Could we get voting reform ordered by a court?

[iconoclastNYC]

You know how some court cases regarding public financing of public schools have resulted in the state legislature being ordered to draft legislation rectifying the unconstitutional (state) public financing schemes?

Could we get court-ordered election reform to ensure a fair and verfiable election and vote count? Maybe in the Democratic states first and then federalize it?

[PurgedVoter]

1. Neat Idea!

If this were made as a case in an area were the votes were clearly messed up. A group of voters could then petition for a fully verifiable vote as a right. This would make for an interesting case.

[kster]

4. KICK.NT

[Bill Bored]

2. Read the new law in NY!

http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A08969&sh=t

If you contest an election in court, or even with the Board of Elections, you can have all voter-verified paper records manually counted:

28 S 16-113. AUDIT OF VOTER VERIFIABLE RECORDS. THE SUPREME COURT, BY A
29 JUSTICE WITHIN THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT, OR THE COUNTY COURT, BY A COUNTY
30 JUDGE WITHIN HIS OR HER COUNTY, BY ANY CANDIDATE OR HIS OR HER AGENT,
31 MAY DIRECT A MANUAL AUDIT OF THE VOTER VERIFIABLE AUDIT RECORDS APPLICA-
32 BLE TO ANY CANDIDATE RUNNING FOR OFFICE WITHIN SUCH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OR
33 COUNTY WHERE (1) THE UNIFORM STATEWIDE STANDARD PROMULGATED BY REGU-
34 LATION BY THE STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION THREE OF
35 SECTION 9-211 OF THIS CHAPTER WITH RESPECT TO DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN
36 MANUAL AUDIT TALLIES AND VOTING MACHINES OR SYSTEMS TALLIES REQUIRES A
37 FURTHER VOTER VERIFIABLE RECORD AUDIT OF ADDITIONAL VOTING MACHINES OR
38 SYSTEMS OR ALL VOTING MACHINES OR SYSTEMS APPLICABLE TO SUCH ELECTION,
39 OR (2) WHERE EVIDENCE PRESENTED TO THE COURT OTHERWISE INDICATES THAT
40 THERE IS A LIKELIHOOD OF A MATERIAL DISCREPANCY BETWEEN SUCH MANUAL
41 AUDIT TALLY AND SUCH VOTING MACHINE OR SYSTEM TALLY WHICH CREATES A
42 SUBSTANTIAL POSSIBILITY THAT THE WINNER OF THE ELECTION AS REFLECTED IN
43 THE VOTING MACHINE OR SYSTEM TALLY COULD CHANGE IF A VOTER VERIFIABLE
44 RECORD AUDIT OF ADDITIONAL VOTING MACHINES OR SYSTEMS OR OF ALL VOTING
45 MACHINES OR SYSTEMS APPLICABLE TO SUCH ELECTION WERE CONDUCTED.

As far as the machines themselves, if the vendor wants to do business in the state, they must:

WAIVE ALL RIGHTS OF THE VENDOR OR
40 MANUFACTURER TO ASSERT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OR TRADE SECRET RIGHTS IN
41 ANY COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION HEARING A CHALLENGE TO THE RESULTS
42 OF ANY ELECTION AND REQUESTING THAT PROGRAMMING SOURCE CODING, FIRMWARE,
43 AND SOFTWARE AS WELL AS VOTING MACHINES OR SYSTEMS BE TESTED BY INDE-
44 PENDENT EXPERTS UNDER COURT SUPERVISION AND AT THE CONCLUSION OF SUCH
45 PROCEEDING SHALL BE SEALED.

Now, the question is how do we use this law and when should we use it?

Can we apply it to ALL elections, random elections, close elections, what? Can we get the CANDIDATES to go along with it? Would John Kerry use this law if it existed in OH, FL, IA, NM, or NV in 2004?

When would we be satisfied that the system worked properly?

I'm proud of this law, with all its flaws, and proud to be a New Yorker because at least in this state, we have the POTENTIAL to get to the TRUTH of our elections. We have the tools. What we need now are some carpenters!

[kster]

3. If you have

Paper Ballots and you hand count the ballots, you wouldn't need all these laws,lawyer and computer scientist just to get a recount. If a candidate wants a recount you recount the ballots, until every one is happy.

The people I've talked to Dem, Rep they really don't give a shit how the ballots get counted, its only the Neocons and the voting mchine companies that seem to care.

The Neocons and the voting machine companies are the only ones that want us to have a team of lawyers just to fight for a recount and then a team of computers scientist just to be able to do the damn recount.

Remember family,freinds and neighbors Dem or Rep DO NOT CARE how the votes get counted. I have talked to many about it.

[Bill Bored]

5. see post #2

That's basically what the law says.

You first go to the BOE, then the courts.

You don't need to see the s/w if you hand count all the VVPATs or VVPBs. You do have to convince either the BoE or a judge that they need to be counted though. Since the law only requires a 3% audit, how hard would THAT be????

I think we both agree it's up to the CANDIDATES and their ELECTION LAWYERS to USE THE LAW. This is crucial!!!

I'm surprised at how few comments there are on this thread so far. Once we do away with paperless e-voting in all states, what's the next step? Is anyone thinking about this besides the few posters here and a few NY legislators?

I'm wondering what we as New Yorkers should do next too. We've got a reasonably good law on the books now, but is it enough and how will it be used by the actual candidates? What will the BoE regs look like? How do we avoid another Ohio or Florida? Maybe in NY, it will be the Republicans who will go to court over the machines! Who knows?

I will say it was the Dems who fought for the above recount law and good for them! But even the Repukes here had the vendors give up their trade secret bull shit in the event of a contest of election. So they apparently don't trust these machines very much either. Good for them too!

But of course, we're talking about NY Repukes which are almost tantamount to Democrats or Greens anywhere else -- except that they LOVE their death penalty! As long as it applies to Rove and Libby for committing Treason, that's OK I guess. That's the law you know, but I digress.

[FogerRox]

6. using the law against the repubs is a great

way of beating them at their own game--
Currently HAVA can used to decertify voting equipment in states that lack decent election law such as NJs title 19.

See here -
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=385179&mesg_id=385179