DOCSLIB.ORG

Voluntary Voting System Guidelines VVSG 2.0 Requirements for the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Voluntary Voting System Guidelines VVSG 2.0 Requirements for the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0 Voluntary Voting System Guidelines VVSG 2.0 Requirements for the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0 February 10, 2021 Prepared for the Election Assistance Commission At the direction of the Technical Guidelines Development Committee 1 Acknowledgements Chair of the TGDC: Dr. Walter G. Copan Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Gaithersburg, MD Representing the EAC Standards Board: Robert Giles Paul Lux Director Supervisor of Elections New Jersey Division of Elections Okaloosa County Trenton, NJ Crestview, FL Representing the EAC Board of Advisors: Neal Kelley Linda Lamone Registrar of Voters Administrator of Elections Orange County Maryland State Board of Elections Orange County, CA Annapolis, MD Representing the Architectural and Transportation Barrier, and Compliance Board (Access Board): Marc Guthrie Sachin Pavithran Public Board Member Public Board Member Newark, OH Logan, UT Representing the American National Standards Institute (ANSI): Mary Saunders Vice President, Government Relations & Public Policy American National Standards Institute Washington, DC Representing the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers: Dan Wallach Professor, Electrical & Engineering Computer Science Rice University Houston, TX Representing the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED): Lori Augino Judd Choate Washington State Director of Elections State Elections Director Washington Secretary of State Colorado Secretary of State Olympia, WA Denver, CO 2 Requirements for VVSG 2.0 February 10, 2021 Individuals with technical and scientific expertise relating to voting systems and equipment: McDermot Coutts Geoff Hale Chief Architect/Director of Technical Computer Security Expert Development Washington, DC Unisyn Voting Solutions Vista, CA Diane Golden David Wagner Accessibility Expert Professor, Electrical & Engineering Grain Valley, MO Computer Science University of California-Berkeley Berkeley, CA 3 Public Working Groups discussed and developed guidance to inform the development of requirements for the VVSG. • The Election Process Working Groups: Pre-Election, Election, and Post-Election Process Working Groups performed a great deal of up-front work to collect locale-specific election process information and, from that, to create coherent process models. • The Interoperability Working Group handled voting system interoperability including common data format (CDF) modeling and schema development. • The Human Factors Working Group handled human factors-related issues including accessibility and usability. • The Cybersecurity Working Group handled voting system cybersecurity-related issues include various aspect of security control and auditing capabilities. • The Testing Working Group handled voting system testing-related issues including what portions of the new VVSG need to be tested and how to test them. 4 Requirements for VVSG 2.0 February 10, 2021 Executive Summary The United States Congress passed the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) [HAVA02] to modernize the administration of federal elections and to establish the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) to provide guidance to the states in their efforts to comply with the HAVA administrative requirements. Section 202 of HAVA directs the EAC to adopt voluntary voting system guidelines, and to provide for the testing, certification, decertification, and recertification of voting system hardware and software. The purpose of the guidelines is to provide a set of specifications and requirements against which voting systems can be tested to determine if they provide all the basic functionality, accessibility, and security capabilities required of voting systems. This document, the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines Version 2.0 (referred to herein as the Guidelines or VVSG 2.0), is the fifth iteration of national level voting system standards. The Federal Election Commission published the first two sets of federal standards in 1990 [VSS1990] and 2002 [VSS2000]. The EAC then adopted Version 1.0 of the VVSG (VVSG 1.0) [VVSG2005] on December 13, 2005. In an effort to update and improve Version 1.0 of the VVSG, on March 31, 2015, the EAC commissioners unanimously approved VVSG 1.1 [VVSG2015]. The VVSG 2.0 is a departure from past versions in that a set of principles and associated guidelines were first developed to describe how, at a high-level, voting systems should be designed, developed, and how they should operate. The VVSG 2.0 requirements were then derived from those principles and guidelines. The VVSG 2.0 requirements fit within a framework of documents under the EAC Voting System Certification Program that include: • VVSG 2.0 Principles and Guidelines • VVSG 2.0 Requirements • VVSG 2.0 Testing and Certification Program Manual The Guidelines were designed to meet the challenges ahead, to replace decade’s old voting machines, to improve the voter experience, and provide necessary safeguards to protect the integrity of the voting process. All sections of the prior VVSG versions have been reviewed, re- evaluated, and updated to meet modern expectations, which address how voters should interact with the voting system and how voting systems should be designed and developed. The VVSG 2.0 requirements represent the latest in both industry and technology best practices, requiring significant updates in many aspects of voting systems. The Guidelines allow for an improved and consistent voter experience, enabling all voters to vote privately and independently, ensuring votes are marked, verified and cast as intended, and that the final count represents the true will of the voters. Section 508 Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Final Standards and Guidelines [USAB18], and Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) [W3C10] are referenced and highlighted. Voter interface requirements have been updated to incorporate recent usability research and interactions that result from modern devices and now fully support accessibility throughout the voting process. 5 Requirements for VVSG 2.0 February 10, 2021 The cybersecurity of voting systems has never been more important. Indeed, attacks from nation state actors on our elections infrastructure in 2016 led to a critical infrastructure designation. To limit the attack surface on voting systems, the Guidelines require that any election system, such as an e-pollbook or election reporting system, be air-gapped from the voting system. To ensure the integrity of the voting process, methods have been implemented to detect errors through the combined use of an evidence trail and regular audits, including risk-limiting audits (RLAs), compliance audits, and ballot-level audits. There is a dedicated section on ballot secrecy, preventing voter information from being carried through to the voting system, and two-factor authentication is now mandated for critical voting operations. Cryptographic protection of data and new system integrity requirements ensure that security protections developed by industry over the past decade are built into the voting system. These include risk assessment and supply chain risk management, secure configurations and system hardening, exploit mitigation, sandboxing and runtime integrity. The VVSG 2.0 requires the voting system to include the capability of using common data formats defined by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and public working groups. The common data formats were created to make election data more transparent and interoperable. These formats can be used in addition to any native formats used by the manufacturer. Defensive coding practices, reliability and electrical requirements were reviewed, updated, and streamlined. Finally, guidance relevant to testing and certification has been moved to the EAC’s testing and certification manual. This document was produced by the EAC’s Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC) working in conjunction with NIST to aid in developing guidelines for voting equipment and technologies for making accessible, accurate and secure elections possible. EAC staff must annually review the VVSG for proposed revisions. Determinations must be sent to the EAC’s Executive Director (or a person operating in that capacity) to begin the review process required by HAVA (review by the TGDC, Board of Advisors, Standards Board, and public comment review) to ensure timely adoption of revisions. Under the direction of the Executive Director, EAC staff in consultation with NIST staff may make minor technical changes to the requirements in a timely manner. This process may include, but is not limited to, the development of an appeals process for such minor technical changes. EAC staff is responsible for updating the test assertions and issuing requests for interpretation or notices of clarification, as needed, to ensure efficiency in the process. 6 Requirements for VVSG 2.0 February 10, 2021 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. 2 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. 5 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 9 How the VVSG is to be Used ............................................................................................... 9 Scope ................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Guide to Braille ASCII (Or “Computer Braille”)
    A Guide to Braille ASCII (or “Computer Braille”) Some electronic braille devices occasionally display information or require that users input information in “computer braille” or braille ASCII. Braille ASCII is not technically a braille code, but rather is a one-to-one mapping between braille characters and the QWERTY keyboard (a standard computer keyboard). If you have a braille font installed on your computer, that braille font is the same as “computer braille” when typing. This guide will provide you with an overview of what you need to know to be able to understand or enter text when a device says, “computer braille required.” Do Not Contract Since braille ASCII is a one-to-one mapping between the QWERTY keyboard and braille signs, there is no translation occurring, so contractions cannot be used. Instead of typing: ,l\is ,brl You would need to type: louis braille Because there is no translation occurring, you also cannot use braille indicators that don’t exist in print, such as the number indicator (dots 3-4-5- 6 #) or the capital indicator (dot 6 ,). Numbers Since the number indicator is a symbol that does not exist in print and cannot be used, all numbers are represented in the lower part of the braille cell with no number indicator preceding them. If you need to type a mixture of letters and numbers, such as a postal code like V6P 6G2, instead of typing: ,V#f,P #f,G#b www.prcvi.org March 2021 A Teacher’s Guide to Braille ASCII (or “Computer Braille”) You would type: V6P 6G2 Capitals Without being able to use dot 6 to indicate capitals, many devices will use 8- dot input to accomplish this.
    [Show full text]
  • Kemampuan Imajinasi Matematis Siswa Tunanetra Smplb Pada Pembelajaran Joyfull Learning Berbantuan Audio Geobraille
    KEMAMPUAN IMAJINASI MATEMATIS SISWA TUNANETRA SMPLB PADA PEMBELAJARAN JOYFULL LEARNING BERBANTUAN AUDIO GEOBRAILLE SKRIPSI diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat untuk memperoleh gelar Sarjana Pendidikan Matematika oleh Yusriza Firdausi Romdhiana 4101416042 JURUSAN MATEMATIKA FAKULTAS MATEMATIKA DAN ILMU PENGETAHUAN ALAM UNIVERSITAS NEGERI SEMARANG 2020 ii PENGESAHAN iii MOTTO DAN PERSEMBAHAN MOTTO 1. “Allah tidak akan membebani seseorang melainkan sesuai dengan kesanggupannya” (Q.S Al Baqarah: 286). 2. “Boleh jadi kamu membenci sesuatu, padahal ia amat baik bagimu. Dan boleh jadi (pula) kamu menyukai sesuatu, padahal ia amat buruk bagimu. Allah Maha Mengetahui, sedang kamu tidak mengetahui” (Q.S. Al Baqarah: 216) 3. “Sesungguhnya bersama kesulitan ada kemudahan. Maka apabila engkau telah selesai (dari sesuatu urusan), tetaplah bekerja keras (untuk urusan yang lain). Dan hanya kepada Tuhanmulah engkau berharap” (Q.S. Al Insyirah: 6 – 8). PERSEMBAHAN Kedua orang tua tercinta, Abah H. Muhammad Kusdi, M.Pd dan Ibu Hj. Unsa Laila, S.Pd yang senantiasa menjadi panutan, memberikan semangat dan penguatan, memberikan cinta dan kasih sayang, selalu tulus mendoakan, serta menemani setiap lagkah perjuangan. Semoga selalu diberikan umur yang panjang dan barokah. Amin. Kakak saya, Fahmi Rikza Luqmana dan Adrikna Niam serta adik saya M. Mirzasofa Sirrul Wafi yang selalu memberikan semangat dalam menempuh pendidikan dan terus mengalirkan doa. Keluarga besar yang selalu mendoakan dan mendukung dalam segala hal. iv PRAKATA Puji syukur penulis ucapkan kehadirat Allah SWT atas segala limpahan rahmat-Nya sehingga penulis dapat menyelesaikan skripsi yang berjudul “Kemampuan Imajinasi Matematis Siswa Tunanetra SMPLB pada Pembelajaran Joyfull Learning Berbantuan Audio Geobraille” ini dengan lancar di tengah-tengah wabah pandemic COVID-19.
    [Show full text]
  • Security of Voting Systems Ronald L
    Security of Voting Systems Ronald L. Rivest MIT CSAIL Given at: GWU Computer Science Dept. November 9, 2009 Voting is Easy… ??? "What's one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one?" "I don't know," said Alice. "I lost count." “She can't do addition," said the Red Queen. There are three kinds of people working on elections: 1. those who can count 2. and those who can’t. ? Outline Voting technology survey What is being used now ? Voting Requirements Security Threats Security Strategies and Principles New voting systems proposals: “Twin” and “Scantegrity II” Voting Tech Survey Public voting Paper ballots Lever machines Punch cards Optical scan DRE (Touch-screen) DRE + VVPAT (paper audit trail) Vote by mail (absentee voting) Internet voting (?) New voting methods (“end-to-end”), involving invisible ink, multiple ballots, scratch-off, cryptography, and other innovations… Public Voting The County Election. Bingham. 1846. Paper Ballots Lincoln ballot, 1860, San Francisco “Australian ballot”, 1893, Iowa city Lever Machines Invented in 1892. Production ceased in 1982. See “Behind the Freedom Curtain” (1957) Punch card voting Invented 1960’s, based on computerized punch card. Now illegal, by HAVA (Help America Vote Act) of 2002. The famous “butterfly ballot” A “dimpled chad” ??? Optical scan (“opscan”) First used in 1962 DRE (“Touchscreen”) Direct Recording by Electronics First used in 1970’s Essentially, a stand-alone computer DRE + VVPAT DRE+Voter-Verified Paper Audit Trail. First used in 2003. Vote By Mail Often used for absentee voting, but some states use it as default.
    [Show full text]
  • VVSG Comments
    Before the U.S. ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION In the Matter of ) COMMENTS SUBMISSION ) VOLUNTARY VOTING SYSTEM ) Pursuant to 84 FR 6775, Doc. No.: 2019-03453 ) GUIDELINES VERSION 2.0 ) Wednesday, May 29th, 2019 ) DEVELOPMENT ) EAC Offices, Silver Spring, MD PUBLIC COMMENTS SUBMISSION OSET INSTITUTE COMMENTS LED BY GLOBAL DIRECTOR OF TECHNOLOGY EDWARD P. PEREZ REGARDING THE VOLUNTARY VOTING SYSTEM GUIDELINES VERSION 2.0 PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES Comment #1 Issue: Principles and Guidelines vs. Functional Requirements Reference: Overall VVSG 2.0 Structure The OSET Institute applauds the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (hereinafter, “EAC”) for making efforts to ensure that the future Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) certification program is more flexible and agile than it has been in the past. With increasingly faster advances of technology matched by newly emerging cyber-security threats, it is essential for the VVSG to support regular adaptation and modification. Toward that end, VVSG 2.0's initial distinction between "Principles and Guidelines" versus "Functional Requirements" is well placed and laudable. In order to deliver on the promise of such a distinction, the OSET Institute believes that the following programmatic requirements must be adhered to: • “Principles and Guidelines" reflect policy statements, and any modifications to the Principles and Guidelines should require approval of EAC Commissioners. • Functional Requirements (and VSTL test assertions) do not represent policy statements, and their modification should not require approval of EAC Commissioners. Functional Requirements are simply the technical means to operationalize or implement the achievement of policy goals represented in the Principles and Guidelines. • Functional Requirements must support the policy goals represented in the Principles and Guidelines.
    [Show full text]
  • Viewplus Software Suite 7.0.7 User Manual Revision: 20200427
    ViewPlus Software Suite 7.0.7 User Manual Revision: 20200427 Contents I. Preface ............................................................................................................................... 3 II. Tiger Software Suite - Program Installation ........................................................................ 4 II.A. Installation ..............................................................................................................................4 II.B. Uninstallation ..........................................................................................................................8 III. VP License Manager ......................................................................................................... 9 III.A. Software Activation .............................................................................................................. 10 III.A.1. Activation on computer with internet connection .................................................................................. 10 III.A.2. Activation on computer without internet connection............................................................................. 12 III.B. Deactivation of Tiger Software Suite ..................................................................................... 15 III.B.1. Deactivation on computer with internet connection .............................................................................. 15 III.B.2. Deactivation on computer without internet connection ........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Voluntary Voting System Guidelines VVSG 2.0 Recommendations for Requirements for the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0
    Voluntary Voting System Guidelines VVSG 2.0 Recommendations for Requirements for the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0 February 29, 202010, 2021 Prepared for the Election Assistance Commission At the direction of the Technical Guidelines Development Committee 1 Acknowledgements Chair of the TGDC: Dr. Walter G. Copan Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Gaithersburg, MD Representing the EAC Standards Board: Robert Giles Paul Lux Director Supervisor of Elections New Jersey Division of Elections Okaloosa County Trenton, NJ Crestview, FL Representing the EAC Board of Advisors: Neal Kelley Linda Lamone Registrar of Voters Administrator of Elections Orange County Maryland State Board of Orange County, CA ElectionElections Annapolis, MD Representing the Architectural and Transportation Barrier, and Compliance Board (Access Board): Marc Guthrie Sachin Pavithran Public Board Member Public Board Member Newark, OH Logan, UT Representing the American National Standards Institute (ANSI): Mary Saunders Vice President, Government Relations & Public Policy American National Standards Institute Washington, DC Representing the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers: Dan Wallach Professor, Electrical & Engineering Computer Science Rice University Houston, TX Representing the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED): Lori Augino Judd Choate Washington State Director of Elections State Elections Director Washington Secretary of State Colorado Secretary of State Olympia, WA Denver, CO 2 Requirements
    [Show full text]
  • Voluntary Voting System Guidelines VVSG 2.0 Recommendations for Requirements for the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0
    Voluntary Voting System Guidelines VVSG 2.0 Recommendations for Requirements for the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0 February 29, 2020 Prepared for the Election Assistance Commission At the direction of the Technical Guidelines Development Committee 1 Requirements for VVSG 2.0 February 29, 2020 Acknowledgements Chair of the TGDC: Dr. Walter G. Copan Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Gaithersburg, MD Representing the EAC Standards Board: Robert Giles Paul Lux Director Supervisor of Elections New Jersey Division of Elections Okaloosa County Trenton, NJ Crestview, FL Representing the EAC Board of Advisors: Neal Kelley Linda Lamone Registrar of Voters Administrator of Elections Orange County Maryland State Board of Election Orange County, CA Annapolis, MD Representing the Architectural and Transportation Barrier, and Compliance Board (Access Board): Marc Guthrie Sachin Pavithran Public Board Member Public Board Member Newark, OH Logan, UT Representing the American National Standards Institute (ANSI): Mary Saunders Vice President, Government Relations & Public Policy American National Standards Institute Washington, DC 2 Requirements for VVSG 2.0 February 29, 2020 Representing the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers: Dan Wallach Professor, Electrical & Engineering Computer Science Rice University Houston, TX Representing the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED): Lori Augino Judd Choate Washington State Director of Elections State Elections Director Washington Secretary
    [Show full text]
  • A Secure, Transparent, Auditable, and Reliable Voting System
    USENIX Journal of Election Technology and Systems (JETS) Volume 1, Number 1 • August 2013 STAR-Vote: A Secure, Transparent, Auditable, and Reliable Voting System Susan Bell, Office of the Travis County Clerk Josh Benaloh, Microsoft Research Michael D. Byrne, Rice University Dana DeBeauvoir, Office of the Travis County Clerk Bryce Eakin, independent researcher Gail Fisher, Office of the Travis County Clerk Philip Kortum, Rice University Neal McBurnett, ElectionAudits Julian Montoya, Office of the Travis County Clerk Michelle Parker, Office of the Travis County Clerk Olivier Pereira, Universite´ catholique de Louvain Philip B. Stark, University of California, Berkeley Dan S. Wallach, Rice University Michael Winn, Office of the Travis County Clerk STAR-Vote is a collaboration between a number of academics and the Travis County (Austin), Texas elections office, which currently uses a DRE voting system and previously used an optical scan voting system. STAR-Vote represents a rare oppor- tunity for a variety of sophisticated technologies, such as end-to-end cryptography and risk limiting audits, to be designed into a new voting system, from scratch, with a variety of real world constraints, such as election-day vote centers that must support thousands of ballot styles and run all day in the event of a power failure. This paper describes the current design of STAR-Vote which is now largely settled and whose development will soon begin. 1. INTRODUCTION A decade ago, DRE voting systems promised to improve many aspects of voting. By having a computer mediating the user’s voting experience, they could ostensibly improve usability through summary screens and a variety of accessibility features including enlarged text, audio output, and specialized input devices.
    [Show full text]
  • Lic. Ciências Da Computação Estrutura Do Tema ISC
    Introdução aos Sistemas de Computação Sistemas de Computação (1) Lic. Ciências da Computação Estrutura do tema ISC 1º ano 1. Representação de informação num computador 2007/08 2. Organização e estrutura interna dum computador A.J.Proença 3. Execução de programas num computador 4. O processador e a memória num computador 5. Da comunicação de dados às redes Tema Introdução aos Sistemas de Computação AJProença, Sistemas de Computação, UMinho, 2007/08 1 AJProença, Sistemas de Computação, UMinho, 2007/08 2 Noção de computador (1) Noção de computador (2) Um computador é um sistema que: Computador tipo – recebe informação, processa / arquiva informação, Sinais Processador Sinais transmite informação, e ... Digitais Periférico / (1 ou +) Periférico / Digitais –é programável Sinais Sinais Dispositivo Dispositivo i.e., a funcionalidade do sistema pode ser modificada, Digitais Digitais sem alterar fisicamente o sistema Entrada Memória Saída Sinais Sinais primária Quando a funcionalidade é fixada no fabrico do sistema onde o Analógicos Analógicos computador se integra, diz-se que o computador existente nesse sistema está “embebido”: ex. telemóvel, máq. fotográfica digital, automóvel, ... Arquivo Como se representa a informação num computador ? Informação Como se processa a informação num computador ? AJProença, Sistemas de Computação, UMinho, 2007/08 3 AJProença, Sistemas de Computação, UMinho, 2007/08 4 Representação da informação Noção de computador (3) num computador (1) Como se representa a informação? –com binary digits! (ver sistemas de numeração...) • Como se representa a informação num computador ? Tipos de informação a representar: – representação da informação num computador -> – textos (caracteres alfanuméricos) » Baudot, Braille, ASCII, Unicode, ... – números (para cálculo) » inteiros: S+M, Compl. p/ 1, Compl.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines and Standards for Tactile Graphics, 2010
    Guidelines and Standards for Tactile Graphics, 2010 Developed as a Joint Project of the Braille Authority of North America and the Canadian Braille Authority L'Autorité Canadienne du Braille Published by The Braille Authority of North America ©2011 by The Braille Authority of North America All rights reserved. This material may be downloaded and printed, but not altered or sold. The mission and purpose of the Braille Authority of North America are to assure literacy for tactile readers through the standardization of braille and/or tactile graphics. BANA promotes and facilitates the use, teaching, and production of braille. It publishes rules, interprets, and renders opinions pertaining to braille in all existing codes. It deals with codes now in existence or to be developed in the future, in collaboration with other countries using English braille. In exercising its function and authority, BANA considers the effects of its decisions on other existing braille codes and formats; the ease of production by various methods; and acceptability to readers. For more information and resources, visit www.brailleauthority.org. ii Canadian Braille Authority (CBA) Members CNIB (Canadian National Institute for the Blind) Canadian Council of the Blind Braille Authority of North America (BANA) Members American Council of the Blind, Inc. (ACB) American Foundation for the Blind (AFB) American Printing House for the Blind (APH) Associated Services for the Blind (ASB) Association for Education & Rehabilitation of the Blind & Visually Impaired (AER) Braille Institute of America (BIA) California Transcribers & Educators for the Blind and Visually Impaired (CTEBVI) CNIB (Canadian National Institute for the Blind) The Clovernook Center for the Blind (CCBVI) National Braille Association, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Transition Planning for Students Who Are Deafblind
    Transition Planning for Students who are Deafblind Coaching from Students, Parents and Professionals Citation: Ingraham, C.L. (Ed.) (2007). Transition Planning for Students who are DeafBlind. Knoxville, TN: PEPNet-South. These materials were developed in the course of agreement between the Research to Practice Division, Oce of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education and PEPNet-South at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville under grant #H326D060003. Additional information about current pepnet 2 project activities and resources can be found at www.pepnet.org. Year of publication: 2007. Tablle of Contents Foreword.......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 The Purpose of This Monograph Chapter 1 – History of DeafBlindness................................................................................................ 7 A Brief History of Services for Deafblind People In the United States Chapter 2 – Who are the DeafBlind? .................................................................................................19 What Does It Mean to be DeafBlind – Really? Chapter 3 – Aids and Devices...............................................................................................................29 Aids and Accommodations for DeafBlind Students:
    [Show full text]
  • The Help America Vote Act and Election Administration: Overview and Selected Issues for the 2016 Election
    The Help America Vote Act and Election Administration: Overview and Selected Issues for the 2016 Election Arthur L. Burris, Coordinator Section Research Manager Eric A. Fischer Senior Specialist in Science and Technology October 18, 2016 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RS20898 The Help America Vote Act and Election Administration: Overview for 2016 Summary The deadlocked November 2000 presidential election focused national attention on previously obscure details of election administration. Congress responded with the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA; P.L. 107-252). HAVA created the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), established a set of election administration requirements, and provided federal funding, but it did not supplant state and local control over election administration. Several issues have arisen or persisted in the years since HAVA was enacted. Some observers have criticized the EAC for being obtrusive, slow, ineffectual, or even unnecessary. Others believe that the agency is an important resource for improving the election administration. The EAC lacked a quorum of commissioners between 2011 and 2015. HAVA requires computerized state voter registration systems, and its voting-system requirements promote the use of electronic voting systems. However, those systems, especially the kinds that record votes directly into a computer’s memory (DREs), raise concerns about security and reliability. In response, many states have enacted requirements for paper ballot records that can be verified by the voter and used in recounts. All states now use paper-based optical scan systems for at least some voters, and most use them in at least some polling places. DRE systems are also used in most states, in many cases to meet HAVA accessibility requirements, but in several states to serve as the primary voting system in at least some jurisdictions.
    [Show full text]