Reply-To: "Kent Snyder-The Liberty Committee" <kentsnyder@thelibertycommittee.org> From: "Kent Snyder-The Liberty Committee" <kentsnyder@thelibertycommittee.org> To: "Declan McCullagh" <declan@well.com> Subject: Release: Democracy or Republic? Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 13:57:19 -0500 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
The Liberty Committee 701 W. Broad Street, Fifth Floor Falls Church, VA 22046
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Thursday, December 07, 2000 Contact: Kent Snyder, 703-241-1003 E-mail: kentsnyder@thelibertycommittee.org Web site: http://www.thelibertycommittee.org
THE UNITED STATES IS NOT A DEMOCRACY. IT IS A REPUBLIC. THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE SYSTEM SHOULD NOT BE CHANGED.
House Concurrent Resolution (H.C.R.) 443 was submitted Monday, December 4, 2000 by Representatives Ron Paul (TX), Jack Metcalf (WA), Bob Stump (AZ), and Mark Sanford (SC) expressing the sense of Congress in reaffirming the United States of America as a republic. H.C. R. 443 also reaffirms the electoral college system.
"I call upon every member of the U.S. House of Representatives to cosponsor House Concurrent Resolution 443 and ask every citizen to see that they do," stated Kent Snyder executive director of The Liberty Committee. He added, "The U.S. is a republic. Our present system of selecting a president and vice president should remain so our republic of independent and sovereign states will remain."
The Liberty Committee is a nationwide, grassroots organization of over 45,000 Americans who are determined to restore the national government of the United States to its constitutional limitations in order for liberty to prevail.
-30-
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote:
From: "Kent Snyder-The Liberty Committee" <kentsnyder@thelibertycommittee.org>
THE UNITED STATES IS NOT A DEMOCRACY. IT IS A REPUBLIC. THE ELECTORAL
A republic is a form of democracy, a representative one. ____________________________________________________________________ Before a larger group can see the virtue of an idea, a smaller group must first understand it. "Stranger Suns" George Zebrowski The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote:
From: "Kent Snyder-The Liberty Committee" <kentsnyder@thelibertycommittee.org>
THE UNITED STATES IS NOT A DEMOCRACY. IT IS A REPUBLIC. THE ELECTORAL
A republic is a form of democracy, a representative one.
No, it isn't. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "Despite almost every experience I've ever had with federal authority, I keep imagining its competence." John Perry Barlow
Hey if there's a good side of the US mis-election this year.. it is that finally there will be an attempt to improve and modernize the process. One of the technologies to improve the voting process is secure e-voting..Can anyone enlighten me as to who is working in the field.. Looks like it will be the only tech stocks that will do well in 2001 ! regards robert
Robert, With respect, you're joking, right? The current system is flawed, true, but an Internet voting system would likely suffer from far more serious security, authentication, and fraud problems. This is a recurring topic of discussion in cryptographic and computer-risks circles. Do some web searches. -Declan On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 10:23:17AM -0500, Robert Guerra wrote:
Hey if there's a good side of the US mis-election this year.. it is that finally there will be an attempt to improve and modernize the process.
One of the technologies to improve the voting process is secure e-voting..Can anyone enlighten me as to who is working in the field.. Looks like it will be the only tech stocks that will do well in 2001 !
regards
robert
Declan: I completely agree with you that internet voting isn't quite ready fom prime-time just yet. But given the current snafu I highly suspect that there will be a lot of interest in the field. Certainly, I hope one of the few things the new congress will be able to do is set-up a commission to propose new voting standards. Hopefully they will pick a standard that doesn't give rise to problems 30-40 years in the future... personally, if I had a say I'd say they should adopt the same system Canada uses. They use a 100 year old system, had few if any recounts, and managed to count all thier manual ballots in less than 72 hours. --On Sunday, December 10, 2000 11:59 AM -0500 Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> wrote:
Robert, With respect, you're joking, right?
The current system is flawed, true, but an Internet voting system would likely suffer from far more serious security, authentication, and fraud problems. This is a recurring topic of discussion in cryptographic and computer-risks circles. Do some web searches.
-Declan
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 10:23:17AM -0500, Robert Guerra wrote:
Hey if there's a good side of the US mis-election this year.. it is that finally there will be an attempt to improve and modernize the process.
One of the technologies to improve the voting process is secure e-voting..Can anyone enlighten me as to who is working in the field.. Looks like it will be the only tech stocks that will do well in 2001 !
regards
robert
At 11:58 AM -0500 12/10/00, Robert Guerra wrote:
Declan:
I completely agree with you that internet voting isn't quite ready fom prime-time just yet. But given the current snafu I highly suspect that there will be a lot of interest in the field.
Certainly, I hope one of the few things the new congress will be able to do is set-up a commission to propose new voting standards. Hopefully they will pick a standard that doesn't give rise to problems 30-40 years in the future...
personally, if I had a say I'd say they should adopt the same system Canada uses. They use a 100 year old system, had few if any recounts, and managed to count all thier manual ballots in less than 72 hours.
It wasn't a close election, was it? Didn't think so. In the U.S., when the election isn't close, the ballots are counted, and recounted, by midnight of the day of the election...maybe by mid-morning the next day. It's the _closeness_ that magnifies potential hinge points into court cases, redefinitions, and recriminations. As for "Hey, kids, let's all put on an electronic vote!," it's been discussed many times here. And elsewhere. RISKS had a major discussion of the...risks. As someone said in recentl weeks, if we really want to see elections stolen efficiently, make them electronic. No paper trail, no evidence, no chads, just pure gleaming bits. --Tim May -- (This .sig file has not been significantly changed since 1992. As the election debacle unfolds, it is time to prepare a new one. Stay tuned.)
----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Guerra" <gateway@cryptorights.org>
personally, if I had a say I'd say they should adopt the same system Canada uses. They use a 100 year old system, had few if any recounts, and managed to count all thier manual ballots in less than 72 hours.
is there any benefit to the 'canadian system' above it's lack of lawyers? in the last decade in canada, i have voted for different levels of govt via: normal X in the circle paper ballot, scantron sheet, write-the-name-in-the-blank ballot, no polling station/mail-only ballot, various absentee forms, proxy (which the fuckers did away with this year), etc. they were counted by: little old ladies with a pencil and paper; or a Brainiac-2000 computer; or possibly not at all depending on canada post and the particular election. i dont see why any of these methods are inherently better/safer/more accurate than those used in florida. i imagine we dont hear a fuss because: all positions are generally local positions and of no larger significance; the vote is often won by a large plurality and not in question; all of these legal cases would probably have died with the first prothonotary that saw them; etc. speaking of canadian elections, its too bad the canadian alliance didnt get elected and revoke the bill c-68 gun control laws, eh?
In article <001c01c062e0$5db95fc0$0100a8c0@golem>, "Me" <commerce@home.com> wrote:
is there any benefit to the 'canadian system' above it's lack of lawyers?
Having a plethora of different standards sure doesn't help.. In Canada, and other countries there is a uniform ballot across the country..something that hopefully will be introduced into the USA real soon.
i dont see why any of these methods are inherently better/safer/more accurate than those used in florida.
Counting a "X"'s I would think is easier than counting chads on punch card ballots
speaking of canadian elections, its too bad the canadian alliance didnt get elected and revoke bill c-68 g, eh?
Polls before the election were correct and the alliance didn't win. If somone wants to revoke bill c-68 they will have to wait 5 years until the next elecion. BTW. Many thanks to those of you who have replied to my earlier messages on this topic. I hope to answer you within a day or so. regards robert -- Robert Guerra <rguerra@yahoo.com>, Fax: +1(303) 484-0302 WWW Page <http://crypto.yashy.com/www> PGPKeys <http://pgp.greatvideo.com/keys/rguerra/>
At 11:17 PM -0500 12/10/00, Robert Guerra wrote:
In article <001c01c062e0$5db95fc0$0100a8c0@golem>, "Me" <commerce@home.com> wrote:
i dont see why any of these methods are inherently better/safer/more accurate than those used in florida.
Counting a "X"'s I would think is easier than counting chads on punch card ballots
Clue 1: Hollerith cards are not intended to be read by humans. Clue 2: The first computer count, the second computer count, and in some cases, the third computer count, gave substantially identical results. Clue 3: One party, seeing it was approximately 500-1000 votes behind the other party, initiated a series of diversionary measures, including folderol about butterflies and confused Jews. The diversion lasted long enough for planeloads of New York shysters to arrive. Then the focus shifted to "the will of the people must be listened to." Clue 4: Hollerith cards in banks and corporations around the world are _still _ not read by human eyeballs. --Tim May -- (This .sig file has not been significantly changed since 1992. As the election debacle unfolds, it is time to prepare a new one. Stay tuned.)
Different standards aren't necessarily bad either. Local jurisdictions have a substantial amount of leeway in ballot design in Florida, which, Democratic partisan protests notwithstanding, is probably a reasonable thing. In other areas of the law, they have the opportunity to craft laws and rules that are more suitable to their area of the country. Local control and competition among different standards set by different local communities generally is a good thing. If nothing else, it's the way the U.S. political system was set up to work. -Declan On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 11:17:15PM -0500, Robert Guerra wrote:
In article <001c01c062e0$5db95fc0$0100a8c0@golem>, "Me" <commerce@home.com> wrote:
is there any benefit to the 'canadian system' above it's lack of lawyers?
Having a plethora of different standards sure doesn't help.. In Canada, and other countries there is a uniform ballot across the country..something that hopefully will be introduced into the USA real soon.
i dont see why any of these methods are inherently better/safer/more accurate than those used in florida.
Counting a "X"'s I would think is easier than counting chads on punch card ballots
speaking of canadian elections, its too bad the canadian alliance didnt get elected and revoke bill c-68 g, eh?
Polls before the election were correct and the alliance didn't win. If somone wants to revoke bill c-68 they will have to wait 5 years until the next elecion.
BTW. Many thanks to those of you who have replied to my earlier messages on this topic. I hope to answer you within a day or so.
regards
robert -- Robert Guerra <rguerra@yahoo.com>, Fax: +1(303) 484-0302 WWW Page <http://crypto.yashy.com/www> PGPKeys <http://pgp.greatvideo.com/keys/rguerra/>
----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Guerra" <gateway@cryptorights.org>
Having a plethora of different standards sure doesn't help.. In Canada, and other countries there is a uniform ballot across the country..something that hopefully will be introduced into the USA real soon.
The reason there is a uniform ballot for all federal elections in Canada is that they are all conducted by Elections Canada. Ballots for voting at other levels of government differ greatly from the EC's and each other. What body in the US would have the authority to impose standards for Presidential ballots upon the states? And what problem would it solve?
i dont see why any of these methods are inherently better/safer/more accurate than those used in florida. Counting a "X"'s I would think is easier than counting chads on punch card ballots
for who or what? i, otoh, would think a computer would be more reliable at counting holes in punch cards than scanning for Xes. i'd bet the human would prefer the Xes, tho. as the ballots in florida were intended to be tabulated by comp, the punch card may have been a better choice.
I guess it's time once again to dig back into the little bag o tricks to destroy an accurate e-vote. Let's take the most recent election in the US, where the highest office actually hinges on the swing of less than 500 voters. Consider if at the same time we had instated a vote from your home initiative. It was publicly known that the race would be close, so activists were out in force. All it would take is 1000 strong willed people, with equally strong willed guns, standing behind terrified voters who would gladly cast their vote anyway the nice man with the big gun told them to. With public voting locations we can certify that this did not happen, with vote from home, the US has laws specifically for the privacy of what happens behind those doors, as long as it's not illegal. Through this those 1000 vote would have gone for <insert your least favorite four letter word here> and he would have won the election. In spite of the fact that 1000 felonies were committed to get him elected, the voting structure of the united states is such that those votes MUST be counted. I honestly don't care how good the voting system is. I don't care how many people actually vote their conscience. I don't care how many people were simply killed because they lived in an area that favored <insert your favorite four-letter word>. A private system is more corruptible than a public one. Joe ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Guerra" <gateway@cryptorights.org> To: <cypherpunks@cyberpass.net> Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2000 9:23 AM Subject: CDR: The US mis-election - an oportunity for e-voting..
Hey if there's a good side of the US mis-election this year.. it is that finally there will be an attempt to improve and modernize the process.
One of the technologies to improve the voting process is secure e-voting..Can anyone enlighten me as to who is working in the field.. Looks like it will be the only tech stocks that will do well in 2001 !
regards
robert
At 03:26 AM 12/10/00 -0800, petro wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote:
From: "Kent Snyder-The Liberty Committee" <kentsnyder@thelibertycommittee.org>
THE UNITED STATES IS NOT A DEMOCRACY. IT IS A REPUBLIC. THE ELECTORAL
A republic is a form of democracy, a representative one.
No, it isn't.
Quite. And the specter of the Florida legislature selecting a new set of electors are providing one of the best civics educations citizens young and old have had this century. Its really quite healthy to have the myth of democracy we were all taught in grade school laid bare by the reality of a conservative and plain reading of the Constitution by some of the best and brightest. steve
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 05:12:23PM -0800, Steve Schear wrote:
Quite. And the specter of the Florida legislature selecting a new set of electors are providing one of the best civics educations citizens young and old have had this century. Its really quite healthy to have the myth of democracy we were all taught in grade school laid bare by the reality of a conservative and plain reading of the Constitution by some of the best and brightest.
Heh. For every Democrat (and perhaps some Republicans) who goes on TV and proudly proclaims this perpetual election as a good thing because it buttresses our civics knowledge, I want to ask: Why don't we encourage the president, say, to commit a felony? The subsequent prosecution and conviction would be fascinating to observe and would *really* educate America's children. Of course, I think the perpetual election (see perpetualelection.com) is a good thing for entirely different reasons than those I give above. See: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,40200,00.html -Declan
At 1:32 AM -0500 12/11/00, Declan McCullagh wrote:
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 05:12:23PM -0800, Steve Schear wrote:
Quite. And the specter of the Florida legislature selecting a new set of electors are providing one of the best civics educations citizens young and old have had this century. Its really quite healthy to have the myth of democracy we were all taught in grade school laid bare by the reality of a conservative and plain reading of the Constitution by some of the best and brightest.
Heh. For every Democrat (and perhaps some Republicans) who goes on TV and proudly proclaims this perpetual election as a good thing because it buttresses our civics knowledge, I want to ask: Why don't we encourage the president, say, to commit a felony? The subsequent prosecution and conviction would be fascinating to observe and would *really* educate America's children.
Yes, the treatment Bill received after raping Juanita Brodderick was indeed instructive. As was the punishment he received for lying under oath, suborning perjury, tampering with evidence, and (very probably) having witnesses in his scandals killed. (While not _all_ of the several dozen people on the Bill Hit List were victims of foul play, I expect many were. And about 10 standard deviations' worth of deaths as compared to the expected number around other men of similar age --Tim May -- (This .sig file has not been significantly changed since 1992. As the election debacle unfolds, it is time to prepare a new one. Stay tuned.)
participants (9)
-
Declan McCullagh -
Jim Choate -
Joseph Ashwood -
Me -
petro -
Robert Guerra -
Robert Guerra -
Steve Schear -
Tim May