Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org
HR-811/Microsoft-811 may be going to the floor for a vote sometime this week. Maybe not. Does it all really matter though? The bill will almost definitely get a majority of the votes, though it may be closer than some have thought. Then what? Then comes the Senate. The 811-clone, Sen Nelson’s bill, is still just sitting in a holding pattern and S-1487, Senator Feinstein’s destructive bill, is waiting on hearings before it is finalized, if it gets that far. Then what? It seems with the Senate, bills don’t get voted out of committee without having at least 60 votes. That’s to ensure they are filibuster-proof. A source in the Senate Admin Committee (Feinstein’s committee) has said that the minority has already said that no election-related legislation will go to the floor this session. Can deals be made? Sure. Anything can happen. I’m just not holding my breath. Today was supposed to be the court hearing in New Jersey to decide what actions would need to be taken regarding vvpat printers. As of press time there have been no reports from New Jersey….
State board suggests election judges need better training LINK
State would have to replace new touch-screen machines LINK
**”Daily Voting News” is meant as a comprehensive listing of reports each day concerning issues related to election and voting news around the country regardless of quality or political slant. Therefore, items listed in “Daily Voting News” may not reflect the opinions of VotersUnite.Org or BradBlog.Com**
NAtional: Will House Leaders Duck Debate on Electronic Voting Compromise? LINK
“kdopp” says in the comments for that article that “HR811 does, in its effect get rid of DRE machines by 2012. To understand why the bill does this, read these two very short explanations: http://electionmathematics.org/VoteYesHR811.pdf and “Analysis of… (HR811)” posted at http://electionarchive.org
Funny thing is… neither link actually bothers to explain why Holt’s Fiasco gets rid of DRE’s in 2012.
Of course that’s not very surprising since the bill does no such thing.
John, you said:
Not exactly. There have been about 50 filibusters by the republicans so far in the 110th Senate this year.
All that is required to get a bill out of committee is the chair calling for a committee vote, and thereafter a majority vote of that committee. It is then and there out of committee.
And you said:
Is it fair for me to say that I pointed this out months ago? As I have said all along, the EVM vendors own the republicans in congress, and it is the republicans who own the EVM companies.
And they have said clearly, since the report sending HR 811 out of committee, that no bill which outlaws the Ken Blackwell and Katherine Harris technique, that exposes EVM source code to public scrutiny, that requires a paper ballot, and that forbids network traffic via EVMs is going to get past the senate filibuster.
The EI movement is divided against itself and is thereby powerless as it condemns congress for exactly the same thing. Which is hypocrisy.
This is not because we have differing opinions, its just that we know the same things at different times. 🙂 Yep, some of us know it months in advance for some reason, and others know it only in the last moment for another reason.
The following posts show some reasons why HR 811 and its Senate version S. 559 will be filibustered by the republicans in the Senate:
(Holt HR 811 RH page 21, lines 16-23 thru page 22, line 7, emphasis mine).
Doesn’t that mean we do not have to use the EVM, and instead must be allowed to cast a paper ballot vote instead? Notice further:
(id at page 22, lines 8-18, emphasis mine). It seems to me that it could be argued that anyone can cast a paper ballot under Holt HR 811 RH, and furthermore, that the paper ballot must be counted.
Nelson’s related bill (S. 559) and Holt’s bill (HR 811 IH) has some more good text:
(S. 559, page 12, lines 2-14, HR 811 IH, page 12, lines 2-14).
Is anybody here opposed to that principle? If so don’t worry, be happy, it will be filibustered.
Nelson’s S. 559 IS, Holt’s HR 811 IH, and Holt’s HR 811 RH have some more good text:
(S 559 IS, page 12, lines 16-24; Holt HR 811 IH, page 13, lines 11-19; Holt HR 811 RH, page 17, lines 18-25 thru page 18, line 6).
Is anybody here opposed to that principle? If so don’t worry, be happy, it will be filibustered.
Nelson’s S. 559 IS and Holt’s HR 811 IH and HR 811 RH have some other good text:
(S 559 IS, page 13, lines 12-18; Holt HR 811 IH, page 14, lines 6-12; Holt HR 811 RH, page 18, lines 17-24).
Is anybody here opposed to that principle? If so don’t worry, be happy, it will be filibustered.
Dredd #2
According to Senate Admin Comm staff no election bill will go out of that committee without being filibuster proof. They have to know that they have at least 60 votes before they will hear it in committee.
That may change in the future. The Dems may decide that they want the bill to require a cloture vote on the floor just so they can show the Reps as being against election reform. They may get an agreement that no filibuster will be filed against the bill.
But, for now, I was told that no election reform bill will leave that committee unless it has a guarantee of 60 votes when it goes to the floor.
John #7
Thanks for the info. With over 50 filibusters by the republicans already this year, perhaps the democratic chairs on the committees have had enough obstruction.
I remember the mantra “Just let us have an up or down floor vote” the republicans chanted in the 109th when the dems did a filibuster once or twice.
“To some, the text of a bill is where the truth lies” 🙂 Dredd
John #7
After thinking over it a bit more … sorry … I must say that a de facto filibuster is technically keeping the bills in committee, even as we speak, if your information is correct.
Thus my prediction that the republicans would filibuster is at this point de facto accurate.