Point of View
Open Democracy Action's April 11, 2024, book club features Congressman Jamie Raskin's memoir, Unthinkable: Trauma, Truth, and the Trials of American Democracy, detailing, with first-hand experience, the attempt on January 6 to overturn the 2020 presidential election results. The congressman will join the Zoom for the first half hour. Discussion starts at 7 PM. An important and moving conversation. RSVP and learn more.
A Priority for Voting Rights Advocates
Bob Perry reports that the bill referenced in the following testimony, HB 1569, repeals a number of existing statutes, repeals and reenacts a number of others, and amends a number of statutes, which, in effect, repeal years of progress made towards expanding, and making more convenient, the act of voting. The bill was introduced by Robert Lynn (R-Rockingham 17), and has no co-sponsors. It has become a priority bill to oppose among a number of voting rights advocacy organizations in New Hampshire.
Note: HB 1569 – relative to eliminating voter identification exceptions
Dear Representatives Harrington, Turcotte, Howard,
As legislators, you are aware of our current political climate. It is rife with threats to repeal hard-fought human rights. In America. Land of the free. Promises of a national abortion ban - forced birth, survival of the mother based on a bureaucratic or committee ruling; The Heritage Foundation's Project 2025, a scheme to dismantle the administrative state by eliminating or reprioritizing government functions; A warning of the return of the Comstock Act - access to contraception on the line; Dictator on Day One; Four years of retribution; Suspending the Constitution; America a Third World Country. More. All public information you have heard with your own ears.
You are also aware that our secretary of state and governor assert our elections are safe and secure, free of fraud that would change election results. HB 1569, therefore, is unnecessary, baseless, serves no purpose, except will make voting more difficult and evoke less confidence in our most basic right, the right that makes all else possible.
Ordinarily, I would "urge" you to vote against HB 1569. However, leadership and defense of acquired human rights requires you to vote against it.
Bob Perry, Strafford
HB 1569 – relative to eliminating voter identification exceptions
Public Hearing 2.20.24
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee,
I speak in opposition. This bill repeals decades of progress towards rectifying 234 years of denying certain classes of Americans a voice in our experiment in self-governance. From the beginning, there were restrictions on who could vote, and the value of the vote. For example, gerrymandering has existed early on. In that regard, I often think about the flight of the Kitty Hawk, and how it only took five minutes for some bright individual to act on the idea of installing a machine gun on it to gain serious advantage over others. Since the beginning, it has been students of good government, in and out of government, who have delivered expanded rights and opportunities.
Artificial intelligence has already been used to recreate music from deceased persons, to give adult voice to toddlers, to mock, and has been deployed in the Granite State to suppress the vote. It will be used by independent political organizations, competing for the most effective AI ads for their candidates. It will be used to subvert Democracy. It will be used indefinitely for all purposes.
Another serious issue is us. We are using the tools of Democracy to subvert Democracy.
To start, we must unite in this body to maintain confidence in our elections. We must continue to expand access to the ballot box, to make it convenient to vote, to hold voting in high esteem against those who would take it from us. This bill represents a taking – a taking of hard-fought voting rights already acquired. In a world of rising autocracy, we must rise united in support of expanded rights.
I urge ITL.
Bob Perry, Strafford
Note: HB 1569 – relative to eliminating voter identification exceptions
Dear Representatives Harrington, Turcotte, Howard,
As legislators, you are aware of our current political climate. It is rife with threats to repeal hard-fought human rights. In America. Land of the free. Promises of a national abortion ban - forced birth, survival of the mother based on a bureaucratic or committee ruling; The Heritage Foundation's Project 2025, a scheme to dismantle the administrative state by eliminating or reprioritizing government functions; A warning of the return of the Comstock Act - access to contraception on the line; Dictator on Day One; Four years of retribution; Suspending the Constitution; America a Third World Country. More. All public information you have heard with your own ears.
You are also aware that our secretary of state and governor assert our elections are safe and secure, free of fraud that would change election results. HB 1569, therefore, is unnecessary, baseless, serves no purpose, except will make voting more difficult and evoke less confidence in our most basic right, the right that makes all else possible.
Ordinarily, I would "urge" you to vote against HB 1569. However, leadership and defense of acquired human rights requires you to vote against it.
Bob Perry, Strafford
HB 1569 – relative to eliminating voter identification exceptions
Public Hearing 2.20.24
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee,
I speak in opposition. This bill repeals decades of progress towards rectifying 234 years of denying certain classes of Americans a voice in our experiment in self-governance. From the beginning, there were restrictions on who could vote, and the value of the vote. For example, gerrymandering has existed early on. In that regard, I often think about the flight of the Kitty Hawk, and how it only took five minutes for some bright individual to act on the idea of installing a machine gun on it to gain serious advantage over others. Since the beginning, it has been students of good government, in and out of government, who have delivered expanded rights and opportunities.
Artificial intelligence has already been used to recreate music from deceased persons, to give adult voice to toddlers, to mock, and has been deployed in the Granite State to suppress the vote. It will be used by independent political organizations, competing for the most effective AI ads for their candidates. It will be used to subvert Democracy. It will be used indefinitely for all purposes.
Another serious issue is us. We are using the tools of Democracy to subvert Democracy.
To start, we must unite in this body to maintain confidence in our elections. We must continue to expand access to the ballot box, to make it convenient to vote, to hold voting in high esteem against those who would take it from us. This bill represents a taking – a taking of hard-fought voting rights already acquired. In a world of rising autocracy, we must rise united in support of expanded rights.
I urge ITL.
Bob Perry, Strafford
Open-source the Way to Go for Ballot-counting Devices
On August 28, 2023, Strafford Democrat Bob Perry wrote the following letter to Brad Cook, Chairman of the State of New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission. Update: On August 31, 2023, the NH Ballot Law Commission narrowed the field of electronic ballot-counting devices to two: VotingWorks [open source] and Dominion/LHS [proprietary] See full report.
Dear Chairman Cook, and members of the Commission:
Among the three ballot-counting devices on display with their functions demonstrated earlier this month at the legislative office building, my attention was focused on the open-source system. The concept of an open-source elections platform was presented by election-integrity organizations to members of the committee on which I served as an option to a fully privatized system. I am pleased to learn this technology has reached the marketplace. See Final Report, Electronic Ballot Counting Device Advisory Committee, dated 11.30.2009.
As you know, open source is not proprietary, that it may be - and I expect will be - observed by people outside the program vendors, but cannot be altered by mere observers. It has been difficult over the years to convince skeptics that programing by an outside vendor is safe and secure. With respect to the use of open-source equipment, I am equally aware that it may be difficult to convince skeptics that the programing cannot be altered. Both technologies may present their public relations challenges, but selecting the open-source system by Voting Works allows the state to boast full transparency from the starting gate.
In any case, I am confident one of the criteria you will use to determine your choice of equipment is the ease and confidence in its use by those who are responsible for carrying out our elections. Whatever the commission’s decision, please approve only one system for use across the state.
Bob Perry
Strafford, NH
Dear Chairman Cook, and members of the Commission:
Among the three ballot-counting devices on display with their functions demonstrated earlier this month at the legislative office building, my attention was focused on the open-source system. The concept of an open-source elections platform was presented by election-integrity organizations to members of the committee on which I served as an option to a fully privatized system. I am pleased to learn this technology has reached the marketplace. See Final Report, Electronic Ballot Counting Device Advisory Committee, dated 11.30.2009.
As you know, open source is not proprietary, that it may be - and I expect will be - observed by people outside the program vendors, but cannot be altered by mere observers. It has been difficult over the years to convince skeptics that programing by an outside vendor is safe and secure. With respect to the use of open-source equipment, I am equally aware that it may be difficult to convince skeptics that the programing cannot be altered. Both technologies may present their public relations challenges, but selecting the open-source system by Voting Works allows the state to boast full transparency from the starting gate.
In any case, I am confident one of the criteria you will use to determine your choice of equipment is the ease and confidence in its use by those who are responsible for carrying out our elections. Whatever the commission’s decision, please approve only one system for use across the state.
Bob Perry
Strafford, NH
What's the plan for replacing Strafford's voting machines?
Bob Perry, who monitors voting rights legislation in his work with Open Democracy, informed the committee at its March 2023 meeting as to the status of the Town of Strafford's voting machines, which must be replaced after the 2024 elections.
Education at Risk in Strafford
Education in New Hampshire is facing steep challenges. This year alone, $20 million was siphoned off from public education statewide to fund "Education Freedom Accounts" used to send kids to private and religious schools. The Concord Monitor shed some light on this in a recent article "Local Property Taxpayers Bear Brunt of Education Funding".
Contributor Bob Perry is a former State Representative who chaired the Strafford Town Democrats for more than 16 years. He is a longtime board member of Open Democracy New Hampshire, and a darn good blueberry picker.
|
Take a virtual guided tour of the New Hampshire State House with Virginia Drew, Director of the State House Visitor Center.
|