Take Back Our Elections: The Power of an Election System for the People by the People with Hand-marked Hand-Counted Paper Ballots

On May 31, 2025, over 100 passionate grassroots activists, lawyers, and election officials gathered at Glenn Beck’s American Voyage Experience Museum in Dallas, Texas, to champion a return to trustworthy elections. Led by Colonel Allen West with the Pledge of Allegiance and inspired by Pastor Andy Thompson’s call for unity and humility, the event showcased practical, scalable solutions for hand-counting paper ballots—because your vote should always count.

Why This Matters

For over four years, dedicated election warriors have fought for transparency and trust in our voting systems. Yet, many still feel our elections are vulnerable. The good news? Proven methods exist to secure our votes using hand-marked, hand-counted paper ballots. At this event, experts demonstrated four effective systems: the A-count-able Dotting Method, the Gold Standard Tally Method, and the Echo and Texas Tally Team Methods. These methods aren’t just ideas—they’re accurate, efficient, and ready to restore confidence in our elections.

What Happened

In a vibrant, patriotic setting, attendees saw these methods in action. The Gold Standard Team—Laura Scharr, Hava Laudon, Beth Biesel, and Rick Weible—shared their whitepaper, outlining clear steps to achieve secure, transparent, verifiable, and accessible elections. Each method was demonstrated through engaging “TED-style” talks, followed by hands-on sessions where attendees split into four groups to test the systems. They counted votes in a two-person race and a “pick 3 out of 6” race, proving these methods work accurately and efficiently.

Dr. Rick from Eagle AI also shared a robust system for cleaning voter rolls, ensuring only eligible votes are counted. Afternoon panels tackled tough questions and discussed how to prepare for the 2026 midterm elections, lessons learned, and victories to date.

This is an Urgent Matter

The enthusiasm in Dallas showed one thing clearly: the people want paper. They want to trust that their vote matters. We need to unplug our elections to ensure that they cannot be tampered with.

Here are the core recommendations for attainment of the gold standard:

  • All phases of the election process are open and transparent to the public, with bipartisan and or impartial participation and oversight
  • Poll workers verify voters through proof of citizenship and photo ID
  • Local election officials maintain up-to-date voter rolls
  •  Poll workers log and validate voters through paper poll books
  • States return to one-day voting in person at their precinct, except for UOCAVA (Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act) voters
  •  Laws minimize absentee and mail-in voting
  • Where possible, states should institute 100% hand-counting of hand-marked ballots in public, with bipartisan representation, and with recorded or live-stream video capabilities.
  • Election results are publicly reported first to the precinct, then the county, then the state.
  • The public may gain access to election records 48 hours prior to the canvassing certification.

But change won’t happen on its own. To make secure elections a reality by 2026, we must act now. Election officials, legislators, and citizens must unite to reform processes, update laws, and educate voters. Paper ballots offer the transparency, verifiability, and security we’ve been demanding, boosting voter turnout and restoring faith in our constitutional republic.

Take Action Today

You have the power to make a difference.

  1. Contact your state legislators and election officials today. Tell them you want a voting system by the people, for the people—one that uses paper poll books and hand-counted paper ballots with one day of voting. Demand that citizens be able to observe election materials once ballots are cast. Below is a sample of a letter you can send them.
  2. Visit goldstandardelections.com for more information. We can put you in touch with volunteers in your area or provide you with a toolkit to do the demonstration yourself.

Every call, email, or letter brings us closer. The time to act is now. Let’s secure our elections for 2026 and beyond—together.

Here is a sample letter to send to your state elected officials:

Dear [State Representative/Senator Name],

The trust of American voters in our electoral process is eroding. Over half of Americans believe elections are vulnerable to cheating, a crisis that threatens the foundation of our democracy. Many citizens, including my neighbors across [State], are so disillusioned with the opaque, machine-based voting system that they choose not to vote. Corporate-owned systems count ballots in secret, providing only total counts without transparent transaction details—akin to a bank statement showing only a balance, not individual transactions. Even public figures like Tulsi Gabbard have raised alarms about vulnerabilities in our electronic systems.

This is a national emergency. We cannot allow confidence in our elections to collapse. As our elected representative, I urge you to take immediate action to restore trust by prioritizing election integrity in the 2026 legislative session. Specifically, I call on you to:

  1. Eliminate electronic voting machines and implement hand-counted paper ballots to ensure transparency and security.
  2. Transition to a single day of voting to reduce opportunities for potential malfeasance associated with early voting.
  3. Require detailed, public reporting of vote counts to provide voters with clear, verifiable data.

These reforms are urgent and non-negotiable—failure to act risks further eroding public trust and the legitimacy of our elections. If you cannot commit to these priorities, I, alongside other concerned citizens, will actively support candidates who will.

I look forward to your response and your commitment to safeguarding our democracy. Sincerely,
[Your Full Name]
[City, State]
[Contact Information]

The Gold Standard Team- Hava Laudon, Laura Scharr, Beth Biesel, and Rick Weible
A Proposed Executive Order for Election Reform

This is proposed Election reform for the people by the people developed by an elite cadre of grassroots election experts to forge a bold plan for securing the people’s vote and shielding our Constitutional Republic from the threat of election tampering.

Members of our group spent months preparing this. Please spread this far and wide.

“South Carolina: Epicenter of Election Interference”

South Carolina has long been viewed as a reliably “red state,” a bastion of conservative values rooted in our constitutional republic. But that foundation is cracking. Today, the “R” might stand for “Ready to Undermine the Republic” or “Resistant to Transparent Voting.” The recent county GOP reorganizations across the state expose a troubling reality: election interference isn’t just a national threat—it’s festering here, subverting the democratic processes that sustain our constitutional system and exposing dangerous vulnerabilities that threaten the security of our Republic.

In Georgetown County, interference took the form of exclusion. The County Chair issued a memo barring members from participating in the reorganization if they were “associated” with MySCGOP, a grassroots group within the party. What constitutes “associated”? An email subscription? A YouTube view? A single meeting? This vague decree isn’t a rule—it’s a calculated move to rig the process by silencing dissent. Electoral interference strikes at the heart of free speech, thought, and association—rights enshrined in our Constitution. Leaders who are secure in their vision don’t need to meddle; they prevail through fair debate within the republican framework.

Beaufort County’s interference came as manipulation. The current leadership forced their chosen slate of delegates forward, curtailing opportunities for other candidates to compete. This wasn’t a democratic process within a republic—it was a power play to control the outcome, denying members their rightful voice in party governance. Interference here didn’t just tilt the scales; it broke them.

Charleston County pushed interference into subversion. Voters were forced to vote by holding up green and red cards instead of hand-marked ballots, with the result decided by a subjective call from the meeting’s temporary president—an establishment ally. When the vote seemed close, and attendees demanded a division of the house to verify it, they were shut down. No paper trail, no accountability—just a predetermined result. This isn’t how a constitutional republic conducts its business; interference mocks the transparency and verifiability our system demands.

These acts of interference erode the four pillars of Gold Standard Elections—accessibility, security, transparency, and verifiability—that uphold our constitutional republic.

  • Accessibility is undermined when voters endure endless speeches just to cast a vote, driving many to leave before participating.
  • Security is compromised when voting methods are subjective and unrecorded, opening the door for manipulation.
  • Transparency vanishes when ballots are counted behind closed doors—or, worse, destroyed.
  • Verifiability is eliminated when no paper trail or documented results exist.

When voting methods are opaque—like waving cards with no record—trust in the process collapses. And when ballots are reportedly counted in secret or, as in Charleston two years ago, destroyed, the interference becomes blatant. Disillusioned party members disengage, withhold support, and warn others to steer clear. Can we fault them?

South Carolina is emerging as the epicenter of election interference, not from external forces but from within. If the Republican Party can’t conduct internal elections without tampering, what hope is there for preserving our constitutional republic at higher levels? President Trump, in his inauguration speeches, vowed to protect this republic and return power to the people. Yet these reorganization tactics—rigged slates, suppressed votes, destroyed evidence—reek of entrenched power defying that promise. His endorsement of Senator Lindsey Graham, broadly unpopular among South Carolinians across party lines, only widens the gap between rhetoric and reality.

The stakes are monumental. Election interference at the local level threatens the integrity of our entire constitutional system. South Carolina’s GOP must lead by example, ensuring every vote within its ranks is accessible, secure, transparent, and verifiable—principles that reflect the republic we’re meant to be. Voters deserve a process free of meddling, one that honors their role in this system—not one that leaves them doubting whether their voice counts. The party must act decisively, or South Carolina risks becoming a symbol of interference over republican ideals.

YouTube player
What is going on behind the scenes with election integrity

Team leader Laura Scharr discusses recent movements to reform elections with Mike Dakkak from ITNnews.

Trump’s EO on Election Integrity

Here is the breakdown of the fact sheet on the EO. This EO is likely priming the pump for further Executive Orders. Stay tuned.

Voter Data Issues in South Carolina

Are we getting our money’s worth?

Our state Election Commission spends thousands of dollars annually for ERIC, the Electronic Registration Information Center, and Kopis to maintain our rolls (a $6 Million, five-year contract). Yet our voter rolls have some concerning anomalies. Simple database best practices and hygiene seem to be ignored.

Why are there:

*9 registrants over 115
*98 under 18
*hundreds if not thousands registered at commercial (non-domicile) addresses–that is illegal.
*and more?

Watch to find out what we found.

No electronics in elections-it can be done

Laura and Tara from SC Safe Elections speak with Argentina and Costa Rica voters to discuss how they vote with people, paper, and pens—no machines! And guess what? They can finish counting by 9 PM and the process is observable by party delegates and representatives. They vote on Sunday on ONE DAY with NO mail-in ballots except for people outside the country.

This is an eye-opening interview—lots of good nuggets of information.
If countries like Argentina, with 44 million people, can do this, why can’t America?

Momentum from Congress and Trump will revamp the election process to ensure a system for the people by the people

For Immediate Release

Contact Laura Scharr for more information: lscharr@gmail.com  803-331-3721, scsafeelections.org

SCSafeElections.org Supports the Make Elections Secure Again (MESA) Bill that Removes Electronics from Federal Elections and Ensures Transparency of the Vote

Lexington, SC -March 5th, 2025-

Momentum from Congress and Trump will revamp the election process to ensure a system for the people by the people:

     Grassroots group SC Safe Elections (SCSE) has worked tirelessly to ensure that voters feel confident their vote is counted accurately and transparently. We have analyzed all steps in the process by canvassing eight counties, poll observation, analysis of the machine certification and vulnerabilities, scrutinizing federal and state election laws, and developing processes and procedures for re-engineering all phases of the election ecosystem as demonstrated in our Gold Standard Elections whitepaper.

     We are excited to support Congressman Pete Session (R-Tx) ’s bold action in drafting a groundbreaking bill that repeals HAVA and replaces machines with hand-marked, hand-counted paper ballots that are counted at the precinct level. This bill limits precinct size to a maximum of 1,500 and calls for paper poll books to validate voters who must provide government-issued photo IDs and an affidavit of U.S. citizenship. Absentee ballot requests are limited to military personnel, overseas voters, and persons with physician-certified medical conditions.  

     Polls show that 60% of likely voters want to vote with hand-marked paper ballots, and 56% are willing to volunteer to hand-count those ballots on election night.

     We urge our South Carolina legislators to follow Congressman Session’s lead by supporting Bill H 3628, the Gold Standard Election Bill. Representative Rob Harris, a member of SC Safe Elections and a fierce advocate for election reform, has sponsored this bill. He and his family have seen firsthand the issues regarding elections. Rep. Harris states, “The people of South Carolina deserve to know how their vote was counted and to have a transparent system. They need to be able to observe the entire process, including the ballot count. The Gold Standard Election Bill will help voters feel more confident that their vote was accurate.”

    H3628 calls for:

  • Registered voters must provide valid photo ID to confirm citizenship and residency
  • Keeps the maximum precinct size to 1,500 but adds more poll workers -4 for each 250 electors
  • Hand-counting of hand-marked paper ballots with paper poll books used for check-in
  • All ballots (including absentee ballots) are to be counted at the precinct level- no vote centers
  • One day of voting with Election Day designated as a state holiday;
  • Strict chain of custody for all elements of the election process
  • The public has complete observation of the process

 SC Safe Elections urges all SC legislators to prioritize and support this bill to preserve our constitutional republic and respond to the people’s will. We also encourage citizens in SC to call their representatives and senators to ask them to support elections for the people by the people by supporting H3628.

*******

Breaking: The people want paper and are willing to hand-count

In this video, team leader Laura Scharr talks about the recent polling conducted by Rasmussen that shows 60% of US likely voters want to vote using hand-marked paper ballots, and 56% of them are willing to volunteer to count on election night. This is a slam dunk, so why are legislators unwilling to codify these measures? Even India and other European countries have more secure elections where they hand-count, hand-marked paper ballots (not the barcoded ballots we currently have) and can finish counting by midnight.

Significant security concerns with new SC tabulators

Are foreign actors influencing source code for our elections?

Guest post by Application Security/Cybersecurity Expert Julie Baker

Open-source software has been the foundation of software development for decades now. I doubt there is an application or an operating system in use today that does not have some open-source libraries or components. I know many utilize a high percentage of open-source components.   There are many benefits to open source software – https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/introduction-to-open-source-and-its-benefits/.   These are very utopian ideals, but then there is human nature, which leads to the fact that there are also significant security risks that go along with its use – https://owasp.org/www-project-open-source-software-top-10/.   These are both well-known to those of us in application security, and I will not spend time on those very real issues here.   Instead, I want to focus on specific concerns regarding the open-source project Yocto[i].

Late last year, the State of South Carolina upgraded its election systems to EVS 6.3.0.0. As part of this update, DS300 tabulators were purchased, and these run a Yocto image.   The ESS EVS 6300 Certificate and Scope of Conformance.pdf[ii] only mentioned Yocto once in the document. I expected more information about the image, especially regarding updates, versions, and anti-virus protection. But there is nothing in the conformance document about this. I became curious and decided to do some research into Yocto. 

What I discovered about Yocto is concerning. Yocto is an open-source project. Open source projects emphasize openness and collaboration amongst their members, and they have historically followed a decentralized model. Members often share code, ask and answer questions, and help and support each other as part of the community. Security is usually a collaborative effort, but Yocto now has a security team, a new and welcome development.

Additionally, “Without fanfare, Yocto Project touches most people’s lives without their knowledge,” notes Richard Purdie, lead Architect at Yocto Project. “At least half the world’s internet traffic passes through routers built using Yocto. Add in mobile phone masts, software in cars, and software inside core server components. Billions of devices around us are relied upon daily, making it a key piece of easily overlooked critical infrastructure software.”[iii]   Even if Yocto was not being used to generate software for ES&S election infrastructure, it is critical because it is ubiquitous.

How open-source communities work sounds quite idyllic, and it can be. However, it is not so idyllic when there is a direct push from the U.N. and globalist governments like Germany and China to centralize, govern, and monitor these open-source communities and projects. This is done through direct funding grants, membership fees, participation in leadership, and everyday community collaboration, all under the guise of sustainability and the public good. It sounds like USAID; only this funding is to subvert critical open-source communities and software. There has been an increase in momentum for this centralization and governance in the past three years because the critical nature of these communities and what they produce has come to the attention of the “powers that be.” The fact that ES&S is generating software for critical election infrastructure using tools from an open-source project with these issues increases the likelihood that the software has been compromised.

The Evidence

  1. Yocto is a project under the umbrella of the Linux Foundation, a non-profit group established in 2000 to support Linux development and open-source software projects.[iv]  Umbrella projects are allocated resources from the Linux Foundation parent and receive funding from membership dues. Yocto is also in partnership with other open-source projects like OpenEmbedded and provides financing for those open-source projects as well.[v]
  2. Some of the Yocto participating organizations (ones that were willing to make their participation public) include Meta, Huawei (a Chinese company), Dell, AWS, KCE Group Services (a Venezuelan company), Linaro (a Chinese CEO, non-profit), and others.[vi] I am assuming that ES&S, since they use Yocto, is also a participating organization. However, they have decided not to publicize this.
  3. Yocto received an infusion of funding in 2023 from the Sovereign Tech Fund[vii], now known as the Sovereign Tech Agency – this “is a funding program initiated by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action, aimed at supporting the development and maintenance of open-source software and digital infrastructure. Established in May 2022, it focuses on enhancing technological diversity and resilience in the open-source ecosystem.”[viii]   This is fully supported by the U.N. as well – they appear to be hand in glove to centralize and manage open source.
  4. The Linux Foundation probably provides much funding for Yocto since Yocto is under its umbrella. However, it is hard to tell, given the lack of transparency in the finances of these non-profits. There are some areas of concern about the Linux Foundation:
  •  The Linux Foundation has aligned its goals to the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals[ix]
  • The Linux Foundation believes open-source communities need assistance becoming “sustainable” (ensuring appropriate funding). Therefore, they “suggest that open source work is consolidated under a single banner, such as an Open Source Program Office (OSPO) at companies.   Finally, we suggest incorporating contribution monitoring into the organization’s pipeline. We developed a toolkit to help improve data capture and monitoring.”[x] 
  • The U.N. is pushing for establishing OSPOs – Open Source Program Offices – OSPOs for Good to “champion OSPOs as a global network for good” and  ‘enablers of global cooperation.’[xi]
  • The Sovereign Tech Agency, mentioned above as a source of Yocto funding, is very tightly associated with the United Nations and its goals. The United Nations hosted the 2nd annual OSPOs for Good conference at its headquarters. The Linux Foundation and Sovereign Tech Agency were participants/speakers.
  • There is a definite push to centralize/govern open source communities under the auspices of the U.N. and an effort to get governments, like Germany, more involved to make sure this happens for the sustainability of critical open source technologies. Also, centralization and monitoring are needed for security – to prevent another xz utils incident, which was stopped from going global by sheer “luck.” Never let a crisis go to waste.
  • Jim Zemlin – executive director of the Linux Foundation and Board member: “Jim has been recognized for his insights on the changing economics of the technology industry, and he is a regular keynote speaker at industry events. He advises various startups, including Splashtop, and sits on the boards of the Global Economic Symposium, Open Source For America, and Chinese Open Source Promotion Union.”[xii]  Based on this description, the executive director has strong ties to Chinese and globalist endeavors.
  • China has been increasing its influence in open source – “Today, China’s open source community has become a driving force behind some of the most influential projects in the cloud-native ecosystem.”[xiii]  The article mentioned Kubernetes, but as you will see below, it also includes the Linux Foundation. 
  • Two board members are Chinese – Peixin Hou (Huawai) and Xin Liu (Tencent), representing Chinese-owned companies. Other board members include people from large multinational companies, including Microsoft, Ericsson, Oracle, Intel, Sony, and others.
  • Platinum member companies (which provide a large part of the funding through annual membership fees) include Ericsson, Huawei, and other large multinational companies. Given the large membership fees (500k per year), platinum member companies will likely have a lot of influence over how things are run.
  • Gold member companies ($100k per year) – Ali Baba Cloud (Chinese), Blackrock, Webank (Chinese)’ and others.

This very interesting article that I found while doing research on this – is worth a read.

Shared post – Linux Foundation decreased Linux spending to 3.2% in 2022.


[i] “The Yocto Project is an open-source collaboration project that provides templates, tools, and methods to help you create custom Linux-based systems for embedded system deployments in connected edge devices, servers, or virtual environments, regardless of the hardware architecture.”[i]  An embedded system is a small computer that’s built into a larger device or machine to control it and allow the user to interact with it.  ES&S uses a Yocto project image on its DS200 and DS300 tabulators – the computers that count the votes. 

[ii]https://www.eac.gov/sites/default/files/voting_system/files/ESS%20EVS%206300%20Certificate%20and%20Scope%20of%20Conformance.pdf

[iii] https://www.yoctoproject.org/blog/2023/10/10/sovereign-tech-fund-boosts-yocto-project/

[iv] Linux Foundation – Wikipedia

[v] https://www.yoctoproject.org/blog/2023/10/10/sovereign-tech-fund-boosts-yocto-project/

[vi] https://www.yoctoproject.org/about/participants/

[vii] https://www.sovereign.tech/tech/yocto

[viii] https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/sovereign-tech-fund-boosts-yocto-project

[ix] Sustainability | Linux Foundation

[x] Understanding the State of Open Source Funding in 2024

[xi] OSPOs for Good 2024 | Office for Digital and Emerging Technologies

[xii] Leadership | Linux Foundation

[xiii] https://www.computerweekly.com/news/366608127/The-rise-and-rise-of-open-source-in-China