He may be The Man, but We The People!

[2 Much Tribulation]

'nuf said. Quote I heard from Land Shark. I think it reminds who's *rightfully* in charge. Whaddya think? I guess "the Man" refers to the elections-industrial complex.

[stillcool]

1. I hope "we the people"

jump on our reps to sign on to this bill, and then jump on our state reps to take the fed up on their offer.
H.R. 5036: Emergency Election Assistance for Secure Elections Act – the “EASY” bill to secure the November 2008 elections

http://holt.house.gov/HR_5036.shtml

[2 Much Tribulation]

4. Boy i sure don't hope that bill passes, legally deceptive

it's a rerun of Bush v. Gore. REad that case and the bill first.

[stillcool]

7. What is the problem?

I was under the impression that it is just an emergency measure.. a bill that allows those states that choose to, to employ security measures to be reimbursed by the government. In my state we use paper ballots already, but we have no standard audit. Is there some reason I should not be asking my state reps to do this?

[Bill Bored]

10. Yeah, because it would be one step closer to fixing this problem.

You don't really think everyone in the Election Integrity "community" wants to do that, do you?

On edit:

It would mean all these BIG TALKERS who want hand counted paper ballots would have to get off their asses, go to their county clerks, legislators, or whatever, and actually convince them that it's a good idea, instead of just trashing everyone else's efforts on the Internets!

That's why they don't like the new Holt Bill. It funds THEIR solution to the e-vote counting problem, HCPB. So it means that for them, the party is over! They will have to put up or shut up.

Either they will be able to convince people that HCPB is a good idea, get the money from Uncle Sam and do it, or they will fail and have to come up with another plan instead of sitting on their butts posting on message boards.

That's why they don't like the new Holt Hand-Counted Paper Ballot bill!

Get it?

[Land Shark]

13. I read section 2 of HR 5036 and it just talks about emergency paper when DREs ARE USED

what bill are you reading???? I know there are other funding options. Let's see which options counties with dREs go for --- I'll bet its section 2 funding for emergency paper WHILE DRE's CONTINUE TO BE USED

[demodonkey]

15. Good Lord, Paul -- read Section 4. Complete funding for 100% hand counts.

Everything the HCPB crowd wants -- if they can convince counties to go for it.

And in recalcitrant counties where there are still paperless DREs, emergency paper ballots to be used ONLY in case of machine failure and counted as a regular ballot on election night, IS A NO-BRAINER.

I am in one of those paperless DRE counties, and a precinct election offical there as well. I want this protection, if nothing else. Fortunately, after numerous machine failures, Pennsylvania is requiring these emergency paper ballots anyway.

[Land Shark]

17. Counties are COMMITTED to the LEAST accountability they can possibly get

If they have a CHOICE (as they do in this bill) of levels of accountability, they will, I promise you, choose the least accountability possible. (and they have 3 sections to choose funding options from, secs. 2, 3 and 4)

Nobody likes to be on the spot or in the fish bowl of publicity. (though it is election officials JOB to be that for us, as our public servants, they've proven quite clearly they DO NOT WANT that at all)

If the bill ONLY funded HCPB, you'd be right. It's a whole different animal than that, however.

[troubleinwinter]

18. Section 4, if you'd like to read it: 'PAYMENTS FOR CONDUCTING HAND COUNTS...'

SEC. 4. PAYMENTS FOR CONDUCTING HAND COUNTS OF RESULTS OF 2008 GENERAL ELECTIONS.

PAYMENTS.—

ELIGIBILITY FOR PAYMENTS.—If a State, county, or equivalent location tallies the results of any regularly scheduled general election for Federal office in November 2008 by conducting a hand count of the votes cast on the paper ballots used in the election (including paper ballot printouts verifiable by the voter at the time the vote is cast) in accordance with the requirements of this section, the Administrator shall make a payment to the State, county, or equivalent location in an amount equal to the documented reasonable costs incurred by the State, county, or equivalent location in conducting the hand counts.

CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE AND COSTS.—

CERTIFICATION REQUIRED.—In order to receive a payment under this section, a State, county, or equivalent location shall submit to the Administrator (and, in the case of a county or equivalent jurisdiction, shall provide a copy to the State), in such form as the Administrator may require, a statement containing— (i) a certification that the State, county, or equivalent location conducted the hand counts in accordance with all of the requirements of this section; (ii) a statement of the reasonable costs incurred by the State, county, or equivalent location in conducting the hand counts; and (iii) such other information and assurances as the Administrator may require.

AMOUNT OF PAYMENT.—The amount of a payment made to a State, county, or equivalent location under this section shall be equal to the reasonable costs incurred by the State, county, or equivalent location in conducting the hand counts.

DETERMINATION OF REASONABLENESS OF COSTS.—The determinations under this paragraph of whether costs incurred by a State, county, or equivalent location are reasonable shall be made by the Administrator in consultation with the Election Assistance Commission.

TIMING OF PAYMENTS.—The Administrator shall make the payment required under this section to a State, county, or equivalent location not later than 30 days after receiving the statement submitted by the State, county, or equivalent location under paragraph(2).

AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— There are authorized to be appropriated to the Administrator $30,000,000 for payments under this section. Any amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization under this subsection shall remain available until expended.

HAND COUNTS DESCRIBED.—

IN GENERAL.—A hand count conducted in accordance with this section is a count of all of the paper ballots on which votes were cast in the election (including paper ballot printouts verifiable by the voter at the time the vote is cast), including votes cast on an early, absentee, emergency, and provisional basis, which is conducted by hand to determine the winner of the election and is conducted without using electronic equipment or software.

COMPLETENESS.—With respect to each jurisdiction in which a hand count is conducted, the State, county, or equivalent location shall ensure that a voter verified paper ballot or paper ballot printout verifiable by the voter at the time the vote is cast is available for every vote cast in the jurisdiction.

PROCESS FOR CONDUCTING HAND COUNTS.—

IN GENERAL.—In order to meet the requirements of this section, a hand count of the ballots cast in an election shall be conducted in accordance with the following procedures:

On the date of the election, the jurisdiction shall conduct an initial hand count of the ballots cast in the election, using the ballots which are eligible to be counted in the election as of the time the polls are closed.

Any ballot which is eligible to be counted in the election but which is not included in the initial count conducted under sub-paragraph (A), including a provisional ballot cast by an individual who is determined to be eligible to vote in the election or an absentee ballot received after the date of the election but prior to the applicable deadline under State law for the receipt of absentee ballots, shall be subject to a hand count in accordance with this section and added to the tally conducted under subparagraph (A) not later than 48 hours after the ballot is determined to be eligible to be counted.

The hand count shall be conducted by a team of not fewer than 2 individuals who shall be witnessed by at least one observer sitting at the same table with such individuals.

Except as provided in paragraph (2), all such individuals shall be election officials of the jurisdiction in which the hand count is conducted.

USE OF OTHER PERSONNEL.—An individual who is not an election official of the jurisdiction in which a hand count is conducted under this section may serve on a team conducting the hand count or may serve as an observer of a team conducting the hand count if the jurisdiction certifies that the individual has completed such training as the jurisdiction deems appropriate to conduct or observe the hand count (as the case may be).

LOCATION.—The hand counts conducted under this section of the ballots cast in an election shall be conducted—

(A)in the case of ballots cast at a polling place on the date of the election, at the polling place at which the ballots were cast; or (B) in the case of any other ballots, at the office of the chief election official of the jurisdiction conducting the hand count.

INFORMATION INCLUDED IN RESULTS.— Each hand count conducted under this section shall produce the following information with respect to the election:

The vote tally for each candidate.

The number of overvotes, undervotes, spoiled ballots, and blank ballots cast (or their equivalents, as defined by the State, county or equivalent location).
The number of write-in ballots and the names written in on such ballots pursuant to State law.

The total number of ballots cast.

A record of judgement calls made regarding voter intent.

PUBLIC OBSERVATION OF HAND COUNTS.— Each hand count conducted under this section shall be conducted in a manner that allows public observation of the entire process (including the opening of the ballot boxes or removal of machine-printed ballots from their containers, the sorting, counting, and notation of results, and the announcement of final determinations) sufficient to confirm but not interfere with the proceedings.

ESTABLISHMENT AND PUBLICATION OF PROCEDURES.—Prior to the date of the regularly scheduled general election for Federal office held in November 2008, a State, county, or equivalent location shall establish and publish procedures for carrying out hand counts under this subsection.

ANNOUNCEMENT AND POSTING OF RESULTS.— Upon the completion of a hand count conducted under this section, the State, county, or equivalent location shall announce the results to the public and post them on a public Internet site.

USE OF HAND COUNT IN CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS.—The State shall use the results of the hand count conducted under this section for purposes of certifying the results of the election involved. Nothing in this section may be construed to affect the application or operation of any State law governing the recount of the results of an election.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:h5036ih.txt.pdf

[2 Much Tribulation]

19. read the thread. It's already been stated there's a choice of sections 2, 3 and 4

No county, GIVEN A CHOICE on their own free will BY LAW (not one we can lobby on and FORCE) is going to choose a complete HCPB buyout or something close to that... There's only 500 million in the bill, total, anyway

The lion's share will choose, if they do anything, section 2 funding for emergency paper while keeping DREs

[Bill Bored]

22. No choice? Ya mean ya want a Federal takeover of our elections?

I thought that's why HR811 was such a bad idea. HAVA, EAC, The Executive Branch, all that crap.

Now you want them to force HCPB down the counties' throats, even if they don't have enough people to do the counting?

$500-million is enough to hand count Fed elections for many years by the way. HR811 only provided $1-billion and that was NOT voluntary and paid for a LOT of equipment.

But if you want hand counts, all you have to do is convince your friendly local election officials. How hard is that?

[Land Shark]

24. The Constitution now requires "uniform objective" rules for vote counting, read Bush v Gore

That's different than "choice" and variety from county to county, as HR 5036 encourages.

[troubleinwinter]

25. The constitution now has something new?! Who knew? Far out!!!

Is this kinda like Lee Mercer informed us that Bush was impeached in 2004 and told us about the Saudi Arabian War?

[Land Shark]

28. No, it's like what any lawyer could tell you about the effect of US Supreme Ct cases on the Const...

[troubleinwinter]

29. "any lawyer could tell you" OK, so tell me.

[Bill Bored]

30. Well, not to be divisive, but you better tell Dave Berman about this

because he's been fighting the good fight for HCPB in Humboldt County for YEARS! I wouldn't want to have to be the one to break the news to him that he's Un-Constitutional!

[demodonkey]

14. Yay Bill! Ya' hit the nail squarely on the head.

:yourock:

[troubleinwinter]

16. I give your post a kick and a hearty recommendation.

[stillcool]

21. Thanks ...

:hi: I can certainly understand this 'emergency bill' not being the 'be all', 'end all', but it certainly seems like no-brainer for states like mine that use optical scans.

[keep_it_real]

2. Yea, but "we the people" are too divided to make a difference

We must be UNITED to make a difference in the status quo.

[2 Much Tribulation]

5. Gee, what happened to majority rule? OK, elections, if rigged, dispense with majority rule, but

effectively impose a supermajority requirement. (one can't steal an election at 90% to 10% public support, it wouldn't be credible, so that level of support would be unstealable...)

But you've got us all the way up to UNITED. Wow, that's a real burden. Should i give up? ;)

[Bill Bored]

11. 90-10 is stealable without a paper ballot. nt

[Land Shark]

12. of course paper ballots are required, but if the public KNEW it was so one-sided, it wouldn't be

credible for 90-10 to become 48-52. As Jefferson said, public opinion is a separate force in EVERY form of government, even a dictator can not, for very long, go against the will of the people IF IT IS something like 90% against

[kster]

3. Landshark is a true patriot and is willing to put his REAL Name

on the line for what he believes in. We are all cowards compared to him, we hide behind fake names, Paul Lehto AKA Landshark is a true Patriot.

K&R

[Wilms]

6. I think you forgot something...

:D

[kster]

8. My favorite pic, thanks Wilms.....nt

[2 Much Tribulation]

9. Nice pic, tho of course not of Land shark! ;)

[OnTheOtherHand]

20. speak for yourself n/t

[2 Much Tribulation]

23. What do you mean?

[troubleinwinter]

26. kster accuses people of "hiding behind fake names" and of being "cowards"

Kster certainly "hides behind a fake name", while 'OnTheOtherHand' does not, having posted links to numerous highly respected professional academic papers he has authored and collaborated on (under his own name).

Kster does not even show a profile.

Many frequent posters in this forum are known voting integrity activists, scholars and academics, who have never hidden their identities and don't accept donations of any sort or tie postings to monetary solicitations, so are not focused on promoting their own 'celebrity' by pushing their own names, though they are not hidden.

Yes, as kster points out, Lehto does put his name out there. He has a PayPal button on his site right next to his name.

I think the point of the post was to indicate that while kster rails about 'anonymous' postings, hurling accusations of 'cowardice' at others, kster has never bothered to back up his own silly bullshit, while OnTheOtherHand, WillYourVoteBeCounted, Febble and several others have never hidden who they are (nor do they solicit/accept donations).

Bottom line: Kster's post is just his usual disruptive meaningless bullshit. But he is OUR Disrupting Bullshitter!

"A day without kster is like a day without Ex-Lax".

[OnTheOtherHand]

27. thanks, I missed the question

I'm certainly not interested in impugning anyone's patriotism. I leave that shtick to others.

I'm not sure what the OP means, but it's hard to argue with "We the People."

[Land Shark]

31. Hard to argue with We the People because it's hard to argue with the Ultimate source of power in any

country. On the other hand, one can argue with "the man" based on inalienable rights, constitutional rights, democratic principles, and other things, depending on the specific context in question.