S.B. 1051: Too much, too little, too risky

Last week the Government Administration and Elections Committee passed a modified version of S.B. 1051, hailed by the Secretary of the State and ROVAC (Registrars Of Voters Association of Connecticut) as a ‘bipartisan’ compromise.

Yet, all the compromising seems to be the agreement of election officials on a bill that would make registrars jobs easier while adding largely undefined and unchecked powers for the current and future Secretaries of the State.

Bill to study regionalization of elections moves forward

Last week Government Administration and Elections Committee (GAE) on passed a modified version of S.B. 1083out of committee. It would empower a task force to study regionalization of election administration. Earlier we testified in favor of the bill pointing to the possible benefits of such a task force.

UK Considers risky online voting…Safe enough for democracy?

Guardian article, apparently titled by an editor who trusts MPs opinions more than scientists and experience: Why electronic voting isn’t secure – but may be safe enough .

Safe enough, not for democracy. The link to the article says it better “Why Electronic Voting is NOT SECURE.

New South Wales wails: Researchers find flaws in Internet voting system

New South Wales, Australia is holding an election with a significant number of online votes. Researchers point out several concerns…

Testimony – Do for Elections What We Have Done for Probate

How often is there a bill with everyone testifying for it? Not often!

Monday I testified to the Government Administration and Elections Committee on S.B. 1083 that would empower a task force to study regionalization of election administration.

Lottery better pay-off than witch hunt

Iowa spent a lot of time, money and rhetoric on a witch hunt for illegal immigrant voting.

If I were an illegal immigrant, my goal would be to stay under the radar. I would avoid speeding, drunk driving, and doing anything that might get me caught.

CORRECTED: Testimony On Five Bills

Monday I testified to the Government Administration and Elections Committee on five elections bills. For one bill and against four others.

Most of the testimony was on the Secretary of the State’s bill, S.B. 1051, that would turn elections over to a single registrar in each town under the direction of an official appointed by the town council or similar body.

Testimony on another flawed bill

Last week there was a public hearing for another well-intended yet risky bill. This bill would allow absentee voting for any person who was absent for any amount of time from their town on election day. We are sympathetic to those who are gone most of the day and cannot be sure if they will get back from work in time.

Absentee voting is most prevalent cause of detected voting fraud in Connecticut and across the country.We offered a compromise of allowing an absentee ballot to anyone gone from 7:00am to 6:00pm. That should give them time to vote in the morning or in the evening, even if they are a bit late returning to town.

Courant Editorial: Cheap Way To Boost Turnout

Today the Hartford Courant printed an editorial citing the Citizen Audit’s latest report:  Cheap Way To Boost Turnout

SOTS Plan: Real problems, yet no solution

One Wednesday, Secretary of the State Denise Merrill held a press conference to introduce her solutions to the recent problems with elections caused by registrars in several towns.  The problems are real. These solutions will do little to help, and might actually might make things worse. Its not worth the effort and the risks. As we have said many times, the solution is to “Do for elections what we have done for probate: Regionalize, Professionalize, Economize”.