Legislature2011

Senate passes risky, expensive online voting bill – Now on consent calendar

Despite opposition by the Secretary of the State and promises to the contrary, the Senate passed S.B.939 with online voting, placing it on the Senate consent calendar.

Op-Ed, Denise Merrill: “Bill Ends Ballot Shortages, Protects Voters”

We agree with Secretary Merrill in strongly supporting passage of the bill. Yet it is insufficient. More is required to recover from similar problems in the future such that all votes are counted initially, followed by time for a full statewide recanvass, when based on corrections to initial results, the tallies become close. We continue to recommend the stronger measures in the Coalition Bridgeport Recount Report.

Risky, expensive online voting bill moves forward in legislature

Yesterday, after a brief discussion S.B. 939 was passed by the Planning and Development Committee. As we have discussed many times, online voting is risky and expensive.

More online voting risks and opportunities for skulduggery

We have been warning of the risks of Internet voting and ignoring science since our founding. Yet, we have overlooked some of the risks, literally right in front of our nose.

Military Internet voting requirement tucked into “Technical Bill”

If you accept the science that global warming is caused by human activity – you have much more reason to oppose Internet voting.

GAE Committee changed title and substance of bill

A “Technical” change to existing statutes becomes a National Popular Vote Agreement.

Courant Op-Ed: Daniel Patrick Moynihan warned of national popular vote risks

We have learned more about voting integrity since the time of Senator Moynihan. It would be even worse than he imagined.

Laws interact – be careful what you legislate

Earlier this month we cautioned the legislature about enacting the UMOVE Act without providing election officials an opportunity to check for conflicts with existing laws. We highlight an example of a similar conflict in existing state and local laws that frustrates officials and disenfranchises voters.

A little bit of nonsense in well intended proposed law

“If you cannot fit all the races or candidates on a paper ballot…then use a paper ballot”

Testimony on eight bills, including the National Popular Vote

Today the Government Administration and Election Committee (GAE) held hearings on a variety of election related bills. We testified against seven bills and lukewarmly for one.

Since 2007, I have been the only person to testify against the National Popular Vote (NPV) Compact in Connecticut. Finally, this year I was not alone. But I remain the only Connecticut citizen to testify against the NPV Compact.

I challenge anyone to a responsible public blog debate on any and all of the issues we raised in our testimony on the National Popular Vote Compact.

Page 1 of 212