CONTENTS
[1] Newsletter Highlights
[2] USACM Chair Testifies on Electronic Employment Verification
[3] USACM Applauds New Voting System Standards
[4] USACM Cautions Against Filtering
[5] Emergency E-Voting Legislation Goes Down In House
[6] Advanced Placement Computer Science Exams Change
[7] National Academies Releases Interim Report on Voter Registration
Databases
[8] About USACM
[An archive of all previous editions of Washington Update is available at
http://www.acm.org/usacm/update/]
[1] NEWSLETTER HIGHLIGHTS
Due to project deadlines at the beginning of May, we regret that we are late
in providing this update, which covers events over the last six weeks (April
through mid-May). There is more detail on each item below, as well as on our
weblog at http://www.acm.org/usacm/weblog:
* USACM Chair Eugene Spafford testified before a House subcommittee on
the technical challenges associated with the proposed expansion of
electronic employment verification systems.
* USACM submitted comments to the Election Assistance Commission on the
next version of the Federal voting system guidelines. While generally
supportive of the proposed standards, USACM has some suggestions for
improvement.
* USACM wrote education leaders in the House and Senate cautioning
against Federal policies that would require or encourage universities to
install network-based filters for copyrighted material.
* Legislation proposed by Rep. Rush Holt to make it easier for state and
local elections officials to adopt paper trails for voting failed on the
House floor.
* The College Board moved to eliminate one of the two high school
Advanced Placement Computer Science exams, leaving the more popular “A” exam
in place, while announcing potential restructuring of this exam in the
future.
* An interim report released by the National Academies gave
recommendations for jurisdictions to more effectively handle their voter
registration databases during the 2008 elections.
[2] USACM URGES CONGRESS TO BUILD IN SAFEGUARDS FOR AUTOMATED EMPLOYMENT
CHECKS
Dr. Eugene H. Spafford, chair of USACM, cautioned Congress against expanding
electronic employment verification systems without properly dealing with the
significant technical issues involved with expanding large database systems.
Testifying before Congress, Dr. Spafford was responding to legislative
proposals that would expand electronic employment eligibility from the
current voluntary program (called E-Verify) to include all the nation’s
employers over the course of several years. These systems are used to check
an employee’s eligibility to work in the United States against Federal
databases.
Dr. Spafford identified three major concerns regarding E-Verify: the
accuracy and timeliness of system results; the security and privacy
protection afforded to information kept in the system; and the technical
feasibility of multiple approaches to creating such a system. He added that
these concerns are also applicable to related programs such as the REAL ID
Act, which established standards for state-issued drivers licenses, and
US-VISIT, a U.S. immigration and border management system.
Historically, Dr. Spafford said, decisions to hire someone willing to put in
an honest days work are made by individuals. Requiring that decision to be
overruled by technology is a not-insignificant change that would remove or
penalize human judgment in exigent or compassionate circumstances,
especially in cases of error. He also noted that any widespread shift toward
mandating an employee verification system has significant social as well as
technological impacts.
The complete testimony from the hearing is available at
http://www.acm.org/usacm/PDF/EEVS_Testimony_Eugene_Spafford_USACM.pdf
[3] USACM APPLAUDS NEW VOTING SYSTEM STANDARDS
USACM filed detailed comments with the Election Assistance Commission (EAC)
on the draft 2007 Federal Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG). While
these standards are voluntary, they are considered by many states as a
necessary benchmark for approving voting systems for use in their elections.
The newest edition of the VVSG was released last fall after a lengthy
process of drafting by the Technical Guidelines Development Committee - a
group of experts in various aspects of voting (election officials, experts
in standards, usability, accessibility, and computer science). USACM
released its comments after careful review and consideration of this draft,
calling them a welcome step forward from previous versions and fundamental
improvement from existing guidelines. USACM supported several important
concepts in the draft, including software independence, innovation class,
new accessibility and usability requirements, and open-ended vulnerability
testing. You can read USACM’s full comments at:
http://usacm.acm.org/PDF/USACM_VVSG_Comments_Final.pdf
The EAC now has to process the reportedly 2000+ comments it received on the
draft standards. In doing so, the EAC could adopt the draft as is, make
changes, or reject the entire document. The first and the third scenarios
seem unlikely, so we can expect the EAC to makes changes, but what they will
be and in what time frame is anybody’s guess.
As the VVSG process moves forward, we will continue to monitor developments.
[4] USACM CAUTIONS CONGRESS AGAIST FILTERING
USACM released a letter to Senate and House of Representatives education
leaders cautioning against legislation that would promote or require
universities to use filters to deal with copyright infringement on their
networks. USACM argued that filtering technologies are ineffective and
costly in the long run because they can be foiled by technology, create new
security vulnerabilities, and undermine fair use rights and research on new
technologies.
The House and Senate have been busy working to resolve differences with
legislation known as the Higher Education Act, which is the centerpiece of
Federal higher education policy. Always important to the university system,
the legislation drew the special attention of the technology community last
summer when Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) introduced an amendment that would
have required universities to install technology-based deterrents to curb
infringement over their networks – i.e. filters. This proposal was heavily
watered down to a requirement to educate students that unauthorized
downloading of copyrighted works is illegal. However, the House of
Representatives version included a proposal that would authorize grant
funding for filters and require universities to develop a plan for using
technology-based deterrents.
While copyright infringement is a serious issue, USACM believes that
universities are in the best position to determine how to deal with
infringement of copyrighted works on their networks, and filters are
ineffective solution.
The full letter can be downloaded at the following link:
http://www.acm.org/usacm/weblog/wp-content/USACM_Filtering_Final.pdf
[5] EMERGENCY E-VOTING LEGISLATION GOES DOWN IN HOUSE
The House voted down legislation that would provide funding for
jurisdictions to purchase paper-based voting systems for the 2008 elections.
While the bill received a clear majority vote of 239-178, under somewhat
arcane parliamentary measures that require a two-thirds majority to pass, it
failed to pass the House. Bill opponents criticized the cost of the bill and
claimed the program is redundant. USACM commented favorably on the
legislation in a letter sent to Rep. Holt in February. You can read that
letter at:
http://www.acm.org/usacm/PDF/USACM_EASEA_final.pdf
With the 2008 elections quickly approaching, it would appear that the window
of opportunity for this bill is closing fast. House leadership could
reconsider the bill, but early indications are that this will not happen.
[6] ADVANCED PLACEMENT COMPUTER SCIENCE EXAMS CHANGE
Contrary to press reports from early April, the College Board has *not*
discontinued all Advanced Placement Computer Science exams. They eliminated
the less popular Computer Science AB exam, but kept the Computer Science A
exam.
As part of the decision to drop the AB course, the College Board noted that
it will be working with many thoughtful people from the computing community
to redefine what AP CS means:
“Appropriate College Board committees will focus their efforts on improving
and supporting the AP Computer Science A program, which will be enhanced
during the next five years to better represent a full-year, entry-level
college computer science sequence.
Our intensified commitment to AP Computer Science A will ensure that the
course provides the best possible college-level academic experience and is
supported by an increased array of curricular resources and professional
development opportunities that will benefit AP Computer Science teachers.”
While the decision was a shock to many involved in teaching and
administering these classes, participation in the AB class has fallen since
2002. Course content may have been a key factor in this decline, but there
are other issues with high school CS education worth exploring. ACM launched
its Education Policy Committee last year to look at some of these questions
from a policy context, and we can speculate about a couple of contributing
factors. First, computer science is often counted as a business or
technology elective instead of a core class. With Federal policy focused on
testing in reading and math, core courses receive many more resources and
attention than electives. Second, these organizational issues contribute to
teacher certification problems where CS teachers are often certified outside
of their field of expertise.
For a chart detailing participation in both AP Computer Science exams,
please visit:
http://usacm.acm.org/usacm/weblog/index.php?p=593
[7] NATIONAL ACADEMIES RELEASES INTERIM REPORT ON VOTER REGISTRATION
DATABASES
The National Academies released an interim report from its Committee on
State Voter Registration Databases. An ad hoc committee under the Computer
Science and Telecommunications Board, and sponsored by the Election
Assistance Commission, this committee is charged to identify and address
issues and concerns associated with operating statewide voter registration
databases.
The committee’s interim report is available online (registration required to
read a free PDF file). The report is a compilation of recommended practices
for populating and maintaining a statewide voter registration database. The
report breaks its recommendations into two groups: those that can happen
before the 2008 election, and those that would take more time. The
recommended short-term changes are:
PUBLIC EDUCATION AND DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION
Raise public awareness about the legibility and the completeness of voter
registration card information. Jurisdictions could take some or all of the
following specific steps:
- Emphasize in the instructions for filling out voter registration forms the
importance of legibility and completeness (for example, Please print all
responses; if your answers are illegible, your application may be
mis-entered, rejected, or returned to you.).
- Conduct media campaigns emphasizing the importance of legibility and
completeness in the information provided on voter registration forms.
- Coordinate with third-party voter registration groups and public service
agencies, emphasizing the need for their field volunteers to attend to
legibility and completeness as they distribute and/or collect registration
materials.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES
- Resubmit match queries if the response returned from the Social Security
Administration or department of motor vehicles is a nonmatch.
- Provide human review of all computer-indicated removal decisions.
- Improve the transparency of procedures for adding voters and for list
maintenance.
- Use fill-in online registration forms.
- Perform empirical testing on the adequacy of processes for adding to and
maintenance of lists.
- Take steps to minimize errors during data entry.
- Allow selected individuals to suppress address information on public
disclosures of voter registration status.
- Encourage (but do not require) entities sponsoring voter registration
drives to submit voter registration forms in a timely manner to reduce
massive influxes at the registration deadline.
You can read the report (available as a free PDF document if you register)
online at:
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12173
[8] ABOUT USACM
USACM is the U.S. Public Policy Committee of the Association for Computing
Machinery (ACM). With over 88,000 members, ACM is the world’s largest
educational and scientific computing society, uniting educators, researchers
and professionals to inspire dialogue, share resources and address the
field’s challenges. ACM strengthens the computing profession’s collective
voice through strong leadership, promotion of the highest standards, and
recognition of technical excellence. ACM supports the professional growth of
its members by providing opportunities for life-long learning, career
development, and professional networking. USACM acts as the focal point for
ACM’s interaction with the U.S. Congress and government organizations. It
seeks to educate and assist policy-makers on legislative and regulatory
matters of concern to the computing community.
For more information about USACM and ACM, see:
http://www.acm.org/usacm/about.html
BACK ISSUES
For earlier editions of the ACM Washington Update, see:
http://www.acm.org/usacm/update/
SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE
To subscribe to ACM’s Washington Update newsletter, send an e-mail to
listserv@acm.org with “subscribe WASHINGTON-UPDATE “First Name” “Last Name”
(no quotes) in the body of the message.
To unsubscribe, simply include the “SIGNOFF WASHINGTON-UPDATE” command in an
email to listserv@acm.org.
Trackbacks
The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://usacm.acm.org/usacm/weblog/wp-trackback.php/607
None at this time.