We appreciate the Courant and CT-N for making these interviews available to the public, providing an additional unique opportunity for voters to learn about the candidates positions and personalities. We recommend listening to both interviews to gain a perspective beyond the few quotes we include below.

However, we note several criticisms of the interviews:

• The questions are limited to those areas of interest to the Editorial Board and are shaped by their ideas for change. We note the absence of any questions about voting integrity, voting systems for those with disabilities, supporting military and overseas voters, ballot initiatives, or our relationship to vendors responsible for servicing our election equipment and programming our elections. Although the candidates did touch just a little bit on election integrity and the security of mail and internet voting.
• The Board asked Farrell but not Merrill, how he differed from his opponent.
• The Board asked Farrell but not Merrill, if he would have chosen the same equipment as Secretary Bysiewicz.
• The Board asked Farrell but not Merrill, if he was going to keep any lists of people he would be doing business with.
• The Board asked Farrell but not Merrill, if he would keep a list of people who called the office to ask for help.
• The Board asked Merrill but not Farrell, about the law providing for three registrars if a third-party registrar is elected.
• The Courant Editorial Board seems, at this time, to find it amusing that there are “Voting Integrity Activists In Connecticut” and that they have met some such activists (see the Farrell interview). For the record, to my knowledge, I have never met a member of the Courant Editorial Board. However, not so long ago, the Courant thanked voting integrity activists, including me, in one of their editorials for “willingness to shoulder civic responsibility and to apply their expertise and vigilance to the cause has helped to protect and strengthen voting in Connecticut”.

Denise Merrill <view>

A few quotes of interest to CTVotersCount readers:

“[More participation] is the core mission of this job”
“We should do everything we can to make voting easy”
“I want want really very much to have the no-excuse absentee ballot”
“[election day registration] not until we have a really good statewide voter file…not an efficient system yet”
“I’d like to focus on more consistent procedures for everyone”
Should the hurdles for third-party candidates be lowered: “I don’t think so. The system as it is is pretty fair”
“People still by and large trust the system”
100% Mail-in voting, like Colorado, with permanent absentee status?
“They invested a lot in their voting systems…something we ought to consider…maybe something like same day registration would increase participation more with less risk”

Jerry Farrell: <view>

A few quotes of interest to CTVotersCount readers:

“Three roles as I would see it: First voting…secondly…business registrar…thirdly…custodian of state records which I would capitalize on”
“[More Participation] If we were to go different route on how we conduct elections, there could be financial repercussions to the towns and cities…I am for amending the law…to get rid of the provision that calls for an excuse to be given to get the absentee ballot”
“I would be very careful about same day registration…there is no way as it is presently configured for the polling official to find out if that person is registered elsewhere…you would need some type of electronic hook-up…that has a cost to it”
“At the end of the day…voting must have the greatest amount of integrity to it”
“Voting integrity activists…have absolutely impressed on me…the fact that absolute paper trail is such a necessity.”
“It would be very hard for me to be out there running [without public financing]…I am a very firm advocate of it…we cannot have a system [where the] third parties [have an] absolutely impossible impediment”

Here is her 2nd commercial <view>

Previously, Merrill had been ran the same commercial used before the primary.  And Jerry Farrell has run two since the primary.

Update 10/29.2010: Radio ad <listen>

Covering candidate statements, qualifications and several questions, including one question on voting: <read>

How would you use technology to increase access to public information and make it easier to vote? Would you implement online voting? Why or why not?

Farrell: As the Commissioner of Consumer Protection, I have used technology — electronic forms, online licensing — to make state government more efficient and less costly.  I have saved the taxpayers millions of dollars, in that way, and would implement all of those plans again at the Secretary of the State’s office.  Note that, while my opponent may talk of doing similar things, I am the only one who actually has experience doing so and can immediately start implementing technology, to increase access to public information, lower costs, and make interacting with government more convenient. Unfortunately, there are a variety of roadblocks that prevent voting online. Because elections must be free of the possibility of fraud, every method of voting must have a “paper trail”, where, even if initially tabulated by a computer, there is still an actual paper ballot to examine if there is a question of fraud. I believe that the next Secretary should work to ensure that the current voting machines continue to function and that we find ways to 1) assist the disabled in voting (an issue where we are not in full compliance with the law) and 2) ensure that the ballots cast by our military overseas are counted.

Merrill: One of my top priorities will be making it easier to vote. I believe that our voting system must keep pace with the mobility of the society and the technological advances in information systems.  Although we have made strides over the past 10 years in creating a statewide voter database, it could be greatly enhanced and made more accessible to the public.  We must increase the use of electronic voter registration by making it easier to register online, using fillable forms that could readily be placed into the statewide file.  Online voting might be possible in time, however, there are significant issues with privacy and security that would have to be overcome.  Paramount is the integrity of the ballot.  I would alternatively support streamlining the absentee ballot process, as other states such as Oregon have, with “no excuse” absentee balloting and possibly a system of “early voting” as in Florida, both of which have been shown to increase voter participation. Both would probably require a constitutional amendment.   I would also consider same-day registration to vote provided we have an effective statewide voter file.

We are pleased that both candidates recognize the risks of associated with online voting. Like most fast food, expanded mail-in voting and internet voting are appealing, yet not so good for us.

Secretary of the State candidate Jerry Farrell was interviewed on Fox News, The Real Story <video>

For a while I thought we would never get to elections, but the interviewer did bring them up near the end. Overall a good introduction to Jerry and his qualifications. All open-ended, softball questions. Hopefully other candidates will be given the same opportunity to showcase their qualificatons.

“Two key things the next Secretary must solve”:

• Voting for the disabled
• Military Voting – getting the ballot back in time

The League of Women Voters have published a guide to the Secretary of the State Candidates, listing their qualifications and their responses to two questions <read>

Jerry Farrell, Jr.
The Secretary of the State and local registrars of voters are responsible for both running our elections and conducting post-election audits of our voting machines. Would you support legislation and funding to require post-election audits to be conducted by others than the same local officials who conducted the local election? Please explain.

I do believe that there are improvements that can be made in the post-election audits that would enhance the credibility of the election process. It will be my responsibility to ensure that our elections are open and fair. I support having “outside auditors” as part of the post-election audit, as it would add to the transparency and legitimacy of both the audit and the election itself. I do believe that we need to approach the idea in a way that does not add to the financial burdens and mandates that municipal and state governments are facing.

Denise Wright Merrill
The Secretary of the State and local registrars of voters are responsible for both running our elections and conducting post-election audits of our voting machines. Would you support legislation and funding to require post-election audits to be conducted by others than the same local officials who conducted the local election? Please explain.

There is no greater mandate than to ensure elections are fair, open and accountable. The Secretary of the State randomly selects precincts to be audited and audits are open to the public. This provides accountability.

I believe that post-election audits should include third party review. I would work with the coalition that proposed these solutions to determine whether this could be achieved in a cost-effective manner. I would also review other recommendations made by the coalition such as requiring best practices and consistent procedures for post-election audits and propose legislation to conform our laws to those practices.

No responses were received from other candidates on the ballot.

Jerry Farrell for Secretary of the State campaign’s 1st commercial <view on facebook> <view on blogspot>

And now his second commercial <view>

Denise Merrill released a letter on the occasion of the anniversary of the 19th amendment. We are pleased to note the strong statement included in support of election integrity. We trust that all candidates for Secretary of the State are in favor of election integrity, but note that it is regularly overlooked or underemphasized in campaign talks, web sites, and mailers. <the full statement>

The Office of Secretary of the State is charged with safeguarding everyone’s right to vote and I will do everything in my power to ensure open, fair and secure elections. Everyone’s vote must count.  Voting should be easy and I will work hard to explore ways to increase registration and voter turnout.

But more importantly, I believe we need to inspire people to vote. These are difficult times and people are worried about the economy.  We need to give people a reason to vote and get involved

Update/Correction: An earlier version of this post  read:  “According to Stamford Plus <read> and his personal Facebook page“. In an email, Farrell Campaign Manager, Gregg Hannan asked me to verify that it was in Jerry’s Facebook. I thought I saw it in his personal Facebook, however, I cannot find it – I must have been reading and blogging too fast.  I apologize.

******************

According to Stamford Plus <read> Secretary of the State Candidate Jerry Farrell has signed the Commitment for Connecticut from Citizens for Change.  Checking both the Citizens for Change site and Farrell’s site, we have been unable to locate copies of the completed, signed commitment form.  Checking the web we find the blank commitments for various Connecticut offices, including the Secretary of the State:

CANDIDATE COMMITMENT
CT SECRETARY OF THE STATE

Distribution to All Declared Candidates Only – Notice(s) Applies

1. I will not serve more than _________ terms.
2. I will oppose same day voter registration.
3. I will streamline the candidate filing process to facilitate participation and
install certification of eligibility validation for all electoral offices.
4. I will simplify the citizen signature process required of candidates to petition
on to any party primary ballot or general election ballot.
5. I will advocate for the repeal of the business entity tax.
6. I will support priority legislation that requires: transparency in all state and
local spending government[sic]; online posting of every state and local
expenditure; and independent external audits.
7. I will decrease the total annual budget for this agency from the current
aggregate actual expenditures to a level that is the lower of either an overall
reduction of _______ percent; or a total that is equal or lower than the last
full fiscal year’s total actual expenditures for this agency.
Signed by: Date:
Print Name: _______________________________________ CONNECTICUT

Yesterday, we emailed the Farrell Campaign to ask for the term limits he committed to in question #1 and the budget cut percent in question #7.  We also have asked for clarification of his ideas for streamlining the candidate filing process (#3) and simplifying the citizen signature petition requirements (#4).  We will provide an update once we have a response from the campaign.

Comment:

#1: We must note the irony that while some are concerned with candidates pledging to maximum terms, the question minimum terms has been raised in both the Secretary of the State race and Attorney General race where several have been asked if they would commit to serve out their first term and longer, not running for higher office.

#2: We conditionally favor election day registration, however, only if it is done in ways that protect voting integrity and provide equivalent identification checks to those performed for current voter registration.

#3, #4: These seem a bit to vague to evaluate without more details.

#6: We note that #6 applies to both the state and municipalities. It may represent an extensive local mandate. We have observed several hearings over the last two years in the Connecticut Legislature where municipal clerks testified against the posting of minutes on web sites, based on the cost of such postings. We are generally in favor of open and transparent government along with effective audits. In the Secretary of the State’s Office, we would start with detailed posting of district by district election results, followed by audits that are independent of the Secretary of the State’s Office.

We are not familiar with Citizens for Change,  it seems to only have commitments for Connecticut candidates.  Their web identifies their founder, Richard Olivastro and says:

About Us

In the entire length of the human experience, America’s more than two century existence is but a short time. Yet, America’s birth stands as the singular moment of change in man’s relation to man and the primacy of self-government. If it is an aberration, we consider it the perfect aberration and therefore worth conserving, preserving, cultivating and promoting. If change is a constant, then responsible citizens need to engage in every public process to ensure change always moves towards greater individual freedom and away from statism, servitude, socialism, collectivism, fascism and communism.

We were about to write a post about how little voting and voting integrity discussion we have heard in the Secretary of the State campaigns so far. Yet. yesterday there was a joint appearance/debate between the Democratic Primary candidates Gerry Garcia and Denise Merrill which focused manly on voting issues, including voting integrity. <listen>

The candidates discuss early voting, the Citizen’s Election Program, increasing turnout, optical scanners, absentee vote fraud, popular election of the President, along with their qualifications/motivations, creating jobs, record keeping, business registration, and the state budget.

Opinion: We were pleasantly surprised to hear the focus on voting issues; to hear  in several cases that the candidates agree with CTVotersCount positions; support some of our recommendations; and are in sync with our reasoning. On the other hand we note that in many areas we differ with either one or both candidates. There are many issues where the devil is in the details, deserving much more in depth consideration than is possible for candidates, media, and the voters during a modern campaign.