YouTube logo on display during LeWeb Paris 2012 on Dec. 4, 2012. (Eric Piermont/AFP via Getty Images) Censorship & Socialism

By Petr Svab April 2, 2021 Updated: April 2, 2021 biggersmallerPrint

YouTube has deleted about 2.5 million ‘dislikes’ from videos on the official White House channel of President Joe Biden, according to data collected and posted online by a researcher who wished to remain anonymous. YouTube recently announced that it’s testing a new page design that hides the dislike count.

The Google-owned video platform allows users to give videos either a thumb up (like) or thumb down (dislike). For at least two years, it’s had a policy to remove likes and dislikes it considers spam.

“We have policies and systems in place to ensure that the engagement on YouTube is authentic, and remove any fraudulent metrics,” a YouTube spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email, but when asked, wouldn’t go into details on what criteria it uses to make these calls.

The White House videos have seen these kinds of interventions on an ongoing basis, but it appears it’s only the dislikes that are disappearing.

The channel has posted more than 300 videos that have garnered nearly 3.7 million dislikes of which nearly 2.5 million were removed, according to data posted on the website 81m.org. The author of the website started to track the engagement on January 26 and has published all the data as well as the methodology used to collect it, but wouldn’t comment on his or her identity when asked via email.

YouTube is deleting close to 8,000 dislikes per video on average. Not a single like was removed, the data indicates.

Even after the interventions, the videos have nearly six times more dislikes than likes on average, the data shows. Without intervention the ratio would be over 17 dislikes for every like.

Posts on social media indicate that some supporters of former President Donald Trump make a point of disliking the Biden White House videos. The videos often get thousands of dislikes shortly after popping online, only for a large portion of the dislikes being deleted later.

In some cases, batches of dislikes would be removed about once an hour, keeping the dislike count around the same number. In other cases, a large portion of dislikes would be chopped down at once, the data indicates.

The website 81m.org lists results of the same analysis for several other YouTube channels with large followings. None of them exhibited dislike removals of this magnitude.

Videos of PewDiePie, one of the most popular channels on the platform, do show some like and dislike removals, but never more than a few dozen per video, based on a review of the data for the past more than two dozen videos on the channel.

YouTube recently announced testing of a design that still includes the dislike button, but no longer shows the number of dislikes.

“This is a test for a small group of users and is a response to creator feedback that the visible count may impact their wellbeing,” a spokesperson said via email.

YouTube and its owner, Google, have long faced accusations of political bias. The companies have said their products are developed and run as politically neutral, but employee accounts and leaked internal materials indicate the companies are infusing their politics into their products.

According to research psychologist Robert Epstein, Google shifted millions of votes in the Nov. 3 election by skewing its search results and other tools, compared to competitors.

“Google search results were strongly biased in favor of liberals and Democrats. This was not true on Bing or Yahoo,” Epstein told Fox News’ Tucker Carlson, referring to data from more than 700 voters who worked with him to monitor what results they were receiving from channels such as search results, reminders, search suggestions, and newsfeeds ahead of the election.

Google previously rejected Epstein’s research results.

A syringe is prepared with COVID-19 vaccine at a vaccination clinic in Montreal, on March 15, 2021. The two provinces hit hardest by COVID-19 are weighing stricter restrictions amid surging case counts, as health officials and politicians urge Canadians to stay home over the upcoming Easter holiday. (Paul Chiasson / The Canadian Press) Vaccines

By Jack Phillips April 2, 2021 Updated: April 2, 2021 biggersmallerPrint

One of the largest and oldest civil liberties groups panned proposals by governments and corporations to introduce so-called “vaccine passports,” or documentation that shows people they are vaccinated.

“There is a difference between a standardized system for presenting proof of vaccination, and a digital system for doing so,” the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) wrote. “With more and more of our credentials being displayed through apps on our phones—from airline boarding passes to concert tickets to gym memberships—it strikes many people as an obvious and overdue step to create a similar digital credential for those occasions when a person has to prove that they’ve been vaccinated.”

Last week, White House spokesperson Jen Psaki confirmed to reporters that the Biden administration is working with private companies regarding a vaccine passport system, although she said there is no federal mandate to implement such a system. New York state is also planning to roll out its “Excelsior” system that would allow people to enter certain events, concerts, and more.

The ACLU noted that a digital system is problematic because numerous people don’t own a smartphone, meaning they cannot display a vaccine passport document digitally or via an app.

“As a result, any vaccine credential system would need to include a paper-based version for those who don’t have a smartphone or simply don’t want to use one,” the group wrote on March 31.

Such a system also should “not allow for tracking or the creation of new databases” with the caveat that the “vaccine credential system is completely decentralized and user-centric.”

“If some big company is getting notified any time someone reads one of your credentials, that would let them track your movements and interests—the stores, concerts, and transportation venues you visit, and much more. In the absence of airtight legal protections for privacy, any such information could then be sold for commercial purposes or shared with law enforcement,” the ACLU wrote.

It added: “Fear of tracking could lead people to opt-out of participation, resulting in further marginalization as they are denied access to certain public spaces. Worse, without privacy protections strong enough to create public confidence, it could even deter people from getting vaccinated in the first place.”

Some states, meanwhile, have introduced proposals to bar such vaccine passports.

On Wednesday, for example, the Missouri state Senate took steps to ban COVID-19 passports in the state.

“No entity in this state shall require documentation of an individual having received a vaccination against any disease in order for the individual to access transportation systems or services,” according to the text of a proposed bill.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, said he would take executive action to ban the passports, telling reporters last month that they’re a “terrible idea.”

The logos of mobile apps Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, Facebook, Google and Messenger displayed on a tablet on Oct. 1, 2019. (Denis Charlet/AFP via Getty Images) Media & Big Tech

By Samuel Allegri April 1, 2021 Updated: April 2, 2021 biggersmallerPrint

The Texas Senate passed a bill that forbids social media companies that have at least 100 million users per month to block, ban, demonetize, or discriminate against any of their users due to their political views.

Senate Bill 12, which is sponsored by Republican state Sen. Bryan Hughes, passed on Thursday and would apply to Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, and other platforms.

Hughes said in a video posted on Twitter that the bill is going to “get Texans back online.”

“I think we all have to acknowledge, these social media companies are the new town square,” Hughes said.

“And a small group of people in San Francisco can’t dictate free speech for the rest of us. It needs to be an open exchange of ideas, and Senate Bill 12 is going to get Texans back online.”

He said that the bill is on its way to the state House and that it is expected to get a good consideration, adding that he hopes that the governor will sign it into law soon. https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?creatorScreenName=EpochTimes&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1377534968159698946&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Ftexas-senate-passes-bill-that-would-block-social-media-companies-from-banning-users-for-their-political-views_3758952.html&siteScreenName=EpochTimes&theme=light&widgetsVersion=e1ffbdb%3A1614796141937&width=550px

The measure would require companies to make their moderation policies known, publish reports about the content blocked out by the platform, and create an appeals process for the removed content.

Hughes recognized that if the bill is signed into law, it would most likely face legal challenges.

“Even though they’re private actors, because they are common carriers, because they chose to enter this business and offer their services, then they are bound by certain rules,” Hughes told The Texas Tribune.

Two companion bills have already been sent to the House but have not yet moved ahead in the State Affairs Committee.

Hughes is very optimistic in regard to the bill. He said that their team is very strong and sharp, and is prepared to take the fight to court.

“We know we’re going to be sued if we pass this bill. Facebook is going to take us to court. Facebook and Google and Twitter have armies of lawyers and lobbyists who will be fighting us on this. But we’re on the right side, the law is on our side. Yes, we expect to see this bill passed, put in place, and protecting Texans’ free speech,” Hughes told NTD in February.

Hughes said that this problem “cries out for a federal solution,” but that they can’t wait for it. He believes this bill will thread the needle to get past federal limitations and will serve as a model for other states to do the same.

Seattle City Councilmember Kshama Sawant addresses supporters during her inauguration and “Tax Amazon 2020 Kickoff” event in Seattle, Wash., on Jan. 13, 2020. (Jason Redmond/AFP via Getty Images) US News

By Isabel van Brugen April 2, 2021 Updated: April 2, 2021 biggersmallerPrint

The Washington state Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that efforts to recall Seattle City Councilmember Kshama Sawant can move forward.

Sawant, a socialist representing Capitol Hill and the Central District, faced a recall after being accused of abusing her office by letting a large group of protesters into city hall last year with her passkey, using city resources in promoting a ballot initiative to impose taxes on Amazon, and outsourcing decisions regarding the hiring and firing of city employees to her party’s executive committee.

She is also accused of violating code when she led a protest march to Mayor Jenny Durkan’s private residence even with the knowledge that the mayor’s address was protected under confidentiality laws because of threats from to her previous work as a U.S. attorney.

A county judge ruled in September 2020 that those four charges were “factually and legally sufficient for recall” efforts to proceed.

A group of Seattle residents who believe Sawant’s actions warrant her removal from office began the campaign to recall her, leading to the decision. Sawant appealed that ruling to the state Supreme Court.

In the next 180 days, the petition to oust Sawant, which was first brought by Seattle resident Ernest Lou, must collect 10,000 signatures from residents of Sawant’s Council District 3 in order to get the recall on the ballot.

Sawant’s campaign fighting the push to remove her from office has blamed “big business” and “right wing” influence for the recall effort.

“Big biz and the right wing are furious about the impact of socialist politics and social movements in Seattle & how we have inspired working people around the country,” the Kshama Solidarity Campaign wrote on Twitter. “They are now trying to use the courts & their deep pockets to overturn Councilmember Sawant’s 2019 re-election.”

Henry Bridger II, campaign manager and chairman of the Recall Sawant committee, has pushed back against that claim. He describes himself as a Democrat and a liberal.

“I’m unemployed, I live in a studio apartment here on Capitol Hill,” Bridger said, The Seattle Times reported. “It’s not run by any right-wing anything.”

Sawant, who was first elected in 2013, and subsequently elected in 2015 and 2019, described the Washington state Supreme Court’s ruling as “completely unjust” in a statement.

“But we are not surprised,” Sawant said. “Working people and oppressed communities cannot rely on the capitalist courts for justice any more than they can on the police.” The far-left have continued pushing socialist arguments that private wealth and the police force are solely negative forces in society, while others may point to the good or bad intentions of the individual in a position of wealth or power among law-enforcement establishments.Read MoreCapitalism: How Capitalists Took the Word From Communists

If the group are able to gather the 10,000 signatures in the allotted 180 days, a vote would then be held to oust Sawant from office either with November’s general election, or by early next year, The Seattle Times reported.

Censorship & Socialism

By Janita Kan and Jan Jekielek April 2, 2021 Updated: April 2, 2021 biggersmallerPrint

Investigate journalist Sharyl Attkisson says combatting censorship in today’s media and big tech landscape requires Americans to “speak up” and stand firm against people and groups that seek to silence them.

“I think the most important single thing people can do is to speak up and not be bullied by the people that want to keep the voices silent so that it appears, in this artificial world that we live in online, that everybody’s on the same page and everybody thinks the same thing and this is okay,” Attkisson told The Epoch Times’ American Thought Leaders program.

“Don’t be kowtowed into not speaking out. Don’t act like that’s okay.”

Attkisson, author of “The Smear,” has been researching how information has been controlled in the United States, particularly by political and corporate interest groups. She said these groups began ramping up their efforts to control information once Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election. But these groups, she argued, began realizing Americans were not “getting on board” with their messaging and, as a result, started to act out of desperation.

“The reason they’re being so heavy-handed about information and access is because people are not getting on board with what they’re supposed to think and do. They’re not acting the way they’re supposed to act after their information is controlled. And I think it was very frightening for them to see,” she said.

“As I said, they almost entirely controlled the media landscape in 2016 but Trump still won the election. How did that happen? Well, they blamed the internet.”

This comes as big tech companies have drawn intense scrutiny for perceived political bias and alleged unbalanced moderation of users content. Critics say much of the companies’ moderation in the past year has unfairly targeted conservative speech and speech from individuals deemed to be supporters of former President Donald Trump.

Meanwhile, groups on the other side of the aisle have been taking issue with how social media companies are operating, claiming that the Silicon Valley companies have failed to adequately address “misinformation” that is being proliferated online.

Attkisson said these political and corporate interest groups spent the last four years—during Trump’s presidency—working “very hard to control the internet.” However, it still did not go their way. The 2020 presidential election became one of the most disputed elections and, although President Joe Biden ascended to the White House, Trump still received more votes “than they imagined he would get,” she argued.

“It’s sort of like the wind trying to blow the raincoat off the man when actually you can get the raincoat off with the sun. The harder they try to control the information, the harder some people work, and the more obvious their control is, and the more we resist in terms of wanting our information free and unfettered,” she said.

Despite their efforts, Attkisson said she believes the pendulum will eventually swing the other way. But in the meantime, Americans should not fall for their tactics by gathering all their information online. Instead, Americans should try living “outside of that box,” talk to people in the real world, and try to understand the extent of how disconnected the news and social media are from reality.

She said, for example, that when she traveled around the country in the past year, she encountered some small communities that did not experience any spikes or repercussions during the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus pandemic despite not ever locking down. She said that while the pandemic hit some places very hard, it did not affect other places at all.

“So, what you see on the news sometimes keeps us … hyper-focused, as if it’s, in an exaggerated sense, on phenomenons that are real and happening in some places but certainly not the story that’s being told of all of America. And I think that’s true of a lot of different issues that are being discussed today,” she said.

She also added that Americans should not succumb to attempts by these groups to ostracize individuals with differing viewpoints.

“They want you to think, they want to create this impression that if you have a viewpoint or you believe facts that they don’t want you to believe, that you’re an outlier, you’re sort of fringe,” she said. “That’s what they want you to think, even when you may not be, but it’s to create an impression online that you shouldn’t speak out or you shouldn’t say what you think or say what you believe because it’s so far out there and so off the norm when it’s not.”

The Pentagon building is seen in Washington in a file photograph. (AFP via Getty Images) US News

By Zachary Stieber April 1, 2021 Updated: April 1, 2021 biggersmallerPrint

A Department of Defense diversity chief who compared former President Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler has been given a different assignment as his social media activity is probed.

Richard Torres-Estrada, a former Virginia diversity official, was hired in March by U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) as its chief of diversity and inclusion. When made aware of the post comparing Trump to Hitler, and other posts denigrating Republican officials, the Pentagon began an investigation.

Torres-Estrada is carrying out other duties at USSOCOM amid the probe, military spokesmen said.

“Mr. Torres-Estrada has been assigned to other duties pending the results of the investigation,” a USSOCOM spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email.

Asked why USSOCOM didn’t immediately terminate Torres-Estrada, the spokesperson added: “Personnel actions for civilian personnel assigned to headquarters USSOCOM are governed by federal law and civilian personnel regulations from the Office of Personnel Management, the Department of Defense, and the Department of the Air Force. Civilian employees have rights under those laws and regulations.  When allegations are made about an employee, the command must determine what the facts are and what actions, if any, are appropriate under those laws and regulations before taking action.”

Special Operations Command claimed to be unaware of the activity before hiring the official.

Torres-Estrada didn’t immediately respond to requests by The Epoch Times for comment. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin supports the investigation, a Pentagon spokesman said this week.

“Obviously, we take the need to promote diversity and inclusion seriously here in the department,” Pentagon spokesman John Kirby told reporters in Washington. “The secretary has spoken of that many times. And we certainly want that work to be transparent, to be credible, to be effective, and, of course, professional. We want everybody to take those duties and those responsibilities seriously and professionally.”

Lawmakers have expressed dismay over the hiring of Torres-Estrada, based on the posts.

“I am shocked at the hiring of Richard Torres-Estrada as Chief of Diversity and Inclusion at one of America’s functional combatant command headquarters. Comparing former President Trump, who was duly elected by the American people, to a genocidal madman directly responsible for killing six million Jewish men and women shows irredeemably poor judgment and the total inability to separate fact from fiction,” Rep. Bill Johnson (R-Ohio) said in a statement.

Johnson sent a letter to Austin asking for a detailed report on the official’s qualifications, and whether a background check had uncovered Torres-Estrada’s posts, which were made on his publicly available Facebook account.

“What do you think, will a ‘diversity and inclusion’ officer for our elite military units make America stronger? Or are China and Russia laughing at us?” added Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.) in a tweet.

Eric Trump, Lara Yunaska Trump, Donald Trump, Barron Trump, Melania Trump, Vanessa Haydon Trump, Kai Madison Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Donald John Trump III, and Ivanka Trump pose for photos on stage in 2015. (Christopher Gregory/Getty Images) Donald Trump

By Jack Phillips April 1, 2021 Updated: April 1, 2021 biggersmallerPrint

Former President Donald Trump’s daughter-in-law issued a warning after Facebook removed her interview with the former commander-in-chief earlier this week.

Lara Trump posted screenshots of alleged emails sent by a Facebook representative saying that content in the “voice of Donald Trump” will be removed. A person close to the Trump Organization confirmed to The Epoch Times on March 31 that a video of an interview with Trump was taken down by the social media giant.

“I know that people that dislike Donald Trump might celebrate this and think, ‘Well this is great, we don’t want to hear from him anyway,’” Lara Trump told Fox News on March 26. “Every American should be outraged by this because today it’s Donald Trump; tomorrow, it could be you.”

The censorship, she said, “is something that happens in communist countries” and added that “the message here is they want to erase Donald Trump.”

“They want you to forget he ever existed. They don’t want you to see him, they don’t want you to hear from him. Look away, move on, shut up, and go on about your lives, forget Donald Trump existed. This is really scary stuff,” continued Trump, who is married to Eric Trump, in the Fox interview.

According to screenshots of the purported emails, a Facebook representative told her: “We are reaching out to let you know that we removed content from Lara Trump’s Facebook page that featured President Trump speaking.

“In line with the block, we placed on Donald Trump’s Facebook and Instagram account, further content posted in the voice of Donald Trump will be removed and result in additional limitations on the accounts.”

Facebook officials didn’t immediately respond to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.

Another email from a Facebook staffer gave a “reminder” that content “in the voice” of Trump isn’t allowed on the social media platform, according to Lara Trump’s Instagram post.

“The guidance applies to all campaign accounts and Pages, including Team Trump, other campaign messaging vehicles on our platforms, and former surrogates,” it read.

In January, the former president was suspended from Twitter, Facebook, and other Big Tech platforms, which claimed that Trump was inciting violence or would incite further violence following the Jan. 6 riots.

Trump told Lara Trump that Twitter has since become “boring” without him and asserted that “millions” of people have left while promoting his newfound practice of sending out emailed press statements. Meanwhile, his adviser Jason Miller told news outlets last month that the former president is working to create a new social media platform, although details are scant.

President Joe Biden talks to reporters during the first news conference of his presidency in the East Room of the White House in Washington on March 25, 2021. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) Executive Branch

By The Daily Caller News Foundation April 2, 2021 Updated: April 2, 2021 biggersmallerPrint

• President Joe Biden tacked on measures to his infrastructure plan that make it easier for workers to organize and more difficult for them to avoid unionization.
• “[The plan will] create good-quality jobs … while ensuring workers have a free and fair choice to organize, join a union, and bargain collectively with their employers,” the White House said in a press release.
• Biden also urged Congress to pass the pro-union Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act as part of the infrastructure plan.

President Joe Biden tacked on measures to his infrastructure plan that make it easier for workers to organize and more difficult for them to avoid unionization.

The $2 trillion infrastructure plan, which Biden laid out in a speech Wednesday evening, ensures that workers are able to bargain collectively with their employers, according to a White House press release. The plan introduces new “labor protections” that enable workers to more easily organize.

“[The plan will] create good-quality jobs that pay prevailing wages in safe and healthy workplaces while ensuring workers have a free and fair choice to organize, join a union, and bargain collectively with their employers,” the White House said in the release.

Biden also urged Congress to pass the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act as part of the infrastructure plan. The PRO Act is a compilation of various policy changes that labor unions support, which would make it easier for unions to organize private-sector employees and minimize employees’ choice in unionization.

The bill would remove workers’ ability to vote against unionization via secret ballot elections, threatens the ability for a workforce to kick a union out, redefines legal definition of independent contractors and forces non-union workers to pay union dues.

The House passed the legislation largely along party lines in March, which is expected to face roadblocks in the Senate. Republicans criticized the bill as a wish list for union leaders.

“Here’s who else is a union guy: Joe Biden,” said International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 29 member Michael Fiore who introduced Biden on Wednesday. “He said again and again, ‘unions built the middle class.’ That’s why his plan supports collective bargaining rights.”

Fiore’s remarks were prepared by the White House, IBEW Local 29 said in a blog post following Biden’s speech, which took place at a union training facility.

“Biden’s pledge to unify the country takes another hit by adding a radical and overreaching poison pill like the PRO Act to his infrastructure plan that would deteriorate the relationship between employers and employees,” Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW) Chair Kristen Swearingen said in a statement.

“The PRO Act would be devastating to small businesses and employees in the infrastructure industry, especially small, women- and minority-owned contractors who would have otherwise benefited from investment in our nation’s infrastructure,” Swearingen said.

The CDW represents hundreds of thousands of employers nationwide and hundreds of trade groups like the Associated Builders and Contractors and the National Restaurant Association.

Conservative advocacy group Americans for Prosperity (AFP) vowed to leverage its nationwide grassroots activist network to “urge lawmakers to reject harmful elements of the proposal.”

“[The infrastructure plan provides] favors to labor unions that undermine workers’ rights and their ability to find work,” AFP President Tim Phillips said in a statement.

But Labor Secretary Marty Walsh called the plan historic and said he would work to ensure workers from across the country received access to the opportunities provided in the proposal.

“President Biden’s American Jobs Plan is a historic investment in the working people of America,” Walsh said in a statement Thursday. “It will create millions of good paying, family sustaining jobs that rebuild the middle class by empowering our workers to build America’s future.”

“As Labor Secretary, I stand ready to make sure these opportunities reach workers from all walks of life and in every corner of our country,” Walsh said.

The White House didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki speaks to reporters in Washington on April 1, 2021. (Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images) Executive Branch

By Zachary Stieber April 2, 2021 Updated: April 2, 2021 biggersmallerPrint

The White House on Thursday defended President Joe Biden’s inaccurate critique of Georgia’s newly passed election reform law.

Biden has claimed that the law requires polls to close at 5 p.m. but it does not. He also said the bill bars people from providing voters who are in line with water or food. It does, but makes an exception for freestanding water receptacles that are self-serve.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki defended the inaccuracies after a reporter during a briefing in Washington noted them.

The bill “standardizes the ending of voting every day at five, right? It just gives options?” she said. “It gives options to expand it—right?—but it standardized it at five. It also makes it so that outside groups can’t provide water or food to people in line. Right? It makes it more difficult to absentee vote. Are those things all correct?”

“So, no, our tone is not changing. We have concerns about the specific components of the package, including the fact that it makes it harder and more difficult for people to vote by limiting absentee options; by making it not viable, not possible for people to provide water to people who are in line; by not standardizing longer hours. So, if you’re making it harder to vote, no, we don’t support that,” she added.

The bill changes the vague “normal business hours” during which voting shall be conducted to 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., at minimum. However, clerks can keep polling sites open as long as 12 hours, or from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.

Additionally, it states that people may not actively “offer to give, or participate in the giving of any money or gifts, including, but not limited to, food and drink, to an elector,” adding later that nothing prohibits a poll officer “from making available self-service water from an unattended receptacle to an elector waiting in line to vote.”

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, a newspaper in Georgia, offered a correction after also falsely claiming the new law would limit voting hours.

“Nothing in the new law changes those rules,” the paper said.

“It is obvious that neither President Biden nor his handlers have actually read SB 202, which I signed into law yesterday,” Gov. Brian Kemp said in a recent emailed statement to The Epoch Times. “This bill expands voting access, streamlines vote-counting procedures, and ensures election integrity.”

why?