HAVA’s Misguided Response
Steve Levy’s 2020 Newsmax article examines the 2000 election’s “hanging chads” and the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002, which spent $3 billion on electronic voting machines. HAVA aimed to fix punch-card issues, but Return to Hand Counting sees it as a flawed shift from transparency.
The 2000 Election’s Chaos
Florida’s punch-card systems, per Britannica and University of Washington, caused 172,000 mis-votes from hanging chads and butterfly ballots. A 36-day recount, halted by Bush v. Gore, awarded Bush the presidency by 537 votes. Votescam’s 1996 warnings of machine fraud echoed this chaos, seen again in Wyoming’s 2024 error.
Conservative Distrust of Machines
Levy highlights conservative skepticism of HAVA’s machines, lacking paper trails, as Bev Harris’s Black Box Voting (book and website) critiques. Wyoming’s 2024 ballot design error, wrongly used to dismiss hand counting, shows ongoing risks. Pandora’s Black Box (1996) warned of this, as did Harris’ CNN interview.
“Their” Narrative Fails
“They” claimed HAVA’s machines ensured accuracy, but Levy notes hacking risks, echoed by Mike Lindell’s trial (June 16, 2025), which raised awareness despite a gag order. Hand counting counters “their” narrative, ensuring transparency, unlike 2000’s punch-cards or Wyoming’s machine issues.
Hand Counting: A Better Way
Our Missouri Method, used in a 2023 election, ensures transparency. Estimates show St. Charles County could save $68,000 annually, rebutting a flawed estimate by the Election Director. Hand counting, as Votescam advocates, makes every vote visible—one bad ballot is a felony we prove.
Join the Mission
HAVA’s electronic push failed to deliver trust. Visit our Mission page to see why hand counting is the solution and join the mission by learning with our eManual and training materials.
This post utilized drafting and editing services of Grok3, an A.I. tool by xAI
