A Flawed US Election Reform Bill

H.R.811 sounds great: It's stated purpose is "to require a voter-verified permanent paper ballot." Unfortunately, it sounds like the details have some devils, as usual. From the Bev Harris article Is a flawed bill better than no bill?: "[T]he Holt Bill provides for a paper trail (toilet paper roll-style records affixed to DRE voting machines) in 2008, requires more durable ballots in 2010, and requires a complex set of audits. It also cements and further empowers a concentration of power over elections under the White House, gives explicit federal sanction to trade secrets in vote counting, mandates an expensive 'text conversion' device that does not yet exist which is not fully funded, and removes 'safe harbor' for states in a way that opens them up to unlimited, expensive, and destabilizing litigation." Update: 07/11 16:23 GMT by KD : Derek Slater writes "EFF's e-voting expert Matt Zimmerman recently published this article separating the myths about HR 811 from the facts, and countering many of the misleading and outright false claims being made about it."

Re:Is this a surprise to anyone?

[internic]

Rush Holt, the author of H.R. 811, has a Ph.D. in Physics. Also note that a bill does not always represent what the law maker thinks is best, but rather it's the best thing they think can actually pass.

Let's Drop the Straw Man

[internic]

Some of the objections given at the beginning of the article seem to be worth considering. The straw man debate that follows is just idiotic, however. It might be useful to look at what some actual supporters have to say, supporters like the EFF [eff.org], Prof. Ed Felten [freedom-to-tinker.com], Ars Technica [arstechnica.com], the Brennan Center for Justice [federalele...reform.com], People of the American Way, TrueVoteMD [truevotemd.org], and Prof. Avi Rubin [blogspot.com] to name a few.

Re:HR811 is a Step Forward

[Danse]

As for limiting the states, as I understand it this doesn't.

I just read the EFF link and read through some of the actual bill, and while I think it should do more (like requiring that the source code be publicly available), I do think that it will be a major improvement to the current situation, and hopefully a good starting point for further reform of our election system. I think the BBV article is at least somewhat misleading in its claims, at least if the EFF is correct in theirs (which I'm more inclined to believe). Even if some of what the BBV article says is true, this is still an overall improvement. I guess I just remain very wary of the motives of the people supporting these bills, and I tend to look for ulterior motives. Sad, but understandable given the state of politics these days.

Re:HR811 is a Step Forward

[internic]

Like you, I'm not legal expert. Additionally, I personally haven't had the time to devote to studying this issue as much as I'd like. But I tend to trust the interpretation of the bill by the EFF, and I take into consideration the support of the bill by other people to whom I give credence, like Ed Felten. I'm not saying that BBV may not make some valid points, but right now it seems to me that, on balance, it would be better for the bill to pass.

As for ulterior motives, I agree that there are plenty in congress. As far as I'm aware, though, Rush Holt is one of the good guys, someone who is interested in crafting legislation based upon reason and evidence whether or not it's popular. Unfortunately, I think that the more one seeks political power the more one must give up those qualities.

As an aside: I'm pleasantly surprised (ok, shocked) to see someone in the Slashdot discussion change their stance based upon evidence presented. That alone is enough to make me a fan. :-)

Re:The core of the controversy

[Black Box Voting]

Thank you, but there is no need to translate my own words. The core of the controversy is exactly as stated in the original post:

1. The Holt Bill provides for a paper trail (toilet paper roll-style records affixed to DRE voting machines) in 2008
2. The Holt Bill requires more durable ballots in 2010
3. The Holt Bill requires a complex set of audits.

BUT

1. The Holt Bill also cements and further empowers a concentration of power over elections under the White House
2. The Holt Bill gives explicit federal sanction to trade secrets in vote counting
3. The Holt Bill mandates an expensive 'text conversion' device that does not yet exist which is not fully funded
4. The Holt Bill removes 'safe harbor' for states in a way that opens them up to unlimited, expensive, and destabilizing litigation.

Bev Harris
Founder - Black Box Voting

(Have abandoned old "BevHarris" account here because I forgot the password and have deactivated the e-mails associated with the account. This is me, same person as the other, minus the karma I'd built up under my original screen name).