# Section 1

Carolyn Coggins

John Washburn

Edwin Smith

1.6.2.3.    The question should be eliminated and the sentence about the VSTLs should state their purpose.  The EAC will most probably have to contract out the position of technical expert.   If that is the case then this should be a truly transparent process. The position should be open to competitive bidding under a publicly available list of core competencies that are compiled with the assistance of the Panel of Technical Experts.  The processes for accreditation and certification of laboratories and electronic voting systems should be transparent, impartial, and fair.  Conflict of interest is a real problem under the history of no-bid contracts awarded by the Commission.  Even if it is the case that there is only one person or entity with the specialized background to fill a particular position the process should be transparent.  A competitive bidding process is the only way the Commission will be able to demonstrate that it has sought out the best talent available to fill a position.  A list of applicants or bids for the position should be published on the Commission’s web site.  The Commission should make its position known regarding applicants and its determination on how to fill the position.  An excellent model for the EAC to consider is the one used by the National Science Foundation to manage grant announcements and awards. The rules for consideration as a contractor should be published on the Commission’s web site. Further, there should be restrictions from participating in the bidding process for persons or entities who have within the previous 24 months worked for or been a contractor with a registered manufacturers.  http://votingintegrity.org/docs/eac-letter042806.html

1.7.    The Commission’s ethics policy regarding the conduct of employees should also extend to contractors.  The Commission’s prior contracting activity has presented questions regarding conflict of interest with the awarding of no-bid contracts to members of its Technical Guidelines Development Committee. The Commission should have written guidance, if it has not already been developed, regarding employee conduct and it should be published on the Commission’s web site.  Those awarded contracts should be held to the same ethical standards as employees of the Commission.  Many federal and state government agencies have statutory rules of official conduct.  For a list of federal government agencies with statutorily enforced ethics guidelines, see: http://www.usoge.gov/pages/laws_regs_fedreg_stats/agy_supp_regs.html

Frequently asked Questions: http://www.usoge.gov/pages/misc_files/faq.html

A list of all federal government ethics regulations http://www.usoge.gov/pages/laws_regs_fedreg_stats/comp_fed_ethics_laws.pdf

All EAC personnel and those awarded no-bid contracts or noncompetitive grant awards should follow the ethical standards of the Code of Federal Regulation Volume V Chapter 16 Subchapter B, see: http://www.usoge.gov/pages/laws_regs_fedreg_stats/oge_regs.html.

National Committee for Voting Integrity

Edwin Smith

Alex Coalson

John Washburn

John Washburn

Ian S. Piper

Ian S. Piper

Ian S. Piper

Ian S. Piper

By the Fair Elections Committee of Democracy for New Hampshire[1]

And Election Defense Alliance[2]

Further advances in design integrity are under way in the academic community.  For example, at the University of Texas and other institutions, progress has been made in the formal proof of correctness of both software and hardware logic design[5].  (When we speak of “proof” in this context, we don't mean the “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” that prevails in jurisprudence.  We mean the absolute and final proof demanded in the world of mathematics.  Because a computer program or the hardware logic of a computer's processing unit are purely logical constructs, it is possible for them to meet this rigorous standard of proof.  What remains is the physical-world possibility that the hardware may fail because of defect or damage, and that requires a comprehensive FMEA.)

[1]    www.DemocracyForNewHampshire.com

[2]     www.ElectionDefenseAlliance.org

[3]    77 Musket Dr.  Nashua, N.H.  03062  mykrowatt@comcast.net

[4]    28-31 James Street, Milford, NH  ntobi@tds.net

[5]    A Google search for “software proof of correctness” produces numerous hits.

[6]    http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/nhtoc.htm Title LXIII

[7]    http://www.sos.nh.gov/FINAL%20EPM%208-30-2006.pdf

Nancy Tobi

Carolyn Coggins

Alex Coalson

Juliana Salcedo

Steve Pearson

Steve Pearson

Joseph Lorenzo Hall

Kevin Chung

# Section 2

Howard G. Sholl, Jr.

National Committee for Voting Integrity

Edwin Smith

Ian S. Piper

Joseph Lorenzo Hall

Edgardo Cortes

# Section 3

D. Lee

National Committee for Voting Integrity

Ian S. Piper

Ian S. Piper

D. Lee

Jill LaVine

Carolyn Coggins

Joseph Lorenzo Hall

Jill LaVine

howard rotstein

howard rotstein

Howard G. Sholl, Jr.

# Section 4

Carolyn Coggins

Carolyn Coggins

Carolyn Coggins

National Committee for Voting Integrity

Ian S. Piper

Ian S. Piper

Ian S. Piper

Ian S. Piper

Ian S. Piper

Ian S. Piper

Edwin Smith

D. Lee

D. Lee

D. Lee

D. Lee

D. Lee

Carolyn Coggins

Carolyn Coggins

Ian S. Piper

Ian S. Piper

Edwin Smith

Edwin Smith

Joseph Lorenzo Hall

For more detailed information regarding DRE Security and Functional Testing - contact  http://www.evoteinspector.com/

Patrick Angel

Daniel Kozminski

Juliet Hodgkins

# Section 5

National Committee for Voting Integrity

Ian S. Piper

Edwin Smith

D. Lee

Gail Audette

Gail Audette

Ian S. Piper

D. Lee

Joseph Lorenzo Hall

Ian S. Piper

Ian S. Piper

Carolyn Coggins

Ian S. Piper

# Section 6

John Washburn

John Washburn

National Committee for Voting Integrity

National Committee for Voting Integrity

Ian S. Piper

Joseph Lorenzo Hall

# Section 7

National Committee for Voting Integrity

Ian S. Piper

Ian S. Piper

Joseph Lorenzo Hall

Howard G. Sholl, Jr.

# Section 8

D. Lee

National Committee for Voting Integrity

Ian S. Piper

Debbie Bedford

Joseph Lorenzo Hall

# Section 9

D. Lee

National Committee for Voting Integrity

Joseph Lorenzo Hall

# Section 10

National Committee for Voting Integrity

The Florida Attorney General developed an official opinion on June 6, 2003 (AGO# 2003-26) which found a workable compromise for compliance between the State’s Sunshine laws (freedom of information) and the Federal Copyright Act. (http://myfloridalegal.com/ago.nsf/printview/871ED3B3AA70BDE685256D3D0057CD1E )

Ian S. Piper

Joseph Lorenzo Hall

# Appendix A

John Washburn

John Washburn

admin

# Appendix B

John Washburn

John Washburn

admin

# Appendix C

John Washburn

janet j. jai

admin