We conclude our summaries of the election bills we are watching that passed the Government Elections and Administration Committee this year.
Machine Audit Prototypes
As is too often the case, this bill is aimed at a concept we strongly support – machine assisted audits – yet the bill is so flawed that is misleading and dangerous. Without going into the details I can claim, in all modesty, that I have been a strong, supporter of the concept nationally, and a catalyst in Connecticut. I would be happy to sit back and let others take deserved bows for a great result, well implemented. However, the worst outcome would be the loss of the value of post-election audits, knowing that I was a likely cause.
To be credible, post-election audits must have public verifiability. Connecticut’s current audits have public verifiability: The public can observe each ballot votes are counted manually, observe the totals being produced and accumulated. There are flaws in the current audit law and the audit law as it is currently conducted, yet public verifiability provides the opportunity for independent assessment and reporting of those concerns.a
The good/sad news is that trusted machine assisted audits are possible and they could provide a much more effective and efficient audit for Connecticut.
For a detailed list of our concerns and a paper suggesting how trusted machine assisted audits can be conducted, see our testimony <read>
