HAVA: Two sides – “Whats wrong with the Holt Bill”
All things are not as they seem. This is a worthwhile resource. After all, voting and free, fair, and transparent elections are essential to any real reform.What's wrong with the Holt Bill? Part 3http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_nancy_to_060416_what_s_wrong_with_th.htmby N. Tobi, April 16, 2006
The movement of informed grassroots activists against the Holt bill is growing each day. This bill, like the Help America Vote Act, was borne from the grassroots but now seems to have been hijacked by special interests. Since the 2000 election, grassroots activists have been struggling to bring about meaningful reforms to ensure the integrity of our elections. Passion at the grassroots level has been repeatedly distorted once it hits Congress. Witness the so-called "Help America Vote Act" (HAVA). Ostensibly passed at the behest of election reform activists, the Act is one of the more heinous examples of Capital Corruption and lobbyist influence in contemporary politics. Rather than helping America Vote, HAVA has brought unprecedented chaos into America's elections, at an obscene cost to the country in dollars and democracy.
Now Congress is ready to do it again, once again with the backing and blessing of large election reform groups. Rather than being a simple piece of legislation responding to grassroots demands for verifiable paper ballots, HR550 has grown into another endorsement for the privatization of elections and the creation of a federalized launch into electoral chaos at the federal, state, and even the local level.
<SNIP>
Proponents of the bill need to at least address the following concerns and make revisions to the bill in order to gain widespread grassroots support:
1. The very real possibility that the EAC will become regulatory, either through de facto litigation outcomes, or in much the same way the FEC did: with a single line of text inserted into a completely unrelated congressional act. It will then become an executive agency, reporting to the executive branch of government.
2. The question of crony appointments creating power over the nation's election systems, as shown in GW Bush's recent recess FEC appointment, a stunning example of how a president can use crony appointments to control election-related issues without the benefit of checks and balances for the American people.
3. The concerns and questions that have already been raised by organizations such as ACCURATE, EPIC, and other ordinary citizens like myself, about the composition of the EAC and the non-transparent manner in which the EAC conducts itself and its decision making process.
4. The fact that the bill would enable the institution of yet another privatized election industry in the form of contracted recount firms.
5. The possible subversion -- through assent of potentially corrupt local officials -- and constitutional conflict with federal oversight of state and local elections.
6. The question of how the parameters for audit are exactly defined, given ambiguous language such as shown in the bolded section: "IN GENERAL.—The Election Assistance Commission shall conduct random, unannounced, hand counts of the voter-verified records required to be produced and preserved pursuant to section 301(a)(2) of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (as amended by section 2) for each general election for Federal office (and, at the option of the State or jurisdiction involved, of elections for State and local office held at the same time as such an election for Federal office) in at least 2 percent of the precincts (or equivalent locations) in each State.
7. The absence of any form of real best management practices and guidelines for conducting hand counts that would account for the various and varied precincts in the nation, and enable orderly procedures for the mandated recounts.
8. The possibility of countless unintended consequences stemming from federal audits, such as chaotic hand count management, or litigation resulting in court-appointed rather than elected officials, as we saw in 2000.
9. The fact that election system traditions, customs, and configurations vary from locale to locale, and a one-size-fits-all imperative from above - the Federal level - will cause chaos. We have seen this with campaign finance and the FEC, with the NVRA, and more recently with HAVA.