SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Securityweek has a look at the bits of HR1 with digital election security implications running:
The Democrat-controlled House of Representatives has unveiled its first Bill: HR1, dubbed the 'For the People Act'. It has little chance of getting through the Republican-controlled Congress, and even less chance of being signed into law by President Trump.
Nevertheless, HR1 lays down a marker for current Democrat intentions; and it is likely that some of the potentially bi-partisan elements could be spun out into separate bills with a greater chance of progress.
One of these is likely to include the section on election security. This has been a major issue since the meddling by Russian-state hackers in the 2016 presidential election, and the subsequent realization on how easy it would be for interested parties (both foreign hackers and local activists) to influence election outcomes.
I'm all for secure and accountable elections but the feds are going to need to be careful and deliberate in what they mandate vs. what they place conditions for funding on. They do have significant authority as far as election laws go but their power is more deep than broad; most specifics are legally up to the states. Just because something is a good idea doesn't mean they currently have the legal authority necessary to do it.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Snotnose on Sunday January 06 2019, @09:54PM (4 children)
Yeah, like that's gonna happen. They're gonna vote on the lobbyist written legislation written by the lobbyists who hand out the most bribes, um, sorry, forgot myself there, campaign contributions.
If you think congress nowdays does anything for any reason outside of they either look like total idiots or money, you haven't been paying attention for the past 30 years or so. And they're willing to look like total idiots for enough money.
How to fix? Hellifino. But no doubt our system is fundamentally broken.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday January 06 2019, @10:18PM
That would mean they started accepting bribes in January of 1989.
Consider that public funding of Presidential elections was enacted in response to Watergate-Era discussions of political corruption.
But then I've got grey in my beard, because I invented the Internet.
Fuck MDC
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday January 07 2019, @03:14AM
Even lobbyists should prefer their laws stand up in court. Otherwise they're renting power instead of buying it and for the same price.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday January 07 2019, @03:24AM (1 child)
But no doubt our system is fundamentally broken.
Yep, we broke it ourselves... And this isn't unique to the U.S. Maybe majority rule always ends up in a Mexican Standoff.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday January 07 2019, @04:44AM
It always ends the same. People find out they can vote other people's money into their own pockets. Then they vote for whoever promises them more OPM. This continues until the economy collapses. It can happen over a year or it can happen over centuries but it always happens if they remain any form of democracy long enough.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.