Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

The SAFE act

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The SAFE act

    I see a lot of discussion on here (and outside here) about the trustworthiness of the election results. In particular there are concerns about the use of electronic voting machines. The House passed the SAFE act a year and a half ago but it was never taken up by the Senate.

    Here's the executive summary of the bill. I've highlighted some items I think are particularly important.


    This bill addresses election security through grant programs and requirements for voting systems and paper ballots.

    The bill establishes requirements for voting systems, including that systems (1) use individual, durable, voter-verified paper ballots; (2) make a voter's marked ballot available for inspection and verification by the voter before the vote is cast; (3) ensure that individuals with disabilities are given an equivalent opportunity to vote, including with privacy and independence, in a manner that produces a voter-verified paper ballot; (4) be manufactured in the United States; and (5) meet specified cybersecurity requirements, including the prohibition of the connection of a voting system to the internet.

    The National Science Foundation must award grants to study, test, and develop accessible voter-verified paper ballot voting and best practices to enhance the accessibility of such voting for individuals with disabilities, for voters whose primary language is not English, and for voters with difficulties in literacy.

    The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) must award grants to states to replace certain voting systems, carry out voting system security improvements, and implement and model best practices for ballot design, ballot instructions, and the testing of ballots.

    States must carry out postelection risk-limiting audits for all federal elections, funded by the EAC.

    States may use elections requirements payments from the EAC to carry out activities related to election security.

    The EAC must provide for the testing of voting system hardware and software and decertify such technology that does not meet guidelines.


    Democrats wanted to harden our elections a long time ago. Any complaints that we can't be sure who won this election should be focused directly on the Senate and Mitch McConnell. Why do you think he didn't take up this bill or offer his own version?

  • #2
    Without reading the Safe Act in its entirety, I'd say the idea of paper ballots and manual counting has proven itself to be the only way to go - at this time (no one knows what safeguards will be available or developed in the future).

    The Dominion machines are a disgrace. Our country and our elections have really been infiltrated.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post
      I see a lot of discussion on here (and outside here) about the trustworthiness of the election results. In particular there are concerns about the use of electronic voting machines. The House passed the SAFE act a year and a half ago but it was never taken up by the Senate.

      Here's the executive summary of the bill. I've highlighted some items I think are particularly important.


      This bill addresses election security through grant programs and requirements for voting systems and paper ballots.

      The bill establishes requirements for voting systems, including that systems (1) use individual, durable, voter-verified paper ballots; (2) make a voter's marked ballot available for inspection and verification by the voter before the vote is cast; (3) ensure that individuals with disabilities are given an equivalent opportunity to vote, including with privacy and independence, in a manner that produces a voter-verified paper ballot; (4) be manufactured in the United States; and (5) meet specified cybersecurity requirements, including the prohibition of the connection of a voting system to the internet.

      The National Science Foundation must award grants to study, test, and develop accessible voter-verified paper ballot voting and best practices to enhance the accessibility of such voting for individuals with disabilities, for voters whose primary language is not English, and for voters with difficulties in literacy.

      The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) must award grants to states to replace certain voting systems, carry out voting system security improvements, and implement and model best practices for ballot design, ballot instructions, and the testing of ballots.

      States must carry out postelection risk-limiting audits for all federal elections, funded by the EAC.

      States may use elections requirements payments from the EAC to carry out activities related to election security.

      The EAC must provide for the testing of voting system hardware and software and decertify such technology that does not meet guidelines.


      Democrats wanted to harden our elections a long time ago. Any complaints that we can't be sure who won this election should be focused directly on the Senate and Mitch McConnell. Why do you think he didn't take up this bill or offer his own version?
      Haha. It was the Dems who pushed for this act. It was the Dems who are doing the (most blatant) corruption. This is like the California Governor forcing social distancing but then violating everything for a birthday party.

      There was a Republican alternative bill that was not even brought to a vote.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post

        Haha. It was the Dems who pushed for this act. It was the Dems who are doing the (most blatant) corruption. This is like the California Governor forcing social distancing but then violating everything for a birthday party.

        There was a Republican alternative bill that was not even brought to a vote.
        I'm so confused, who am I to blame now?

        I guess because the Democrats wanted nothing to do with unity, nor letting Trump do his job, I will just blame it on the liberals who are fraudulent.

        Did we figure out how granny can get her impossible to get voter ID?

        Those things don't just fall out of the sky ya know.

        It would cause someone to do something trivial, and we all know people of color have trouble doing trivial things, that's what the liberal handlers tell us.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Ronson View Post
          Without reading the Safe Act in its entirety, I'd say the idea of paper ballots and manual counting has proven itself to be the only way to go - at this time (no one knows what safeguards will be available or developed in the future).

          The Dominion machines are a disgrace. Our country and our elections have really been infiltrated.
          If that's how you feel about Dominion just wait until you hear about ES&S.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post

            Haha. It was the Dems who pushed for this act. It was the Dems who are doing the (most blatant) corruption. This is like the California Governor forcing social distancing but then violating everything for a birthday party.

            There was a Republican alternative bill that was not even brought to a vote.
            Why didn't McConnell bring that bill to a vote?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post

              Why didn't McConnell bring that bill to a vote?
              The Republican promoted bill did not even get to a vote in the House of Representatives. So Mitch would have no say on its progress.

              Source: https://republicans-cha.house.gov/press-release/republican-election-security-proposal-address-mueller-report-concerns

              WASHINGTON - Committee on House Administration Ranking Member Rodney Davis (IL-13) released the following statement on the majority's partisan election security bill, H.R. 2722: the SAFE Act, and its failure to address the election security concerns from the Mueller Report. The Election Security Assistance Act, H.R. 3412, introduced by Committee on House Administration Republicans addresses cybersecurity concerns while standing a chance of becoming law.

              "'The bill that Democrats are rushing through the House does not address the serious security concerns laid out in the Mueller Report. The Former Special Counsel’s report identifies two areas of attack against our election infrastructure: the first was against voter data in the voter registration systems across 21 states, and the second was a misinformation campaign through social media. H.R. 2722 does not address either of these concerns, but our bill does," said Ranking Member Davis.

              "An obvious solution to cyber threats should be to provide flexible grants and resources that allow states to decide how to use their funds and resources to upgrade their cybersecurity. Instead, the Democrats' bill focuses on forcing states to restructure their election systems through federal mandates and ignores states' rights to choose the election system that best fits their unique needs. In order to protect our election system, we need to assist states in upgrading their election and cyber security efforts, as we do in H.R. 3412, the Election Security Assistance Act."

              © Copyright Original Source



              Anyhow it seems the bill you mentioned was not even doing anything in an immediate sense. It was a long term plan.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post

                The Republican promoted bill did not even get to a vote in the House of Representatives. So Mitch would have no say on its progress.

                Source: https://republicans-cha.house.gov/press-release/republican-election-security-proposal-address-mueller-report-concerns

                WASHINGTON - Committee on House Administration Ranking Member Rodney Davis (IL-13) released the following statement on the majority's partisan election security bill, H.R. 2722: the SAFE Act, and its failure to address the election security concerns from the Mueller Report. The Election Security Assistance Act, H.R. 3412, introduced by Committee on House Administration Republicans addresses cybersecurity concerns while standing a chance of becoming law.

                "'The bill that Democrats are rushing through the House does not address the serious security concerns laid out in the Mueller Report. The Former Special Counsel’s report identifies two areas of attack against our election infrastructure: the first was against voter data in the voter registration systems across 21 states, and the second was a misinformation campaign through social media. H.R. 2722 does not address either of these concerns, but our bill does," said Ranking Member Davis.

                "An obvious solution to cyber threats should be to provide flexible grants and resources that allow states to decide how to use their funds and resources to upgrade their cybersecurity. Instead, the Democrats' bill focuses on forcing states to restructure their election systems through federal mandates and ignores states' rights to choose the election system that best fits their unique needs. In order to protect our election system, we need to assist states in upgrading their election and cyber security efforts, as we do in H.R. 3412, the Election Security Assistance Act."

                © Copyright Original Source



                Anyhow it seems the bill you mentioned was not even doing anything in an immediate sense. It was a long term plan.
                McConnell could have passed the Republican bill and sent it over to the House. Why didn't he do that?

                If the SAFE act didn't go far enough that's fine. It still could have been taken up by the Senate with additional things added in.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Ronson View Post
                  Without reading the Safe Act in its entirety, I'd say the idea of paper ballots and manual counting has proven itself to be the only way to go - at this time (no one knows what safeguards will be available or developed in the future).

                  The Dominion machines are a disgrace. Our country and our elections have really been infiltrated.
                  Agreed. But even then, paper ballots are only as reliable as the counters and the willingness of those counting to examine and verify the signatures, something many of these states are not seeming to bother with.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

                    Agreed. But even then, paper ballots are only as reliable as the counters and the willingness of those counting to examine and verify the signatures, something many of these states are not seeming to bother with.
                    Agreed.

                    stalin.jpg

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Ronson View Post
                      Without reading the Safe Act in its entirety, I'd say the idea of paper ballots and manual counting has proven itself to be the only way to go - at this time (no one knows what safeguards will be available or developed in the future).

                      The Dominion machines are a disgrace. Our country and our elections have really been infiltrated.
                      And as soon as the Trumpites come up with some actual evidence of that, they'll have something.
                      America - too good to let the conservatives drag it back to 1950.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

                        Agreed. But even then, paper ballots are only as reliable as the counters and the willingness of those counting to examine and verify the signatures, something many of these states are not seeming to bother with.
                        Where are signatures not being verified? Why aren't Trump's lawyers not suing over that issue instead of the cases they've brought that they've lost 32 out of 34 times and which, by their own admission, are not over claims of fraud?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Ronson View Post

                          Agreed.

                          stalin.jpg
                          https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...about-electio/

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Electric Skeptic View Post
                            And as soon as the Trumpites come up with some actual evidence of that, they'll have something.
                            Sorry, CNN censored that evidence.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              https://www.npr.org/2012/01/10/14497...ing-under-fire

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by rogue06, Today, 09:13 AM
                              9 responses
                              72 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 09:32 AM
                              18 responses
                              121 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Mountain Man  
                              Started by mossrose, 11-28-2020, 03:05 PM
                              26 responses
                              248 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Juvenal
                              by Juvenal
                               
                              Started by CivilDiscourse, 11-28-2020, 01:53 PM
                              26 responses
                              135 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by Starlight, 11-27-2020, 11:51 PM
                              4 responses
                              44 views
                              2 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Working...
                              X