress to introduce and enact legislation ensuring a paper ballot for every vote cast in the United States in time for the 2008 election. This legislation could take the form of an amended version of Rep. Rush Holt's bill known as HR-550, which is currently being rewritten for re-introduction in the new Congress.

While many changes to the U.S. election system are needed, we believe that a paper ballot for every vote cast is an absolutely unassailable requirement of any election reform. This is why we have launched the Paper Ballot Campaign...

http://www.velvetrevolution.us/electionstrikeforce/2006/12/velvet_revolution_and_others_l_1.html



Press releases republished

EFF highlights introduction of the legislation

https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=109
Holt Reintroduces Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act
By Rep. Rush Holt Press Release
February 06, 2007
Bill Would Require Voter-Verified Paper Ballot and Random Audits


Rep. Rush Holt today reintroduced the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act (HR 811), landmark legislation that would amend the Help America Vote Act to protect the verifiability and accessibility of elections...

http://votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2243&Itemid=371

Press Center Common Cause
For Immediate Release Contact: Mary Boyle
February 6, 2007 (202)736-5770

Congress must pass voting integrity legislation to restore public confidence
Common Cause applauds Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) for introducing the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act, which would require a voter-verified paper ballot for every vote cast and require routine random audits of paper ballots by hand count...

http://www.commoncause.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=194883&ct=3524699

http://www.brennancenter.org/

Brennan Center Letter to Rep. Rush Holt
Feb. 1, 2007 Audits

http://www.brennancenter.org/dynamic/subpages/download_file_47860.pdf

Also see

Press Releases
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration Holds First Senate Hearings on Voting Machines February 7, 2007
Read Brennan Center Executive Director MIchael Waldman's testimony before Sen. Diane Feinstein's Committee.

http://brennancenter.org/dynamic/subpages/download_file_47870.pdf

electionline report makes references to other organizations, etc.

February 8, 2007
electionline.org
I. In Focus This Week
Rep. Rush Holt Reintroduces Updated Paper Trail, Audit Bill
New Jersey lawmaker is optimistic for success on Capitol Hill
By Sean Greene
electionline.org

After more than three years of fits and starts in Congress, a new bill authored by Rep. Rush Holt (D-N.J.) requiring voter-verified paper ballots and random audits might have its best chance yet of becoming law.

With a new Democratic majority, voting troubles last November in many areas of the country, legislative activity in the states and most recently, a $32 million plan in Florida to scrap electronic voting machines in favor of paper-based optical-scan systems, Holt said the ingredients for success are in place.

“I don’t anticipate any organized effort to stop it,” he stated at a press conference reintroducing the bill. “The political situation is strong.”

The Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act, H.R.811 amending the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), currently has 179 co-sponsors. He not only expects it to pass, but to be implemented in time for the November 2008 election.

“Until we require that voting systems produce a voter-verified paper ballot, the results of our elections will always be uncertain,” he stated.

At 47 pages, the bill covers a range of issues...

http://www.electionline.org/Newsletters/tabid/87/ctl/Detail/mid/643/xmid/237/xmfid/3/Default.aspx



Tuesday, February 6
Dan Tokaji Equal Vote Blog
The Latest Version of the Holt Bill


Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) has introduced another version of his bill (H.R. 811) to require that all voting systems generate a "voter-verified" paper ballot. It would authorize $300 million for fisacal year 2007 to meet the new requirements. I've commented on the problems with this sort of requirement numerous times in the past, including here and here, and little would be gained by again replaying that debate. Suffice it to say that, whatever problems exist with electronic voting, it remains doubtful at best that attaching a printer will provide a workable and effective solution.

As with previous versions of the Holt bill, there are some good things here, most notably a provision clarifying that individuals may bring private lawsuits to enforce the technology and administration requirements of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). Also, the bill would extend the authorization of the Election Assistance Commission (EAC). Other aspects of the bill, however, are cause for concern.

One is a provision that the paper records aren't just to be used to audit the accuracy of machines, but to "be used as the official ballots for purposes of any recount" of a federal election. This is asking for trouble, in my view, in places where the system used to comply with the bill is an electronic system with a paper printout...

http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/blogs/tokaji/2007/02/latest-version-of-holt-bill.html


More

July 18, 2006 John Gideon explains on another issue

I have never received any funds from Donna Curling or ChoicePoint. I have never received any funds for any reason from VoteTrustUSA. I am not a "Director" of VoteTrustUSA because there are NO Directors. There is a 'core group' of which I am a member...

http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/17778.html?1153513020#POST26185