By Luther Weeks on May 10, 2013
As the Connecticut General Assembly contemplates online voting, we should contemplate r the implications of the recent Liberal Party online vote. In this case it was a landslide. What if it was very very close? Or there were polls saying the other candidate should have won by a comfortable or small margin?
Bonus: 2,904 reasons in New York City alone, that Internet banking and Internet voting can be costly.
Posted in Internet Voting, National
By Luther Weeks on April 13, 2013
As promised, comments on earlier bills passed through the Government Administration and Elections Committee.
Posted in Internet Voting, Legislature2013, Mail/Absentee Voting, National Popular Vote, Post-Election Audits
By Luther Weeks on April 8, 2013
The Government Administration and Elections Committee met for the last time before its deadline to consider and approve 39 bills. After an hour long Democratic caucus they discussed the bills for about three hours. In honor of the late Roger Ebert we provide graphic summaries of our comments.
Posted in Internet Voting, Legislature2013
By Luther Weeks on April 4, 2013
This was a simple online poll that was easily compromised. Internet voting vendor software will be harder to compromise, but this shows that computer security is hard and claims must be proved. Before we entrust critical public functions such as voting to such software, the public deserves a solid demonstration that such claims are truly substantiated, and policy makers need to be schooled in a proper skepticism about computer security. That has not yet happened.
Posted in Internet Voting, National, Other Editorials
By Luther Weeks on March 31, 2013
We are not done in Connecticut, even for this year. Two other bills are still in play. A competing online voting bill, and the UMOVEA bill. The last Committee meeting that can approve bills is Friday April 5th. Perhaps the competing bill will be dropped or also changed to a study. Perhaps the UMOVEA bill was mentioned because it contains provisions to help military vote, but likely not provisions for online voting. Beyond that all bills are subject to dramatic change and consolidation prior to votes by the Senate and House. Like last year, a section authorizing online voting could be stuffed into any other bill by the Committee, even a bill otherwise especially attractive the Governor.
Posted in Internet Voting, Legislature2013
By Luther Weeks on March 24, 2013
Connecticut does need to improve the voting process for military voters — but Internet voting is not the answer.
Every day, headlines reveal just how vulnerable and insecure any online network really is, and how sophisticated, tenacious and skilled today’s attackers are. Just last week, we learned that the U.S. has already experienced our first-ever documented attack on an election system, when a grand jury report revealed that someone hacked into the Miami-Dade primary elections system in August 2012.
Posted in Internet Voting, Legislature2013, Other Editorials
By Luther Weeks on March 10, 2013
Now we have it, a redrafted S.B. 647. We do not know who was involved around the table rewriting it, yet what we have is almost an exact copy of the bill Governor Malloy vetoed last year as risky and unconstitutional.
Posted in Internet Voting, Legislature2013, Mail/Absentee Voting
By Luther Weeks on February 21, 2013
With the same success as Rhode Island, perhaps this bill would decrease Connecticut’s failed return rate from 40% to 36.8%.
Posted in Internet Voting, Legislature2013
By Luther Weeks on February 19, 2013
I applaud this Committee for holding hearings on this Unconstitutional, Risky, Unnecessary, and Discriminatory bill. Last year, without hearings, this concept it was placed far down in an unrelated emergency bill.
Posted in Internet Voting, Legislature2013
By Luther Weeks on February 8, 2013
It has been a matter of consideral discussion and evaluation in Edmonton, Alberta. Should they jump on the bandwagon and double the cost of elections to accept the risks of Internet voting? For now, Edmonton is solidly on the side of science, rejecting Internet voting for very good reasons.
Like DDT, Nuclear Power, Fast Food, and GMOs, Internet voting has some very attractive, beneficial aspects, yet there are often unknown, overlooked, or downplayed real or potential problems. It takes a lot of careful research and evaluation to determine the net current and future risks and benefits.
Posted in Internet Voting, National
