[
    {
        "role": "user",
        "content": "what%20is%20the%20Verified%20Voting%20Foundation%20and%20what%20is%20a%20link%20to%20their%20website%3F"
    },
    {
        "role": "assistant",
        "content": "The Verified Voting Foundation is a non-governmental, nonpartisan U.S. organization focused on improving election integrity and voter confidence by promoting more secure and verifiable election technologies. ([en.wikipedia.org](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verified_Voting_Foundation?utm_source=openai))\n\nHere\u2019s a breakdown of what they do, how they\u2019re structured, and where you can find them online:\n\n---\n\n## What They Do\n\n- **Mission**: Their mission is to \u201cstrengthen democracy for all voters by promoting the responsible use of technology in elections.\u201d They aim to ensure voting systems are secure, transparent, and accessible. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/about/?utm_source=openai))  \n- **Advocacy & Policy**: They work with election officials, lawmakers, and the public to promote best practices like voter-verified paper ballots, post-election audits (especially risk-limiting audits), avoiding insecure online or internet voting, and other measures that help ensure votes are counted as cast. ([en.wikipedia.org](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verified_Voting_Foundation?utm_source=openai))  \n- **Tools & Research**: They maintain tools like *The Verifier,* which is an interactive database of voting equipment in use across U.S. jurisdictions, and an Audit Law Database that shows state laws around auditing elections. ([en.wikipedia.org](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verified_Voting_Foundation?utm_source=openai))  \n\n---\n\n## Organization & Legal Status\n\n- They operate under two legal entities:\n  - **Verified Voting Foundation**: a 501(c)(3) nonprofit focused on education, research, and outreach. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/legal/?utm_source=openai))  \n  - **VerifiedVoting.org, Inc.**: a 501(c)(4) nonprofit (advocacy organization) that lobbies for election security policies. ([en.wikipedia.org](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verified_Voting_Foundation?utm_source=openai))  \n\nThey also employ experts in election technology, law, and policy. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/team/?utm_source=openai))\n\n---\n\n## Why It Matters\n\nVoting systems and election integrity have become increasingly central to public trust in democracy. By offering data, expertise, and advocacy:\n\n- They help states and localities make informed choices about voting machines and procedures.  \n- They support legal and policy changes that make audits and verifications more reliable.  \n- They act as a watchdog, raising awareness about security risks (like internet voting or lack of paper trails). ([en.wikipedia.org](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verified_Voting_Foundation?utm_source=openai))  \n\n---\n\n## Website & Contact\n\n- **Official Website**: https://verifiedvoting.org/ ([en.wikipedia.org](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verified_Voting_Foundation?utm_source=openai))  \n- **About Page**: You can read more about their mission, values, and how they carry out their work here: https://verifiedvoting.org/about/ ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/about/?utm_source=openai))  \n\n---\n\nIf you want, I can also pull up some of their major reports or recent work to see concrete examples of their impact."
    },
    {
        "role": "user",
        "content": "when%20they%20talk%20about%20accessibility%2C%20do%20they%20talk%20about%20voting%20accessibility%20for%20voters%20with%20disabilities%3F"
    },
    {
        "role": "assistant",
        "content": "Yes \u2014 when the Verified Voting Foundation talks about \u201caccessibility,\u201d they *do* explicitly include voting accessibility for people with disabilities. Here\u2019s what I found, with examples and relevant standards to show how accessibility is integrated into their work:\n\n---\n\n## Examples of Accessibility for Voters with Disabilities in Their Work\n\n1. **Joint Statement with the National Disability Rights Network (NDRN), October 2024**  \n   Verified Voting released a joint statement with NDRN that made recommendations specifically aimed at improving access for voters with disabilities (and for those needing language assistance). These include:\n   - Ensuring polling places are physically accessible and that temporary adjustments be made when venues aren\u2019t.\n   - Providing curbside voting (where laws allow it).\n   - Having at least one accessible voting machine per polling site.  \n   - Assigning a dedicated accessibility coordinator or worker for each polling place. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/release-ndrn-vv-accessibility/?utm_source=openai))\n\n2. **Principles for New Voting Systems**  \n   In their policy document \u201cPrinciples for New Voting Systems,\u201d one of the core principles is that a voting system \u201cshould be accessible to voters with disabilities, and in all mandated languages.\u201d ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Principles.pdf?utm_source=openai))\n\n3. **Legal and Non-Discrimination Policy**  \n   On their \u201cLegal\u201d page, Verified Voting confirms that it prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability and encourages people with disabilities to participate in its programs, requesting accommodations when necessary. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/legal/?utm_source=openai))\n\n4. **Advocacy in Reports and Guidelines**  \n   Verified Voting incorporates accessibility requirements into its reports on election administration and polling-place practices. For example, they reference federal laws like the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and emphasize that in-person voting locations must be accessible. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/VerifiedVoting-CastingVotesSafely-2023-FIN.pdf?utm_source=openai))\n\n---\n\n## What \u201cAccessibility\u201d Covers for Voters with Disabilities\n\nFrom Verified Voting\u2019s writings and advocacy work, here are specific aspects they address:\n\n- Physical access to polling places: ramps, wide doorways, accessible parking, pathways of travel. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/release-ndrn-vv-accessibility/?utm_source=openai))  \n- Assistive voting machines: devices that allow people who are blind, have low vision, or have limited manual dexterity to vote privately and independently. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/release-ndrn-vv-accessibility/?utm_source=openai))  \n- Curbside voting, where one can vote from one\u2019s car if entering the building is hard or impossible. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/release-ndrn-vv-accessibility/?utm_source=openai))  \n- Language access as part of broader accessibility efforts\u2014accommodating voters whose first language isn\u2019t English. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/release-ndrn-vv-accessibility/?utm_source=openai))\n\n---\n\nIf you want, I can pull up a recent Verified Voting guide or checklist specifically for disability access, and show you what it recommends in concrete detail."
    },
    {
        "role": "user",
        "content": "do%20they%20criticize%20the%20use%20of%20voting%20tabulators%3F"
    },
    {
        "role": "assistant",
        "content": "Yes \u2014 Verified Voting does critique certain uses of voting tabulators, especially in contexts where they reduce transparency or voter verifiability, or where paper records aren\u2019t handled or designed in ways that allow audits. Here are some specific points they raise, with concrete examples:\n\n---\n\n## What \u201cVoting Tabulators\u201d Mean Here\n\nWhen Verified Voting talks about tabulators, they usually refer to:\n\n- **Optical scan tabulators** that count marks on paper ballots (e.g., voters fill in ovals or use ballot-marking devices that produce paper). ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/votingequipment/?utm_source=openai))  \n- **Hybrid systems**, like Ballot Marking Devices (BMDs) that may encode votes in barcodes or QR codes which the tabulator machine reads. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/votingequipment/?utm_source=openai))  \n\nTheir concerns are not with tabulation per se, but with how tabulation is structured, what voters can verify, and whether the system preserves an audit-friendly paper trail.\n\n---\n\n## What Verified Voting Criticizes about Tabulators or Hybrid Systems\n\n1. **Voter Verification Challenges in Barcoded Systems**\n\n   - In their opposition to certifying the ES&S ExpressVote XL system in New York, Verified Voting criticized its use of barcodes that tabulators read. They argue voters cannot verify that the barcode actually represents their selections, because the voter-readable text is separate from the barcode and the ballot review screen is partially obscured. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/opposition-to-certifying-ess-expressvote-xl-voting-system/?utm_source=openai))  \n   - They point out that when verification is difficult or effectively hidden, it undermines confidence and makes audits less meaningful. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/opposition-to-certifying-ess-expressvote-xl-voting-system/?utm_source=openai))  \n\n2. **Design Flaws That Reduce Transparency or Security**\n\n   - For the ExpressVote XL, Verified Voting noted that the paper record is retained behind a window (i.e. not easily inspected by many voters), which creates barriers to verifying whether the machine recorded selections correctly. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/opposition-to-certifying-ess-expressvote-xl-voting-system/?utm_source=openai))  \n   - They also highlight that hybrid systems can share paths for printing and scanning, which poses a risk: e.g., a malicious printer could alter content between printing and scanning. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/opposition-to-certifying-ess-expressvote-xl-voting-system/?utm_source=openai))  \n\n3. **The Importance of Paper-Based Trails and Post-Election Audits**\n\n   - Verified Voting emphasizes that optical scan systems (or BMDs with verified paper ballots) are more resilient because they allow for hand counts or audits of paper ballots to check whether tabulators\u2019 electronic tallies are correct. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/votingequipment/?utm_source=openai))  \n   - They argue that systems without meaningful paper records \u2013 especially where votes are fully electronic or not voter-verifiable \u2013 lose this protection. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/publication/summary-of-the-problem-with-electronic-voting/?utm_source=openai))  \n\n4. **Security Vulnerabilities in some Tabulation Systems**\n\n   - In their Voting Equipment Database, Verified Voting lists specific tabulators (for example, the Es&S Model 100) and describes security issues and risks, such as access to memory cards, hardcoded keys, or ports that may allow tampering if not well-secured. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/election-system/ess-model-100/?utm_source=openai))  \n   - For the Sequoia AVC Edge system, Verified Voting notes that software engineering problems (like buffer overflows, format string vulnerabilities) and inadequate protections on removable media pose risks to data integrity. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/election-system/sequoia-dominion-avc-edge/?utm_source=openai))  \n\n---\n\n## Where They Do *Not* Criticize Tabulators\n\n- Verified Voting supports tabulation itself when it\u2019s used with voter-verified paper ballots and strong audit mechanisms. Their critiques are mostly targeted at systems that obscure verification or rely excessively on machine reading without adequate transparency. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/votingequipment/?utm_source=openai))  \n\n- They are not fundamentally anti-tabulator: they see optical scan tabulators as generally acceptable so long as voters can verify marks, and paper ballots are available for audits. ([verifiedvoting.org](https://verifiedvoting.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Testimony-of-Verified-Voting-12122017.pdf?utm_source=openai))  \n\n---\n\nIf you like, I can pull up their most recent policy paper or report (2025-2026) to see if any new critiques have emerged \u2014 especially with regard to newer tabulator technologies or barcode systems."
    }
]