New Paper: Evidence Based Elections

A new paper by Andrew Appel and Philip Stark: EVIDENCE-BASED ELECTIONS:CREATE A MEANINGFUL PAPER TRAIL,THEN AUDIT  Provides a thorough description of how the public can be assured of election outcomes, in spite of hack-able voting equipment.

The bottom line: The only reliable method available is Voter-Marked Paper Ballots, with strong security for the ballots, followed by sufficient post-election audits. Other technologies, including Ballot Marking Devices and Internet voting are insufficient.

Anyone interested in trustworthy elections should read this paper – especially those who think that expensive Ballot Marking Devices should be trusted. And those who think it is impossible to use technology to count votes accurately.

[read post] | By on October 15, 2020 - Electronic Vulnerability, Internet Voting, National, Post-Election Audits, Reports

Special Session Election Bill – Safe and Reasonable

Last week the General Assembly passed and the Governor signed a bill to help deal with a flood of mail-in ballots with a special kicker for Bridgeport.

Our summary, its good, it could have been better, or a lot lot worse.

[read post] | By on October 4, 2020 - Legislature 2020, Our Editorials

“Delay” is a dirty word

WhoWhatWhy podcasd interview with Professor Ned Foley  <listen>

Ned is the leading legal expert on our presidential election system and how our country reacts to close elections.

In the second half of the interview he makes the point that counting votes after election day and waiting for certified results is a part of the process. He makes the point that the media and everyone else should avoid using the word ‘delay’ to describe results that are not complete on election night – they never are.

[read post] | By on September 24, 2020 - National, Skulduggery and Errors

237 Late Absentee Ballots in Enfield. Don’t Panic – Investigate

Hartford Courant Report:  U.S. Postal Service investigating why 237 absentee ballots showed up weeks late for Aug. 11 primary in Enfield

The U.S. Postal Service and the State Elections Enforcement Commission are investigating why 237 absentee ballots for the Aug. 11 primary showed up more than two weeks late at Enfield Town Hall…

The ballots showed up in batches more than two weeks after the Aug. 11 primary and were postmarked at the Enfield post office before being delivered on the same day. An initial batch of 65 ballots were suddenly delivered to Enfield’s town hall two weeks after the election, and then 49 arrived two days later, officials said.

“They were postmarked by a stamp by a person at the post office — not by a machine that they run through 1/4 u201a” Rosenberg said. “This is obviously a stamp.”

There were no legislative primaries in Enfield this year but the late-arriving ballots may have been a factor in the GOP primary for the 2nd Congressional District that includes Enfield. In that contest, Justin Anderson defeated Thomas Gilmer by 78 votes, according to results on the secretary of the state’s website.

This obviously may have potential implications for the November election,  may be a crime by postal officials or others, maybe not. Don’t panic yet. Some high level possibilities:

[read post] | By on September 20, 2020 - CT, CT Skulduggery and Errors, Mail/Absentee Voting

My Nov 3 Voting Plan

There have been many articles with quotes from the Secretary of the State, municipal clerks,  and registrars. Many Facebook posts with comments from voters, registrars and clerks. I have also read many articles about the changes in the Postal Service. From all that I have the following plan to assure my vote is counted in November You might consider it, if you vote in Connecticut:

  1. Wait for the prefilled application in the mail. It should arrive in late September. (If not received by Oct 1st, I will download an application from the SOTS Website AB Page.)
  2. Within 24 hours of receiving the AB application, I will carefully fill it out, following all directions.
  3. Also within 24 hours…
[read post] | By on August 24, 2020 - CT, Mail/Absentee Voting

Verified Voting writes Secretary Merrill supporting Citizen Audit’s call for expanded audits

The Verified Voting Foundation has written a letter to Secretary of the State, Denise Merrill, supporting expanded audits based on Connecticut’s expansion of absentee ballots: <read> Their support was based on the Citizen Audit’s recent Op-Ed. in the CTMirror.

[read post] | By on August 18, 2020 - CT, Mail/Absentee Voting

A small hole in ballot packages, is a huge gap in security

Last week Kevin Rennie blogged about a letter from the leader of the Municipal Clerks Association sent to the clerks. Information that should have come from the Secretary of the State warning about problems and misinformation about the mailing of ballot packages to voters. Information that should have gone to voters not just clerks: Merrill Failure: 20,000 Voters Will Not Receive Absentee Ballots. Town Clerks Will Try to Solve Primary Crisis. Unglued, Too. Ballots May Fall Out of Envelopes. There is plenty of disappointment in the post and letter, yet I will concentrate on one item of advice to the clerks:

Additionally, I have been informed that the sides of some inner envelopes have not been properly glued shut by the manufacturer; as a result, the voter’s ballot could slip out of the inner envelope while the town clerk is processing the returns into CVRS. This issue is not related to the voter accidentally slicing open the envelope. It is due to poor quality control at the mail house. Please be on the lookout for envelopes that are not sealed on the side. Please tape the defective inner envelopes shut.

This may appear to be insignificant. Yet it is a big deal. There are reasons for an inner envelope, especially in this election.

[read post] | By on August 10, 2020 - Chain of Custody, Mail/Absentee Voting

Charles Stewart reminds us that mail-in may disenfranchise more than it adds in turnout

In this COVID crisis, I support mail-in voting for all. However, for years we have been warning of the downsides of absentee voting: It usually decreases turnout, it as a frequent path for insider and political operative fraud, and it disenfranchises. A new paper by MIT Professor Charles Stewart documents that disenfranchisement in the 2016 Presidential Election: Reconsidering Lost Votes by Mail

Conceptually, the paper highlights how differing mail-ballot legal regimes produce lost mail votes in different ways, and at different rates, on account of differing laws, regulations, and practices…That estimate works out to approximately 1.4 million votes in 2016—4.0% of mail ballots cast and 1.0% of all ballots. These estimates are relevant in light of efforts to expand mail balloting in the 2020 presidential election. States that will see the greatest growth in mail ballots tended to have higher lost vote rates than those with vote-by-mail systems. This implies that a doubling or tripling of the number of mail ballots in 2020 will result in a disproportionate growth in the number of lost votes due to mail ballots.

Connecticut is on track to increase its mail-in balloting by 10x to 15x by November. That means 10x – 15x the number of voters disenfranchised by mail-in voting.

 

[read post] | By on July 30, 2020 - Mail/Absentee Voting

Why I am not serving in a polling place in the August primary

A few weeks ago my local registrars emailed all recent polling place officials to ask if we would serve in the August primary. I was not looking forward to the anticipated email where I would have to choose. I had been thinking about it, knowing lots of facts positive and negative:

  • The email said there might be as few as three officials in a polling place – that sealed it for me.

I have proposed to assist in counting absentee ballots or other central office function. There, I can likely make a significant difference. Early in my election official career, I led a central count absentee ballot function five times.

 

[read post] | By on July 20, 2020 - CT

CTMirror: Connecticut’s upcoming primary election should be audited. Will it really be?

[read post] | By on July 15, 2020 - CT, Our Editorials, Post-Election Audits