Thread by @jennycohn1

I hope the Freedom to Vote Act passes. But I am disappointed by its election security provisions. It does not require rigorous official audits (or any audits) until 2024 when only ONE race need be audited. It also allows officials to continue using wireless modems in 2022. 😥 1/

On the bright side, it DOES require that all in person voters have the option to mark their ballots by hand. This provision did not come from nowhere. It is the result of hard work, mostly by election transparency advocates who dragged … 2/

… concerns with new touchscreens systems (ballot marking devices) into the light. 3/

As to the modems, I am beyond annoyed. They are dangerous. Pretty much all respected experts agree that they shld not only NOT BE USED, but also physically removed. Even if officials complained that removal is too hard b4 2022, why continue using them? 4/

This is a video that @KateRosenberg4 and I made before the 2020 election. The modems are a serious election security risk? Who is it that insists on using them? 5/

The election-security section of the Freedom to Vote Act is difficult to follow. There is not much reporting on these details bc the GOP only cares about lying about 2020 (not securing future elections) and most Ds now assume election-security is fine just bc Biden won. 6/

If you think I’ve misconstrued these provisions, please let me know. Thanks. 7/

.@JimSoper

Letter signed by many respected election security experts in September 2020, explaining that the modems connect ballot scanners & receiving end systems to the internet (creating the potential for hackers to gain persistent access), & must be removed. 8/ documentcloud.org/documents/7225…

This letter was sent to state officials in Florida, Wisconsin, Michigan, and other states that modem results. It is my understanding that the advice was ignored. 9/

I support the Freedom to Vote Act bc what it DOES do is crucial. 10/

But it’s election security provisions shld be better. I suspect the thinking is that if we stop gerrymandering, dark money, & other forms of rigging, then a little hacking won’t matter. It might be true (fingers crossed), but I’m uncomfortable w/ that bet. 11/

And I think Ds missed a real opportunity here to publicly call the GOP’s bluff on audits and internet connectivity. What politician from either party in this environment wld want to say out loud that they oppose audits & are fine w/ connecting voting systems to the internet? 12/

Again, this was a missed opportunity in my opinion. Ds shld have pushed harder to secure 2022 and, if they got push back, called out the obstructionists publicly. The SAFE Act was better on security. It’s effective date was 2020. 13/

We just keep kicking the election-security can down the road. 14/

Here is the start of the provisions re: wireless modems and internet connectivity. So far so good, but… 15/

Here the bill discusses the “applicable year”4 the bans on modems (para 8) & connecting systems to the internet (para 9). It seems to say that if jurisdictions are already modeming results & feel it’s “impracticable” to stop by Jan. 2022, then they can continue until 2026... 16/

… and request an extension to 2030… Again, pls let me know if you think I have this wrong. 17/

It appears that jurisdictions don’t even have to “certify” the supposed impracticability of complying w/ the modem & internet bans in 2022 or even 2024. The certification requirement kicks in only in 2026 at which point, such certification can give them until 2030. 18/

So basically they can continue doing whatever they’re doing with modems and the internet until at least 2026 and perhaps through 2030. 19/

If I’m reading this right, the bill should, at a minimum, be amended to address the “use” of wireless modems (to transfer results) effective immediately. There is no legitimate reason that modems must be used to transfer results. Results can be driven in. 20/

Removing the modems entirely is a separate issue. I’d sure like to know who is saying they can’t be removed in a timely fashion. Presumably it’s ES&S, as Dominion’s modems are external. I don’t know about Hart. 21/

This bill’s effective date provisions are written like a Rubics cube, which makes them hard to follow much less amend w/ a simple line or two of text. But it shld be done imo. 22/

Here is the audit language in the bill. It phases in the audit requirement beginning in 2024 w/ a single race and then expanding from there. This is just sad. We need meaningful official audits for all or most races starting now. 23/

One thing I haven’t checked yet is whether the Act requires backup paper poll books on Election Day. If we don’t get this requirement passed via a federal bill, we will need to push for it at the state and local level. Ditto re: the #HandMarkedPaperBallots provision. 24/

25/

26/

27/

28/ I'm in the National Voting Rights Task Force (NVRTF) with @JimSoper and others who have analyzed these provisions more than I have. I am benefiting from their analysis, but I don't speak for the group, and I'll be curious to see what they tell me about this thread.