HR5036, the "Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act of 2008" applies to 2008 election

[papau]

HR5036, the "Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act of 2008" which applies only to the upcoming November election.

HR5036 is currently being considered by the Technology and Innovation Subcommittee, and so the measure could possibly still be amended by that subcommittee in the U.S. House - for a few days at least.

[kster]

1. Whats the "Emergency" all about, Al Gore in 2000 said

"This is a time to respect every voter and every vote. This is a time to honor the true will of the people. So our goal must be what is right for America. There is a simple reason that Florida law and the law in many other states calls for a careful check by real people of the machine results in elections like this one. The reason? Machines can sometimes misread or fail to detect the way ballots are cast, and when there are serious doubts, checking the machine count with a careful hand count is accepted far and wide as the best way to know the true intentions of the voters".


I have to read Al Gore's words one more time from 2000, Al Gore said...

"There is a simple reason that Florida law and the law in many other states calls for a careful check by real people"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x469812

If according to Al Gore, a law to Hand Count the Paper Ballots is already in place IN MOST STATES, what the hell is Holts "Emergency" bill, going to change and or accomplish?

You say...

"HR5036, the "Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act of 2008" which applies only to the upcoming November election".

That sounds dangerously close to the SCOTUS's decision in 2000 when they stopped Americans from Hand Counting the Paper Ballots in Florida.



Q: Is there an exception in this case?
A: Yes, the Gore exception. States have no rights to have their own state elections when it can result in Gore being elected President. This decision is limited to only this situation.

Q: C'mon. The Supremes didn't really say that. You're exaggerating.
A: Nope. They held "Our consideration is limited to the present circumstances, or the problem of equal protection in election processes generally presents many complexities."


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x500215

We can keep playing along with this secret vote count scam or we can do something about it, what you choose to do is up to you, a machine count for those Americans that need to know the result quick, then a careful Hand Count for those Americans who want a slow and secure count of the ballots.

No reason Americans can't do both, if they so choose.

K&R...