Thread by @jennycohn1

Here's the new For the People Act (Freedom to Vote Act). In one respect, it's better than the earlier versions in that it requires that all voters have the option to mark their ballots by hand (with a pen) AT THE POLLING PLACE. #HandMarkedPaperBallots 1/ klobuchar.senate.gov/public/_cache/…

I and others in the election-security community requested this change. (See example below). 2/

Here's the exact new language in the new bill. Credit to @TheBradBlog who originally spotted the need to make this change several years ago when similar language appeared in the #PAVEAct and #SAFEAct. 3/

This addition is a big improvement in my opinion. #HandMarkedPaperBallots 4/

Unlike the old bills (HR1 & SR1), the new bill appears to require audits as well, but I can't make heads or tails of the provisions from my computer. I'll have to print them out to figure out the effective date, whether audits must be manual, if it's all federal races, etc. 5/

By way of further explanation re: post 1, without the new language, the old language could have been construed to allow touchscreens only for all in-person voters in jurisdictions with a vote by mail option. 6/

Now, even if there is a vote by mail option, in person voters must have the option to use #HandMarkedPaperBallots (pen and paper). Jurisdictions cannot force in-person voters to use touchscreen voting machines (e.g., BMDs or DREs). 7/

It appears to me that the #HandMarkedPaperBallot option has an effective date of 2022, but again, I'm having trouble following which effective date goes where from my computer. 8/

The National Voting Rights Task Force (I’m a member) also sent a letter requesting the language change re: #HandMarkedPaperBallots . cc: @JimSoper 9/

This one change was an uphill battle. If I’m reading this right, it seems we at least got the Ds to request the right thing (although I’d prefer no touchscreens at all except for ADA use).10/

This wld also be a big deal bc, if needed, it cld pave the way for a standalone bill re: #HandMarkedPaperBallots. I’ve noticed that Congress tends to cut and paste a lot. So fingers crossed. 11/

I’ll look forward to input from others. 12/

Unfortunately, the new voting rights bill does not appear to require robust manual audits in 2022. Rather, it phases them in starting in 2024. Nor does it fund the audits. This is a huge disappointment. The screenshot below is from an email synopsis from someone I trust. 13/

To be clear, I do not oppose the bill over this omission, but WTAF?! We do not need another election where Democratic losses are not audited meaningfully or at all, while Democratic wins are subjected to perpetual fraudits. @amyklobuchar 14/

I’ve heard other parts of the bill are fantastic. I may recommend a push to move up the audit requirement to 2022. Will discuss with NVRTF and others. This is really frustrating. @JimSoper 15/

It may be that we will need a standalone audit bill, as I have long suggested. But if the phase-in audit schedule (starting in 2024) passes in the current bill, it will be difficult. 16/