By Luther Weeks on March 26, 2022
Yesterday I submitted testimony on two bills before the GAE (General Administration and Elections Committee. Unfortunately I was unable to testify in person. It was not for a lack of trying. I had submitted testimony and signed up for the hearing two days in advance, yet only one of my two testimonies was posted in time for the hearing and neither I nor the committee staff could get me the link to testify. Its happened before this year and last, yet only for this committee – in the past the staff was able to correct the problems. In one case not much was lost except to my reputation as the committee still called may name when I was supposed to testify.
S.B.472 Would change our existing 5% audit, adding risk-limiting audits. Unfortunately it is a highly flawed bill. I submitted the most detailed testimony, articulating its many flaws new and existing. Fortunately the testimony, so far, us unanimously against the current bill, with more on the way. Overall no harm done that I could not speak. It would seem that its is very unlikely to move forward this year.
H.J.114 The Constitutional Amendment to provide for no-excuse absentee voting. In this case, not being able to testify in person and my testimony not being up hurt. I am likely the only person speaking and submitting testimony asking that the bill remove another unfortunate restriction in the Constitution that will bite us along the way with absentee voting and/or ranked choice voting. Of course we can wait and learn our lesson the hard way.
Posted in Chain of Custody, CT, CT Law, Mail/Absentee Voting, Post-Election Audits
By Luther Weeks on May 12, 2021
As we pointed out earlier, H1, the House version of the “For The People Act” would have a large impact on Connecticut’s elections.
Recently there was a new Managers’ Amendment in the Senate, S1 https://www.rules. senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Klobuchar%20Substitute%20S1.pdf
We have reviewed the new version and are pleased to report that there are many improvements that would ease its impact on Connecticut election officials, yet the impact remains significant.
Among the changes:
Posted in CT, CT Law, Mail/Absentee Voting, National
By Luther Weeks on March 29, 2021
H.B.6325 was a second bill similar to an earlier on that proposed a task force for Risk limiting Audits (RLAs). My detailed testimony only changed a little bit. For the previous bill, I only testified on paper. For this bill I spoke, especially giving my answer to a legislators question of another on another bill. I’m glad I had a few days contemplate an answer: “How would you explain RLAs to forth graders?”
That is a good question: Risk Limiting Audits are intended to confirm that elections are correctly counted and totaled or to correct incorrect results…
Posted in CT, CT Law, Internet Voting, Mail/Absentee Voting
By Luther Weeks on March 13, 2021
Earlier this week we testified on two elections bills.
First a bill for a Task Force to provide a prototype and recommend state laws for Risk Limiting post-election Audits (RLAs). See our testimony and that of the inventor of RLAs, Philip Stark, and John Marion of RI. Phil and I disagree just a bit on our recommendations. I find November is just not the best time to do a prototype and then providing less that two months to make recommendations to the General Assembly is not enough time. Here is all thee testimony <read>
Then on a long bill with several election changes recommended by the Secretary of the State. We had comments on two sections: We asked that two officials empty drop boxes and sign logs listing their content. Also a reform we have been requesting for a long time – including central count absentee ballots and Election Day Registration ballots in post-election audits <testimony>
Posted in Chain of Custody, CT, CT Law, Mail/Absentee Voting, Post-Election Audits
By Luther Weeks on February 21, 2021
On Monday, the Government Administration and Elections Committee will hear testimony on bills to modify Connecticut’s Constitution for Early Voting and No-Excuse Voting. Meanwhile another Constitutional Amendment or change is advisable to pave the way for related and unrelated voting changes which Connecticut may desire or may be forced upon Connecticut by H.R.1. My testimony is below and <here in .pdf>
H.J.58, H.J.59 – Needed – A Further Critical Change to the CT Constitution
Chairs, members of the Committee, and Connecticut voters, my name is Luther Weeks, Executive Director of CTVotersCount, a computer scientist, and a Certified Moderator since 2008. I also lead one national group and participate in another that discuss, evaluate, and regularly propose changes to state and Federal election laws.
As you are contemplating amendments to the Connecticut Constitution for elections, we need to go just a bit farther than the changes now in H.J.59. Just a few more words would make a great difference going forward. The additional changes would remove deadlines for reporting state contest results that are now baked into our Constitution. These same deadlines would remain in effect, in law, yet easier to change in short order should that become necessary.
Why are these changes critical?
There are at least four reasons why these deadlines may need to change quickly in the near future. Not removing them as soon as possible in our Constitution would cause significant problems and limitations, while waiting for another years-long amendment process to change them…<more>
Posted in Costs, CT, CT Law, Our Editorials
By Luther Weeks on March 26, 2020
Both the US House and Senate have proposals to improve our elections in the age COVID-19. They are huge and dangerous, impossible to implement in Connecticut and many other states by November.
Instead of our usual format here, I will cover them by rants I have posted as comments on Facebook over the last two days. They are just to complex and out of touch with reality to comer in a neat and organized, point by point way.
Posted in CT, CT Law, Mail/Absentee Voting, National, Our Editorials
By Luther Weeks on March 14, 2020
Secretary of the State Denise Merrill has called on Governor Lamont to use emergency posters to expand Absentee Voting.
From CTNewsJunkie Merrill Calls On Lamont To Allow Absentee Voting For Presidential Primary <read>
This will be complex and expensive. So is operating a safe polling place.
Posted in CT Law, Our Editorials
By Luther Weeks on March 8, 2020
Last Friday, provided testimony on three bills. As I said in my prepared remarks:
I oppose S.B.365. As I testified last Friday, we humans have difficulty balancing risks and rewards. This is a case where the added risks outweigh the added convenience.
This bill, while well intended, would remove the valuable fraud detection mechanism of hand-signed absentee ballot applications.
I support H.B.5414. The bill would have the Judiciary rather than the House or Senate rule on remedies to contested elections
The overall result of systems to adjudicate close elections, as our current system for Senator and Representative, is less trust in the system by the public and candidates.
I would support H.B.5404, IF it were Broadened and Corrected.
My written testimony contains a laundry list of issues such a Task Force should address.
I am concerned that this Task Force needs more time, a significant staff budget to handle all the issues, and also to reimburse experts to provide information, analysis, and suggestions to the committee, in order for there to be a thorough evaluation.
Posted in CT Law, Legislature 2020, Mail/Absentee Voting
By Luther Weeks on March 3, 2020
Last Friday, provided five pieces of testimony on six bills. As I said in my prepared remarks:
The context for my testimony on four bills is that humans are not good at accessing risks. We can focus excessively on minor, all but non-existent, risks. We often minimize rare catastrophic risks and ignore frequent familiar risks.
We also do a poor job of balancing risks and rewards.
This Friday I will be submitting three pieces of testimony on three more bills. The theme also applies to one of them.
Posted in CT Law, Legislature 2020, Mail/Absentee Voting
By Luther Weeks on March 1, 2019
On Wednesday the GAE Committee held testimony on another raft if bills.
The bills, and links to my testimony, in priority order: (Take a look at all the testimony <here>, best to look by bill number than date)
H.B.5417 A proposed study to use blockchain to solve some undefined problem in voter registration. I opposed, perhaps the only one in the room who is a computer scientist. In summary, if someone wants to sell you or asks you to invest in blockchain – Run. Run fast and keep your eye on your wallet and passwords! …
Posted in Blockchain, CT Law, Instant Runoff Voting, Internet Security Issues, Legislature 2019
