TrueVote 2007 Legislative Focus 2/28/2007
This year the Connecticut Legislature is
considering several bills that affect voting and
elections in our state. These bills cover a
wide range of the election process including
campaign advertising, robo calls, election day
registrations, voting technology, audits, and
recounts. TrueVote CT has continued our
focus on educating voting officials and the public
on technical issues of voting technology, to help
ensure that Connecticut has the most trustworthy
voting technology available, along with with
sufficient audit and recount procedures to ensure
integrity of our elections.
TrueVote Testifies at GAE Public Hearing on
Proposed SB1311
Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz proposed
legislation to address concerns with voting
technology, audits, and recounts. Her
proposal was entered into the legislative process
as Senate Bill 1311. She
announced her proposal at a press
conference held on February 27, 2007. The
Government Administration and Elections Committee
of the Connecticut General Assembly held a public
hearing on February 28, 2007, to hear comment on SB
1311 as well as several other bills.
Four representatives of TrueVote testified to
the strong points and inadequacies of SB1311 at the
public hearing:
A video of the hearing is available from CT-N at
http://www.ctn.state.ct.us/
. Speakers for TrueVote appear at
approximately 0:18 (h:mm), 1:26, 2:33 , and 2:37
into the video. The Secretary of the State
appears at 2:48 (h:mm) into the video.
Following members of the public, Secretary of the
State Susan Bysiewicz testified
<prepared testimony>. She spoke to
an updated version
of SB1311 which addresses some of
the concerns expressed at the hearing. She
pledged to continue working with concerned groups,
including TrueVote CT, League of Women Voters, and
DemocracyWorks, to further improve the bill.
Remaining Concerns with SB1131
A major concern that TrueVote has with SB1311 is
that the bill would place audit responsibility in
the hands of the same person, the Secretary of the
State, who is also the official charged with
selecting equipment, creating regulations, and
conducting elections. Human nature creates biases
and pressures for the person who specifies and
oversees a system, the election staff they train,
and the contractors they hire, to declare that each
election was accurate and exemplary. Our system of
government, based on checks and balances, suggests
that the public interest would be best served by
moving responsibility for audits to an independent
election oversight body.
An audit should provide some
independent check on those powers. This isn't
just about machines -- it's about the entire voting
process -- who programs the machines, who
certifies them, who provides technical advice etc.
etc. It also isn't just about the current occupant
of the SOTS office -- its about who's going to be
sitting there in the future as well. To have
the SOTS audit the procedures that he or she
controls is like putting the fox in charge of the
hen house"
- Michael Fischer
"I also want to congratulate the
Secretary of the State for her wise selection of
optical scan machines for CT and for her decision
to conduct a voluntary random audit in last
November's election...SB1311 would require an audit
of not less than 20%...I can certainly live with
this number...However, I would like to call the
committee's attention to an alternative model of
selecting audit percentages"
- Ralph Morelli
"Besides audits, there are other
issues related to voting technology which we
believe should be addressed in this or other
legislation...A ban on the outsourcing of any part
of the election process...This would ensure that
Connecticut officials would remain in control of
all aspects of our voting
system... Open data formats
for ballot programming and election-related
electronic data, including electronic ballots,
tallies and audit logs...In summary, CCAG strongly
supports proposed bill SB1311 and respectfully
requests the committee to consider the additional
proposals I have outlined."
- Richard Sivel
"I am a former corporate auditor and
have been involved in the election reform issue for
the last two years. I am also a poll worker in New
Milford and I reviewed the audit process for the
new optical scan voting machines in Monroe, CT..
Bill No. 1311 is a positive step but it has several
flaws and omissions. In general, the biggest
problem with the bill is that it gives too much
power to the Secretary of the State’s (SOTS)
office"
- George Barnett
Other TrueVote concerns have to do with the
timing of the audits and procedures for dealing
with discrepencies discovered during the
audits.
