Dem. Rep. bill would require paper voting, recounts in close elections

[DonViejo]

Source: The Hill




BY JOE UCHILL - 11/08/17 11:01 AM EST

A new bill would require states to use voting machines with paper backups and conduct audits in close elections.

Rep. Debbie Dingle (D - Mich.) introduced the Safeguarding Election Infrastructure Act Wednesday, which aims to increase elections security by requiring voting machines funded by the federal Help America Vote Act to print a paper receipt of each vote.

"Our democracy depends on free and fair elections, and we must do everything we can to protect the security and integrity of that process," said Dingell in a written statement.

"The reality is, many of our voting machines have not been updated in nearly two decades and are susceptible to cyberattacks. We know that foreign adversaries pay very close attention to our elections, and until we address these vulnerabilities, our democratic process is at risk," she said.

Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/359368-dem-rep-bill-would-require-paper-voting-recounts-in-close-elections

[SHRED]

1. This is why we need the majority

So that these type of bills can reach a vote.

[sagesnow]

2. Democracy is not possible if

there is no verifiable recount possible.

[sandensea]

3. +1

The fact that, even now, we still have to remind people of this, is a testament to how far the GOP has degraded our democracy since Bush v. Gore.

[Ukapau]

4. And the Republicans want to suppress the voting and one way to do it is to have voters stay

home because of the belief their vote doesn't matter!

Listen to Republican activist Paul Weyrich on this issue:

[lagomorph777]

5. 100% agree. This is absolutely necessary and should be top priority in 2019.

Else 2020 won't help.

[msongs]

6. paper receipts only prove whats on a paper receipt, NOT what is actually counted in the machine so

paper ballots hand counted at the precinct please

[mr_lebowski]

7. Imagine a machine u vote on, that prints a paper receipt, which the voter verifies ...

Then drops into an official ballot box on the way out ... there's no need for like a 'receipt you take can home' anyway, it would mean nothing.

That way you get both a machine count, and a means to perform a recount with the 'voter-verified paper receipts'.

That makes it VERY difficult to rig as can you cannot just hack the machine and get away with it.

[Louis1895]

9. I still like the idea of an ATM-style slip you take with you.

In this scenario, the voter submits the paper ballot (either electronically recorded on a machine at the time of voting or scanned later to tabulate) and also receives an ATM-style slip to enable him/her to log on and see how the vote was recorded.

I know this could be hacked and totally agree that the most import part of the proposal is to have, as you say, "both a machine count, and a means to perform a recount with the 'voter-verified paper'" ballots. Any recount should be manual with supervision by representatives of all candidates.

[mr_lebowski]

17. Yeah, but even with nothing but a 'code on both sides', you'd be at risk of losing voting privacy

at least to a certain extent.

You'd be creating in effect a digital record that (at minimum) links the IP address of 'where you accessed the system from' to 'who/what you voted for'.

Personally, for me, the risks of creating that particular 'digital trail', if you will ... outweigh the 'auditing advantages'. I'd be happy enough satisfied with what I described

I really DO NOT want to give 'authorities' the opportunity to link 'me', with 'who I voted for' which (depending on how you personally access the internet when you look up your vote) would be intrinsic to a system like you described ... at least, without some pretty complex safeguards (which the bad guys would fight, you can bet) ... either that, or it would involve us having to be REALLY trusting.

[Dustlawyer]

8. Do this Bill right the first time and make sure we can count the actual votes.

I also believe we should fund exit polling to spot differences like we recommend to other countries. Just ask President Jimmy Carter!!!

[dlk]

10. The Electronic Voting Machines Have Too Many Weaknesses-Back to the Future With Paper Ballots!

[red dog 1]

11. + 1

[red dog 1]

12. I applaud Rep. Dingle's effort, but House Speaker Munster will never allow a vote on her bill,

even if she gets some moderate House Republicans to co-sponsor it.

K&R

[stuffmatters]

14. Then Ryan and Repugs categorically prove that they oppose Truth in Voting

i.e. Republicans Oppose Democracy...that's the only explanation for opposing this common sense clean up our very corruptible, unreliable voting system.

Sunlight

[red dog 1]

20. Of course they oppose "Truth in Voting"

They control Congress, the SCOTUS, and the White House because they stole elections using:
- unverifiable electronic voting machines
- GOP Secretaries of State who are complicit in vote flipping
- Voter suppression programs such as CrossCheck, that kept millions of eligible voters from
voting
- Russian interference in the 2016 election, with GOP cooperation

Darkness, not Sunlight......Darkness to cover their evil tampering with every single election!

[stevepal]

13. I can't believe such a bill has even been mentioned in the USofA

Thank you Thank you Thank you Thank you Debbie Dingle of Mich and DonViejo, whoever you are for posting.

Even better would be HAND-COUNTED PAPER BALLOTS.

No reason to put anything thru a machine, and it's cheaper as well. Cut out the middle man. Give the counters something like jury duty as a civic duty. It would change the whole attitude of people toward their community and it would rescue our democracy from the trash can it has been in for about a decade and a half!

[mr_lebowski]

18. Oh, they'll have some State's Rights bullshit to hide behind ...

[diva77]

15. This is a NON-solution. This just further embeds computerized "voting" into the system. The whole

paper receipt issue has been debated and shown to be ineffective. Many of the machines have hidden second paper receipt features. Also, this could trace a vote to a person and therefore remove "voting in secret."

THE solution would be to have hand marked hand counted paper ballots at the precinct level with public oversight. Period.

With Dingle's bill, you're still stuck with corporate owned proprietary software, hackable or inside job pre-programmable machines that do not meet the burden of proof that our votes will be counted as cast.

[raven mad]

16. I always vote on paper.

And keep a copy.

[nitpicker]

19. We already have paper ballots in VA

The voter checks in with photo ID and gets their ballot, then marks it and feeds it into the scanner.

The check-in count is cross-checked to the scanner count (so no one can stuff extra ballots into the scanner).

The scanned ballots collect in a locked box under the scanner, and are boxed and sealed and sent to the election office right after the polls close.