Browse: Home / CT / Legislature2012

Legislature2012

Election Day Registration: Be prepared for lines and dissapointment

By Luther Weeks on November 2, 2013

Insanity:
1) doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
– Albert Einstein
2) doing something different from what has been done over and over and expecting the same result. – The Land of [un]Steady Habits

Maybe not this year, but sometime soon, in a high interest election, we will have a huge turn-out for Election Day Registration, and many voters and candidates disappointed at 8:00pm.

Posted in , | Leave a response

Big Bird and Charlie Rose know what the CT Legislature does not!

By Luther Weeks on October 6, 2012

See Charlie Rose interview Dr. Barbara Simons, co-auther of Broken Ballots. <view>

Big Bird and Charlie Rose now know that Internet voting, email voting, Virgina elections, and inadequately audited elections – do not merit our trust.

Posted in , , , | Leave a response

Governor vetoes bill with email/fax voting “rat”

By Luther Weeks on June 16, 2012

Such rats risk bills being occasionally vetoed, yet more often fuel criticism of the the Legislature and serve to make citizens disgusted with Government in general.

I do not support any mechanism of voting that would require an individual to waive his or her constitutional rights in order to cast a timely, secret ballot, even if such waiver is voluntary…allowing an individual to email or fax an absentee ballot has not been proven to be secure.
– Dannel P. Malloy, Governor

UPDATED

Posted in , | Leave a response

Letter: Email, Fax Voting Provisions Mar Campaign Bill

By Luther Weeks on June 5, 2012

Many citizens and legislators do not understand that email voting is a risky form of Internet voting and that fax voting presents equivalent risks. If the system worked as it should, there would have been public hearings and a chance to educate our senators and representatives.

Posted in , | Leave a response

Newspapers join CTVotersCount, ACLU, and CBIA in objections to H.B. 5556

By Luther Weeks on June 1, 2012

CTVotersCount opposes H.B. 5556 and has urged Governor Malloy to veto the bill because it contains a provision for risky, unconstitutional email and fax voting.

Posted in , , , | Leave a response

NIST: Internet voting not yet feasible. (And neither are email and fax voting)

By Luther Weeks on May 23, 2012

Use of fax poses the fewest challenges, however fax offers limited protection for voter privacy. While the threats to telephone, e-mail, and web can be mitigated through the use of procedural and technical security controls, they are still more serious and challenging to overcome.

Posted in , , | Leave a response

Courant does So-So fact check of its latest editorial

By Luther Weeks on May 13, 2012

The nation’s oldest continuously downsizing newspaper did a So-So job of fact checking its latest editorial, reviewing the legislative session. Here is our analysis, which actually is the Courant’s Report Card: Accuracy: C-; History: F; Prognosis: F

Posted in | Leave a response

EDR passes House and Senate

By Luther Weeks on May 6, 2012

We opposed this unique form of Election Day Registration. We hope we are wrong. We hope that Connecticut’s 339 registrars implement the bill effectively, fairly, safely, and uniformly. That no one is lulled into complacency by low EDR voting in 2013 for the municipal elections and that chaos does not await us in a future high interest election in 2014 or 2016.

Posted in , | Leave a response

EDR – Proponents cannot have it both ways

By Luther Weeks on April 25, 2012

Proponents tout gains in turnout, but then estimate very few will use Election Day Registration (EDR) when it comes to claiming it won’t cost municipalities much and would not result in lines etc.

John Hartwell interviewed Secretary of the State Denise Merill on Stream on Conscience

Posted in , , | Leave a response

A Tale Of Two Laws

By Luther Weeks on March 22, 2012

This year we noticed quite a difference between hearings for bills that Legislators really understand and others covering subjects with which they are not intimately familiar. We see a similar bent in the Connecticut Constitution.

Posted in , , | Leave a response