By Luther Weeks on August 28, 2017
“Justice delayed is justice denied.” What could be worse? Perhaps “Justice delayed and fines transferred to the victims.”
In 2014 the Registrars in Hartford failed to provide check-off lists to polling places in time for voting to begin at 6:00am. From the stories of the public and explanations from officials at the time, it seems pretty clear it was not a simple error or comedy of errors.
Editorial
The pollbook delay went beyond incompetence. These conclusions and fines should not take close to three years. The well-compensated registrars should be paying the fines not the City.
Posted in CT, CT Skulduggery and Errors, Our Editorials
By Luther Weeks on August 24, 2017
A vigilant Registrar in New Haven pursues suspicions. From the New Haven Independent Judge Hopeful Submits Forged Signatures <read>
Americo Carchia Wednesday said he’s considering whether to end his campaign for probate judge and vowed to cooperate with any potential criminal investigations after learning that he had submitted petitions with forged signatures to qualify for the Sept. 12 Democratic primary ballot.
Posted in CT, CT Skulduggery and Errors
By Luther Weeks on July 31, 2017
Today marks the 10th anniversary of CTVotesCount. We had been planning the organization and the blog for a couple of months – we launched after the end of a summer vacation. We wondered if there would be any news during August?. Coincidentally, the Top To Bottom Review commissioned by the Secretary of the State of California was just coming out – that was quite a start – the Top To Bottom Review remains an important landmark in voting integrity.
Our goals remain:
Posted in CT
By Luther Weeks on July 17, 2017
Voting as we know it, depends on two important keys that are often difficult for the public, media, and sometimes even experts to understand.
Voting rolls and check-in lists need to be available to every citizen, young and old, so that the public can be assured that only registered voters voted, that they voted in the correct primary, that the number of ballots match the number of voters checked in, and that those checked in actually did vote. Otherwise there is no basis for trust in democracy.
Public voting rolls provide the only means for individuals and news organizations to independently investigate voting fraud; they provide officials with the credible proof that fraud is limited; and they help the public to trust in decisions by the State Elections Enforcement Commission.
Posted in CT, Our Editorials
By Luther Weeks on July 7, 2017
There is much to criticize in the Trump Commission. Yet there is no excuse for officials to unilaterally disobey the law. There are reasons for voting lists and voting history to be public documents. Perhaps we can providing a teaching moment.
Posted in CT, National
By Luther Weeks on June 27, 2017
Many articles on the Congressional hearings on the “Russian” hacking or not hacking of our elections. Brad Friedman and Mark Karlin come closet to my opinions:
Recent article by Mark Karlin referencing Brad Friedman: Beyond the Russians, Electronic Voting Machines Are Vulnerable to Any Hackers
Journalists and activists have been sounding the alarm about electronic voting machines and their proprietary software for years. The vulnerability of these machines to hacking has not been front and center for some time — primarily due to the failure of the corporate media and legislative bodies to take it seriously. That changed, to some extent, with the charges about Russian hacking from US intelligence agencies. However, the current emphasis is on the Russians allegedly attempting to influence the 2016 election, not on the flawed electronic voting machines that make hacking possible…
Meanwhile, our Secretary of the State continues to spread myths about the safety of voting systems not connected to the internet and “tamper-proof” seals that are at best “tamper-evident”.
We add that paper ballots are insufficient. They need protection from tampering. We need sufficient audits and recounts. Audits and recounts that are comprehensive and convincing. Audits and recounts that are transparent and publicly verifiable.f
Posted in CT, Electronic Vulnerability, National
By Luther Weeks on June 16, 2017
NPR story by Pam Fessler: If Voting Machines Were Hacked, Would Anyone Know? Fessler quotes several experts and election officials including Connecticut Assistant Secretary of the State Peggy Reeves:
Still, Connecticut Election Director Peggy Reeves told a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine panel on Monday that many local election officials are ill-equipped to handle cybersecurity threats.
“Many of our towns actually have no local IT support,” she said. “Seriously, they don’t have an IT director in their town. They might have a consultant that they call on if they have an issue. So they look to us, but we’re a pretty small division.”
Reeves said the best protection against hackers is probably the fact that the nation’s voting system isso decentralized, with different processes and equipment used in thousands of different locations.
We certainly agree with that and the cybersecurity experts quoted.
Posted in CT, Electronic Vulnerability, Internet Security Issues, National
By Luther Weeks on June 12, 2017
Every year Connecticut’s Citizen Election Program is under assault. This year is no different.
Here is the bottom line: The Citizen’s Election Program is a drop in the bucket. A small percentage of what we pay for the General Assembly and its staff; A smaller percentage of the state budget; $10 million a year compared to billions in the budget. Just one bad decision against the people can cost us several times that $10 million.
Read more from the In These Times article: Ten Years Ago, Connecticut Got Big Money Out of Its Elections. Now Democrats Are Gutting the Program
Posted in Legislature 2017
By Luther Weeks on May 24, 2017
A few municipalities conduct elections in May rather than November. We joined Deputy Secretary of the State Scott Bates, Assistant Secretary Peggy Reeves, and SOTS Office Interns for the drawing. Sadly, due to last year’s reduction in the audit, only one district will be audited.
We strongly object to the official press release’s characterization of Connecticut’s Post-Election Audit as “Comprehensive”. A comprehensive audit would not exempt ballots from selection for audit, it would audit the totaling of votes, and include compliance audits of all aspects of the election such as checkin lists, voter roles, and ballot security.
Posted in CT, Post-Election Audits
By Luther Weeks on May 19, 2017
It is rare that a bill is debated that has insufficient majority caucus support to pass.
[Speaker] Aresimowicz said he’s heard from his constituents that they want the issue debated.“I’m saying let’s at least hear it out and have the discussion,” Aresimowicz said Thursday morning during a press conference in his office before the House debated the bill.
House Majority Leader Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, said he expects the vote to be close and it’s unclear what will happen.
Here, we disagree with both sides. We do not buy the Republican arguments against nor the Democratic arguments for the bill. We would support a sufficient Constitutional Amendment. The Compact approach is dangerous making, a flawed system worse. It will lead to increased voter suppression and skulduggery.v
Posted in CT, National Popular Vote
