BBV: Repealing the Help America Vote Act (HAVA)

I had the opportunity to talk with Lynn Landes, a writer/journalist who has been actively involved in confronting the Electronic Voting issue, (as well as so many other great people including our own Bev Harris). If you have any interest in reading some of her work, log on to ecotalk.org.

As I am learning more about this issue, I am realizing how important it is for all of us who understand the problems and consequences of electronic voting for us to band together and work towards having the cleanest elections possible. I have learned so much from those of you who care enough about what is happening to our voting process and (I think!**) Im grateful. :)

I first learned about this issue a year and a half ago, and remember thinking at the time, so why don’t we just get rid of the machines? They are expensive, and they are the problem.

As time has passed, I have found myself getting caught up more in the semantics of the issue, which I think has been helpful at times, but in the end, I think it has distracted us from the core problem : that, if the usage of electronic voting machines violates essential elements of the Voting Rights Act, as well as Articles I and II of the Constitution, then the usage of electronic voting machines are indeed the problem and I believe that is where we need to return: to repeal HAVA and to refuse to accept these machines in our states.

They are costing taxpayers millions, if not billions of dollars for their installation and use, which is doing nothing but insuring a more fraudulent system and ciphoning away the precious funds that could be used for so many other things.

I am certainly not an expert on machines, nor an expert on the Constitution. What I am is a concerned citizen and activist who’s sole agenda is to find the best and most fool-proof solution to this problem.

In addition, I don’t think it takes anything more than common sense to realize we are paying for an albatross, excuse me, Trojan Horse that perhaps stands to ensure a select few will ultimately control our elections. Many experts have already stated that electronic voting will always be subject to fraud and manipulation. More importantly, the usage of the machines has been called a violation of Articles I and II in the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act.

In an article written by Landes, Lynn states some important facts:


When machines are in the voting booth, three violations of federal law take place:

inability to observe if voting machines properly register votes

inability to observe if voting machines properly count votes

inability to enforce the Voting Rights Act, because of the inability to observe if voting machines are properly registering or counting votes


I don’t think we will have a moments peace in knowing our vote has been tabulated correctly with these machines in use.

And, by using electronic voting, it essentially means that we will then have to RECOUNT every election, especially if we question the results, versus just eliminating electronic voting in the first place. By simply returning to the paper ballot and hand count, we have returned to the safest and least error ridden method. Moreover, it is Democracy in action.

Another important thing I have learned is that in order to implement and full-fill the qualifications required for a legitimate election, according to the Voting Rights Act, an election must be fully monitored from beginning to end, in other words it requires PUBLIC OBSERVANCE AND INSPECTION all the way through, which of course is the entire problem with the computers, in inevitably can never be solved!

In other words, electronic machines immediately violate the most important element in the election process.

In addition, as long as we have these electronic machines, Private Companies will remain in control of our vote, our data, and ultimately our Democracy.

These companies are also, as we speak, working to install electronic voting machines in other countries. This seems to return us back to that ever present potentially emerging threat of neo-imperialism.

I have to say I have wondered, so how do we do this? We already have the computers.

That’s right, we do and we SHOULDN'T.

Many of our leaders bear much of the responsibility for not taking the necessary time and consideration to look at what this bill actually means for our Democracy and the protection of our vote, just like they didn’t do in fully considering the ramifications of the War Resolution.

If they do not READ the legislation they are passing, and thoroughly grasp the meaning of the legislation they are signing into law, then they are putting our elections and thus, our National Security at risk in both of these instances.

Also keep in mind that private companies owning our data and our machines could also potentially come under foreign influence. The consequences of this electronic privatized process are pretty endless.

We have watched the past three years as Republicans have passed and enacted some of the most arrogant, entitled pieces of legislation imaginable. We have watched many of them shock and amaze America by walking roughshod over so many of our rights, and many of our Democratic leaders have allowed it and even supported it.

Our nation does not need any more exploitation of our Democracy, it has been exploited enough.

Its time to work to repeal HAVA, because it is NOT the Help America Vote Act, it threatens our Democracy and the legitimacy of our vote.

Until we return to a paper ballot and to hand counts implemented by counties, and until we have removed these machines from our election process, we will continue to be accepting "wooden nickles" and have taken one step further away from protecting our vote and our elections.

So if you made it this far in reading, I welcome thoughts and suggestions.

Here's the operative section from HAVA -- 301(a)(2):

2) Audit capacity.--
(A) In general.--The voting system shall produce a
record with an audit capacity for such system.
(B) Manual audit capacity.--
(i) The voting system shall produce a
permanent paper record with a manual audit
capacity for such system.
(ii) The voting system shall provide the voter
with an opportunity to change the ballot or
correct any error before the permanent paper
record is produced.
(iii) The paper record produced under
subparagraph (A) shall be available as an official
record for any recount conducted with respect to
any election in which the system is used.





The link for HAVA: http://fecweb1.fec.gov/hava/law_ext.txt
(Section 3 is the guts, Sections 1 and 4 have interesting things.)

Here's a superb analysis on the subject by someone who ought to know: http://fecweb1.fec.gov/hava/law_ext.txt

Here's another provision from HAVA, which all those in states where HAVA has been used should be aware of and inquire about:

Section 402:

SEC. 402. <<NOTE: 42 USC 15512.>> ESTABLISHMENT OF STATE-BASED
ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT PROCEDURES TO REMEDY GRIEVANCES.

(a) Establishment of State-Based Administrative Complaint Procedures
To Remedy Grievances.--
(1) Establishment of procedures as condition of receiving
funds.--If a State receives any payment under a program under
this Act, the State shall be required to establish and maintain
## State-based administrative complaint procedures which meet the
requirements of paragraph (2).
(2) Requirements for procedures.--The requirements of this
paragraph are as follows:
(A) The procedures shall be uniform and
nondiscriminatory.

(B) Under the procedures, any person who believes
that there is a violation of any provision of title III
(including a violation which has occurred, is occurring,
or is about to occur) may file a complaint.
(C) Any complaint filed under the procedures shall
be in writing and notarized, and signed and sworn by the
person filing the complaint.
(D) The State may consolidate complaints filed under
subparagraph (B).
(E) At the request of the complainant, there shall
be a hearing on the record.
(F) If, under the procedures, the State determines
that there is a violation of any provision of title III,
the State shall provide the appropriate remedy.
(G) If, under the procedures, the State determines
that there is no violation, the State shall dismiss the
complaint and publish the results of the procedures.
(H) <<NOTE: Deadline.>> The State shall make a
final determination with respect to a complaint prior to
the expiration of the 90-day period which begins on the
date the complaint is filed, unless the complainant
consents to a longer period for making such a
determination.
(I) <<NOTE: Deadline.>> If the State fails to meet
the deadline applicable under subparagraph (H), the
complaint shall be resolved within 60 days under
alternative dispute resolution procedures established
for purposes of this section. <<NOTE: Records.>> The
record and other materials from any proceedings
conducted under the complaint procedures established
under this section shall be made available for use under
the alternative dispute resolution procedures.

(and what I believe to be Lynn Landes position) is that an election must employ full public observance from the beginning to the end.

Seems to me that right there is the issue.

It would in my opinion, (which is not a professional one), render electronic voting as being an illegitimate, (illegal?) procedure of implementation for maintaining fair election standards.

If you can't observe how the ballots are processed and tabulated, then how can it be a legitimate election? In addition, if the data can be manipulated, then we will never know if the results are in fact valid.

...whom I alerted you to earlier, discussed the repeal of HAVA on Saturday. This woman is amazing, and I believe she can help us on this.

She knows exactly how serious this is, and was excited to see a room full of people who felt the same way.

Glad to know there are some leaders who are as concerned as we are.

Can you give a quick summary of what she talked about?

...I'll post a review the entire meeting.

But she connected who owns what, who is connected to who, who is on Ohio's board for approving the machines, and they ALL had an (R) next to their name.

Another important thing I have learned is that in order to implement and full-fill the qualifications required for a legitimate election, according to the Voting Rights Act, an election must be fully monitored from beginning to end, in other words it requires PUBLIC OBSERVANCE AND INSPECTION all the way through,

Can you give me a link or text of the VRA that supports your statement here? This would be very good if electronic voting can be shown to be essentially against the law.

and came to these conclusions after reading some of Landes's work. Her website is ecotalk.org. That is probably the best place to begin.