Dear @RoyBlunt and Senate Rules Committee Members: DO NOT use the withdrawal of support of the Secure Elections Act by one or more senators as an excuse to push through the current version of the Act, which you unacceptably WATERED DOWN, or something even more meaningless. 1/
IT election experts agree that electronic tallies cannot be trusted without, at a minimum, meaningful manual audits and a secure chain of custody between election night and the audit.…;… 2/
Meanwhile, the following states require no manual audits whatsoever to confirm the legitimacy of electronic tallies:


New Hampshire
New Jersey
North Dakota
South Carolina
South Dakota

5/ Independent election experts say that just two states (Colorado & New Mexico) conduct post-election manual audits that are sufficiently robust to detect hacking.…
6/ Meanwhile, elected officials continue spreading the MYTH that electronic tallies can't be altered via the internet because the voting machines themselves don't connect to the internet.
7/ Another example of this dangerous spreading of election security myths:
9/ Vendors like ES&S spread the myth too.
10/ Meanwhile, counties throughout the US are buying touchscreen barcode balloting markers like the ES&S ExpressVote, even though touchscreens have all sorts of known problems, many of which came to fruition during the recent Kansas primary elections.
11/ Enough is enough. Not only must you re-schedule a hearing on the Secure Elections Act, you must amend the Act to make it STRONGER, not weaker.
12/ Specifically, you must amend the Act to require that states (1) give voters the option to mark their ballots by hand; and (2) conduct Risk Limiting Audits (the only type of manual audit endorsed by @commoncause, @lwv, and @verfiedvoting) for every federal race.
13/ Senator Ron Wyden's #PAVEAct already has these provisions and is endorsed by @BrennanCenter among a growing list of others. So another option would be to take up that bill instead and PASS IT.
14/ Either way, you must pass a bill that includes (at a minimum) these two requirements or we will vote you out in November.
15/ P.S. We are still waiting for you to ask ES&S (44% US election equipment) where it installed that remote access software. Yes, we are following this too. Do. Your. Job.
16/ PPS. If (as has been reported) state election officials have lobbied AGAINST robust manual audits, those individuals must be identified so they too can be held accountable at the ballot box.
17/ We demand #ElectionTransparency, including as to the negotiation of election-security legislation.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with ✍🏻 📢 ✍🏻 📢 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jennycohn1

Jan 13, 2019
Study shows that people of all political persuasions are willing to modify their beliefs based on corrective info from reliable sources, but “subjects ‘re-believed’ the false info when retested a week later.” 1/…
2/ The author of the article says It may help to warn people in advance that they are likely to forget the correction bc “this helps them mentally tag the bogus information as false.”
3/ It’s also “important that the corrective information be repeated as frequently, and with even greater clarity, than the myth.”
Read 6 tweets
Oct 9, 2018
I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings but elections have been electronically suspect starting long before the Trump/Russia scandal. This article is lulling folks into a false sense of security, which is dangerous. Domestic hackers & insiders were always an equal threat. 1/
Read 11 tweets
Oct 9, 2018
I agree, tho not enuf time (and 0 political will) to do this in Nov. Wish it were different. For now I hope to stop states from doubling up on electronics w/ touchscreen ballot markers. Using electronics to count votes is bad enuf. Having them mark our ballots too is nuts. 1/
Nuts except for those who are unable to hand mark their ballots. Once you have hand marked paper ballots they can be either scanned or hand counted (my preference) or both. 2/
Any time u put a machine between the voter and the paper record of voter intent there is an opportunity for programming mischief. Here is just the latest example.: 3/
Read 8 tweets
Oct 8, 2018
I’m hoping some of the cyber experts who signed the letter about the risks of using cellular modems to transfer election results can answer this question. Thx! @philipbstark @SEGreenhalgh @rad_atl @jhalderm
P. 79 describes the modem…
Seeing as no one has answered yet, I will say that even if the cellular modems CAN be configured to bypass the internet, we should not have to blindly trust that vendors or whoever else is hired to set them up will do that. 1/
Read 4 tweets
Oct 8, 2018
Kathy Rogers, the face & voice of @ESSVote, which has installed CELLULAR MODEMS in tabulators in WI & FL, is cozying up to @DHSgov which refuses to advise states to remove the modems despite a letter from 30 cyber experts & EI groups stating it should do so. #CorruptElections 1/
Here’s the letter.… 2/
Read 16 tweets
Oct 8, 2018
The notion that cellular modems affect only “unofficial” results is bogus bc, among other reasons, in certain jurisdictions, unofficial results become the official results once added to absentees & provisionals—sometimes w/o ever comparing them to the precinct results tapes! 1/
And Wisconsin doesn’t even require that counties publicly post the results tapes so that the public itself can make this comparison! (I don’t know about Florida, Michigan, & Illinois.) 2/
Thus, we must simply trust that someone trustworthy is conducting this due diligence. In Johnson County, Kansas, the County acknowledged that it does NOT conduct this basic due diligence. 3/
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!