As for privacy, simply don’t make available sensitive information. Open, here, does not mean “make everything available.” It means those things you do make available, and those things that should be available, make them available in a open (available, parse able, free of charge) format. The access to the data should, of course, be free as well.

Calle, that’s the whole point. It matters little what the actual “standard” is or even that it’s “standard” between government entities. If we simply have OPEN specs then any programmer can simply and easily transform it into ANY other OPEN standard. Again, open means exactly what you described it should mean.

Physical medium includes wireless (airspace is public property). If you want to restrict what ISPs can do, that should be a separate ticket. Also part of being content neutral means allowing anyone willing to pay the price the opportunity to use your network (infrastructure). Thus, no more one ISP for one network. IOW no conflict of interest.

Yes, elections are handled locally. But we could have a simple, straightforward law that simply says “any software on any election equipment used for federal elections must be public property, the source thereof freely available and accessible.” This would leave the states still free to use any systems they feel are best, with one needed but not at all difficult requirement.

Every single piece of election software should be 100% open. Not open source per se, but the code, all code, should be reviewable by anyone. As for companies that already have code, they can sell the code to ‘the people’ or it’s not used. I guess it’s up to the states whether they pay the price the company is asking for the code, or to seek elsewhere.