CT

Fax and email voting: Hearing Highlights

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 | Leave a response

Testimony: Worse than online voting, fax and email voting

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 | Leave a response

Testimony: Polling Place Posting, Enforcement, Early Voting, and Internet Voting

By Luther Weeks on January 29, 2013

Yesterday, in the midst of the gun control hearings drawing a couple thousand, we spent an hour in a snowy entrance line to testify on two bills before the Government Elections and Administration Committee. We had planned on testifying on H.B. 5600, however, with many testifying on H.J. 16, I offered additional information to the Committee on that bill and on Internet voting, which was also discussed.

Posted in Internet Voting, Legislature2013, Mail/Absentee Voting | Leave a response

OP-ED: Voting Requires Vigilance. Popular Isn’t Always Prudent

By Luther Weeks on January 22, 2013

Our Op-Ed published yesterday by CTNewsJunkie, outlining the integrity risks of the National Popular Vote Compact, now being considered by the Connecticut Legislature, for the fourth time since 2007.

Posted in CT, Legislature2013, National, National Popular Vote, Our Editorials | Leave a response

Dummies’ Guide to Rigging a Colorado Election

By Luther Weeks on January 10, 2013

Not everything that Marilyn recommends would work quite the same or as well in Connecticut. A strategy for Connecticut insider election thieves would be to rig memory cards and then provide incomplete post-election audit reports, or to claim that any discrepancy in such reports between machine and hand counts is human error.

Posted in CT, Mail/Absentee Voting, Skulduggery and Errors | Leave a response

Did new elected Representative committ multiple voter fraud?

By Luther Weeks on December 20, 2012

Elected initially to the Legislature last month, Christina Ayala, has been arrested for a hit-and-run shortly after the election, arrested for a domestic dispute, and then ordered to move to the district before being sworn in, is no under investigation for illegally voting and registering in that district. Also under investigation is her mother, the Registrar of Voters.

Posted in CT, CT Skulduggery and Errors | Leave a response

Risk Limiting Audits: Why and How

By Luther Weeks on December 14, 2012

A recent, paper by the Risk Limiting Audit Working Group, endorsed by The American Statistical Association, articulates and outlines various types of post-election audits, their requirements, and relative advantages.

We cannot help but think that our Coalition audit reports contributed to statements in the section entitled: Trustworthy audits: the virtue lies in the details:

Posted in CT, National, Reports | Leave a response

Others Weigh In On Election Reforms

By Luther Weeks on December 4, 2012

Last week Secretary of the State Denise Merrill weighed in at her press conference on, as the Courant headlines, how “Reforms Could Boost Voter Participation”. Also weighing in was Melissa J. Russell, President of ROVAC (Registrars Of Voters Association, Connecticut).

Posted in CT, CT Law, Legislature2013, Other Editorials | Leave a response

Aug 2012 Primary Audit Observation Report

By Luther Weeks on November 20, 2012

Coalition finds 31% of Official Audit Reports Lack Critical Data

Municipalities failed to report data critical to audit evaluation. Increasing numbers choose paper only elections, avoiding scanners and audits.

The report highlighted concerns with two increasing trends:

An increase in missing and incomplete official reports. There are 16 of 52 (31%) reports with errors making it impossible to determine if machines had functioned properly. What basis is there to trust audits, with this significant level of error in reporting?
Up up to 19 towns avoided optical scanners and audits by conducting paper only elections. Such voting is not audited, not transparent, and error prone based on past observations of hand counts.

We conclude, based on our observations and analysis of official audit reports submitted to the Secretary of the State, that the August post-election audits still do not inspire confidence.
<Full Report (.pdf)> <Press Release> <Review detail data and municipal reports >

Posted in CT, Post-Election Audits | Leave a response

75 Districts randomly selected for Nov post-election audit