The Voter Confidence & Increased Accessibility Act
H.R. 811/S. 559
"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."
House Sponsor: Rush Holt (D-NJ) --216 Co-Sponsors
Status: Placed on Union Calendar
Senate Sponsor: Bill Nelson (D-FL) -- 1 Co-Sponsor
Status: Referred to Committee on Rules and Admin.
IN FAVOR OF:
There is support from both Democrats and Republicans on this bill. Proponents believe the mandated durable paper ballot has to be implemented ASAP in order to restore voter confidence and guarantee accurate results. They say this bill accommodates all parties adequately while still leaving room for innovation.
OPPOSED TO:
The opposition to this bill comes from very different sides. Many voting activists believe it's not strong enough and too many issues are left unresolved. Many election officials think it will mandate unfunded and unnecessary changes in an untimely fashion. Voting system vendors are concerned about disclosing trade secrets.
It's your vote and your call. Is doing this better than doing nothing? Vote or submit your comment now.
Take the next step. Click below to send a customized letter to your Congressional Rep and Senators
Or click here to get LINKS to other websites on this issue.
Does this legislation increase your
Voter Confidence
or Accessibility?
Federal elections in the last decade have been plagued with problems. After the 2000 Bush/Gore Presidential race was decided by hanging chads in Florida, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act - allocating billions to update election technology - and doing away with punch card machines that were seen as the culprits.
States jumped on the opportunity and started purchasing optical scan and Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines. Trouble is, there were no standards for these machines, and study after study has shown that failure rates are high and tampering by inside personnel or outside hackers is easy.
In addition, if machines make mistakes, there's no way to tell. And there's no way to audit or recount votes with electronic data alone. The data is what it is.
While few disagree that the system needs improvement, there is disagreement on how to go about it. Several bills have been introduced in Congress. H.R. 811 has made the most progress and is now poised for consideration by the whole House. If approved, it would then go to the Senate where a similar bill has already been introduced but not examined.
The Bill
The key premise of H.R. 811 and S. 559 is simple - to require a Voter-Verified Permanent Paper ballot. Electronic voting machines wouldn't have to be replaced - but they would have to be supplemented by a durable paper ballot that each voter can see and confirm, or change if necessary, and that election officials can use to conduct recounts or audits. States must comply in time for the 2008 elections, although at this late date, that would have to be amended. It would also be more difficult for some States than others, since over half the States have already passed their own laws.
This bill also sets standards for certification, management and testing of voting systems for all States. Wireless devices and Internet access are outlawed and a secure chain of custody is required. All systems used by States must be tested by independent labs, although standards for lab accreditation are not required until November, 2010. Fees for testing will no longer be paid by the manufacturer. Instead, to prevent conflicts of interest, the Election Assistance Commission will pay the labs and bill the manufacturer. The manufacturer must also submit software and hardware technologies, including those previously called trade secrets, to qualified testers and election officials who sign non-disclosure agreements. (If a machine contains commercial off-the-shelf technology, that technology is excluded.)
Post-election audits are also required, using a formula based on how close the preliminary results of the federal race were. States do have the option of developing their own audit mechanism as long as it is statistically as or more effective.
Furthermore, the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act mandates systems that accommodate people with physical or learning disabilities and those who speak English as a second language by 12/31/08. It also commissions a report on best practices and requires training for poll workers.
In addition, this legislation allocates funds for the activities required and increases the minimum percentage States must pay toward their systems. The financial commitments are:
$3 million to the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology to study, test and develop best practices on ballot verification for voters with physical or learning disabilities or those who speak English as a second language.
$3 million to the Director of the National Science Foundation to disperse as grants to a minimum of 3 entities which will study and develop new voting systems.
$1 billion (up from the original $300 million) to cover State expenses, using a formula that calculates the number of voters and the number of non-compliant precincts.
$100 million a year to reimburse States for audit costs.
$100,000 to the National Institute for Standards and Technology to establish alternative audit mechanisms.
"When India has a better standardized voting system than the U.S., we know that we lack such a system by design. Where is the press coverage of this issue? Where is the public outrage?"
E. B. S.
Atlanta, GA
"Without a paper ballot, there would be no recounts, and the ability to defraud the voters is high."
Paul H.
Derry, NH
“And people think on-line shopping is risky!"
M. T. H.
Akron, OH
"Who's to say that the same minds that created and implemented these machines aren't somehow able to also directly influence the outcome of the 'numbers'? Now who is going to reassure me that these machines are absolutely 100 per cent problem free? You can't, so I need my proof of what I decided in writing please."
L. B.
Houston, TX
"I consider my party affiliation to be strongly independent; during my voting life I have voted for Democrats and Republicans. I care about the integrity of the voting process, not the winner. I strongly support allowing voters in EVERY state to verify and review their choices."
Sharon
Atlanta, GA
“Our democracy only works if we believe that it does.”
Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ)
Legislative Sponsor
“After hearing from state and county election officials from across the country, I am concerned with a one-size-fits-all approach that could disenfranchise disabled voters and create unrealistic and costly requirements on state and local jurisdictions.”
Rep. Kevin McCarthy
(R-CA)
“To ensure the integrity of our next election, America must move to a paper ballot system.”
Gov. Bill Richardson
(D-NM)
X Pres Candidate
“We don't need another multibillion dollar boondoggle to inject even more complex, more opaque, high-tech, democracy-demolishing gadgetry into our voting systems.”
Nancy Tobi
Democracy for New Hampshire
“So many people worked so very hard on this bill, but in the end, it isn't about who worked hard. It's about getting it right.”
Bev Harris
Black Box Voting
“H.R. 811 will undermine public confidence in our elections by imposing impractical requirements under unrealistic deadlines and will needlessly subject counties to tremendous financial burdens.”
Gail W. Mahoney
Member of the Board
National Association of Counties
“It is better to take a financial loss, however, than to lose our democracy due to the use of expensive and wrongly designed, wrongly used voting equipment.”
Douglas A. Kellner
Co-Chair
NY State Board of Elections
“It (fails) to accommodate a nearly unanimous agreement among citizen activists and computer scientists who have watched election disasters over the past three years - the agreement that electronic voting machines (DREs) should not be used in U.S. elections.”
Ellen Theisen
Voters Unite
Democratic National Committee Statement
in favor of H.R. 811
President John Quincy Adams
Are the 20% of States Without Paper Trails
A National Concern?
© Voters Voice, Inc. 2008
An Iincandescent Light Bulb
is 6 Times More Reliable than Voting Systems
are Required To Be
