By Luther Weeks on July 29, 2023
We have said it before, we will say it again: The best protection is machine counting in polling places on election night followed by sufficient post-election audits and recounts. <for example>
A recent article in Votebeat: Activists for hand-counting ballots don’t acknowledge drawbacks: More mistakes, time, and money
Years ago a minority of liberals wanted only hand-counts now its election-denying conservatives.
It seems that those who have never tried have opinions that are not informed by sufficient facts.
Posted in CT, National, Post-Election Audits, Recounts/Recanvasses
By Luther Weeks on January 8, 2022
There is a lot that needs to be improved in our elections. The current bill before Senate and House, the Freedom to Vote Act, is well intended yet in at least one provision it actually makes elections less secure, less likely to provide public confidence. This is a change from previous bills H.R.1 and all version of S.1.
This new provision would prevent observers from within eight feet of ballots until after certification. That would make it impossible for observers to actually see that votes were counted and totaled accurately in audits and recounts (recanvasses in CT).
Posted in National, Post-Election Audits, Recounts/Recanvasses
By Luther Weeks on December 4, 2017
Recent Headlines:
Wisconsin: Walker makes it harder for candidates to get a recount in close races
Former Trump Advisor: Scott Walker Has ‘Rigged’ 5 Elections
Editorial: What is wrong with this picture?
Posted in Electronic Vulnerability, National, Our Editorials, Recounts/Recanvasses
By Luther Weeks on October 28, 2017
“Yesterday, along with representatives from the state’s information technology and public safety departments, I met with regional officials from the United States Department of Homeland Security to discuss how we can work together to ensure that Connecticut elections are safe from outside interference or manipulation. We had a productive meeting and I look forward to working together in the months and years to come to protect our elections, the bedrock of our democracy.” – Denise Merrill, Connecticut Secretary of the State
We applaud this step in the right direction. Last year as leader of the National Association of Secretaries of State, Merrill opposed the designation of elections as critical infrastructure, leading in expressing the concern for a Federal take-over of elections. We were critical of that stand then and remain so.
In our opinion this is just a step. There are several aspects to election security/integrity that should be addressed,. This step may assist in those that are under direct control of the of the the State, yet less so those under local control.
Posted in Chain of Custody, CT, Electronic Vulnerability, Internet Security Issues, Mail/Absentee Voting, Our Editorials, Post-Election Audits, Recounts/Recanvasses
By Luther Weeks on September 26, 2017
CNN: For fair elections … can we get a recount?
We should not ignore calls for audits, recounts, and paper ballots just because the motivator for those calls may be simplistic. There are a multitude of risks beyond Russians, beyond foreigners, beyond skullduggery. Its not just fairness, it is accuracy and democracy.
Posted in Electronic Vulnerability, National, Recounts/Recanvasses
By Luther Weeks on May 30, 2017
Article in The Atlantic: The Case for Standardized and Secure Voting Technology
It’s time to fix the voting process.
American voting systems have improved in recent years, but they collectively remain a giant mess. Voting is controlled by states, and typically administered by counties and local governments. Voting laws differ depending on where you are. Voting machines vary, too; there’s no standard system for the nation.
Accountability is a crapshoot. In some jurisdictions, voters use machines that create electronic tallies with no “paper trail”—that is, no tangible evidence whatsoever that the voter’s choices were honored. A “recount” in such places means asking the machine whether it was right the first time.
We need to fix all of this.
Posted in Internet Voting, National, Post-Election Audits, Recounts/Recanvasses
By Luther Weeks on April 24, 2017
I recently attended a presentation by Columbia County, NY, Election Commissioner Vivian Martin on the post-election audit/recount performed after every election. It should be of interest to every citizen concerned with trust in elections and every election official: “You Can’t Count Paper Ballots” Want to bet?
After every election (using optical scanners) they count every ballot a second time by hand. What can we learn in Connecticut, “The Land of Steady Habits?
We are not necessarily convinced that we need to go as far as Columbia County. Yet, Connecticut needs a much stronger, more comprehensive, transparent audit; we need a stronger more transparent chain-of-custody; a more uniform, higher quality recanvass. There is no reason, other than “we have always done it this way”, for our current post-election schedule. We could perform rigorous automatic recounts rather than recanvasses; we need more to declare and perform recounts/recanvasses. We could emulate other states and perform audits shortly after the election, delaying rigorous/adversarial recounts to later and providing weeks for their completion.
Posted in CT, National, Post-Election Audits, Recounts/Recanvasses
By Luther Weeks on December 22, 2016
The Nation, hopefully, learned some lessons about our existing “recounts” after the November Election. We learned some disappointing lessons in three states. We likely would have learned similar lessons in the other states that have recounts. Remember that only about half the states have recounts at all. What might we have learned about Connecticut’s recanvasses?
We recommend three articles and comment on Connecticut’s recanvasses.
Our best guess is that Connecticut would rank close to Pennsylvania. Observed variations and poor recanvass procedures, with courts sooner or later. stopping or blocking the recanvass.
Posted in CT Law, Electronic Vulnerability, National, Recounts/Recanvasses
By Luther Weeks on July 20, 2015
“Paper receipts are the obvious answer,Florida gave recounts a bad name. But there is something much worse than a recount: the utter inability to recount votes, and reconstruct voters’ true intent, in light of a serious computer error.”
Actually slightly worse and even more suspicious might be having paper ballots and being barred from using them to verify elections.
Posted in National, Post-Election Audits, Recounts/Recanvasses
