In light of the lack of nonpartisan best practice project completion around and including the 2020 federal elections in the USA, bipartisan support for election processes is of great practical value.
The schism in US politics around the 2020 federal elections may be somewhat unique (compared with historical disagreements, unrest, conflicts, and campaign strategies) in that both sides may be taking the same exact official position with regard to elections. Not that each side claims to know what is best for the region vaguely while offering different particulars contrasting with 'the other side,' but that both sides are here in complete agreement on both the macro regional aims and on all of the particulars of what specifically needs to be done.
We support and advocate for an auditable election process consistent with the US constitution and enlightenment science-of-governance practices as put forward in the Jeffersonian Declaration of Independence of 1776, including the need for election processes to be unswayed by interference in voter participation, vote processes, infrastructure, logistics, counting, reporting, or legal-processes (certification, etc.), including 3rd party observation and investigation of all such parts. We are stating our above advocacy for auditable election processes in a hostile environment in which overt and covert forces (foreign and domestic) have carried out, and will carry out, such interference, such that we are not confident that past elections were, nor that future elections will be, entirely free from pressures from such interference. Along these lines additional steps can and should be taken to support and protect the whole election process through strengthening the auditability of election processes.
This situation of qualified agreement leaves open the possibility that both sides, however fearful of each other, actually are making the same statement and actually are willing and able to follow through with a nonpartisan program to support election processes through supporting the auditability of election processes.
Based on this agreement of statements is the following Auditable Elections Consensus proposal.
This consensus project focuses on transparency, openness, and auditability. Specific parts of a given election should be open to audit and the results of such audits open to scrutiny by anyone. Procedural details of how elections are best carried out by the local offices who carry out elections are not the focus.
List of Parts of Election Rules and Procedures for Audit:
- Voter registration procedures
- Election type and rules (FPP, run-off, primary, partial-representation, etc.)
- Ballot details (type(s))
- Methods of voting (e.g. walk-in, overseas military, retirement homes, etc.)
- How votes are counted (including walkin, mail-in, etc.)
- Voter identity verification
- Voter qualification and restriction of voting rights procedures and rules:Tests, restrictions, and requirements for voter participation (e.g. age-test, citizenship test, residency test, identification test, non-multiple-vote-test, being alive, being h.s.sapiens, etc.)
- Voter participation data and statistics
- Voter eligibility census and statistics data
- Procedures for handling physical ballots
- Data about voting software (e.g. security audits)
- Data about technical audits of voting software (e.g. security audits)
- Statements made by election officials
- Statements made by whistleblowers
- Results of investigations into and legal cases regarding claims
- Security and National Security appraisals of real interference and risk of interference (foreign and domestic) (e.g. a hacking or intrusion attempt on a local office by a foreign actor or group foreign or domestic)
- Election monitoring and observing procedures and records
- Voting district information including population/census information
- Rules and processes for campaigns
- Rules and processes for candidate selection
- Rules and processes for candidate participation
- Rules and processes for who appears on the ballot
- Rules and processes for how and when elections are called
- Rules and processes for filling vacancies
- Rules and processes for recounts and runoffs
- Vote Statistics, Demographics, etc.
- Past appraisals and audits of voting practices and best practice
Regarding practical accessibility, it is not enough for access to information about how elections were carried out to be merely theoretical. Access and formatting of information for election auditing should be sufficiently standardized to make practical standard and best practice analysis procedures realistically feasible and accessible. (e.g. .csv files, standard downloads, standard api lookup, etc.) It may be desirable to have a standards-related federal agency such as NIST manage a repository for auditable election data.
Many 'on the left' are under the impression that there was widespread voter intimidation during the election of 2020. Many 'on the right' are under the impression that there was widespread voter fraud and mis-handling of votes during the 2020 election. All participants in the democratic election process should be able to agree that all such concerns and allegations should be able to be investigated based on verifiable public information.
.............
How is it that we cannot verify that elections have been soundly carried out?
In the narrative on the left it is waffled and omitted that anti-government activists, at least many of them, appear to actually believe that they are defending sound elections against election interference.