Re: DRAFT CVV Testimony on CO HB 1296

[Evan Daniel Ravitz <evan@xxxxxxxx>]

Looks fine, except that "reject Computer Voting" (para 5) is
confusing. We reject the electronic ballots as the official record.

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Joe Pezzillo wrote:

>
> The Steering Committee has seen this, can I please get feedback from
> the broader group before I depart for Denver? Thanks! -Joe
>
> ---------
>
> DRAFT
>
> Statement of Citizens for Boulder County Citizens for Verifiable Voting
>
> Thank you for the opportunity to present. I'm Joe Pezzillo from
> Boulder, Spokesperson for the unaffiliated group Citizens for
> Verifiable Voting.
>
> The public at large was awakened by the crisis in Florida in 2000 when
> they realized they could not tell from the Election who had won. Now,
> we are already seeing record turnout in both Political Party's caucuses
> and primaries this Presidential Election year from voters expecting a
> Trustworthy Election.
>
> Today, despite the passage of Federal Legislation and millions of
> dollars spent on new voting technology, there is No Confidence from The
> People of the United States in the Electronic Storage of Votes, and
> that lack of confidence is not based on unfounded fears or lack of
> understanding, but on the extensive research and analysis of Computer
> Professionals, Security Researchers, Political Scientists, Academics,
> Citizen Activists and Investigative Journalists.
>
> In Boulder County, we're gifted with many High Tech, Legal and
> Elections experts, who have joined together in an ad hoc citizens'
> group and collaboratively formed the group's core positions. We have
> presented our research and conclusions to the County, in the Media, to
> the four active Political Parties, and to a variety of local groups,
> all of whom have offered some degree of support.
>
> Ultimately, the work of this all volunteer citizens group convinced
> Boulder County, possibly Colorado's most technologically advanced
> region, to reject Computer Voting and adopt a 100% Paper Ballot based
> system for the 2004 election.
>
> This Citizen's group has studied this issue thoroughly and come to the
> consensus position that to achieve Trustworthy Elections that embrace
> Security, Verifiability and Reliability at their core, the central
> component of every Election must be Voter Verified, Full-Text,
> Physically Marked Paper Ballots with Hand-Counting of a statistically
> significant random sample of ballots to verify any machine counts.
>
> We are concerned that the legislation before you as originally drafted
> may not go far enough to protect the sanctity of the vote in Colorado
> and our group would support stronger requirements. We ask that you
> adopt the proposed friendly amendments to secure paper ballots as the
> official record of the voter's intent because the changes will improve
> the law and the elections process.
>
> We know that you will hear vigorous objections to this legislation even
> in its weaker form, and ask you to consider Trustworthiness as the most
> important aspect of any Election and to remember that Trustworthy
> Elections are both the Citizen's Right and Requirement. To those who
> would object to the Citizen's Requirements for Trustworthy Elections on
> any grounds, especially those who cite dollar costs and savings, we can
> answer only that the cost of holding Trustworthy Elections is the price
> of having Democracy and Justice.
>
> Recently, our nation's best and brightest scientists and most rigorous
> and thorough engineering processes backed up by billions of dollars of
> taxpayer money weren't able find a serious computer flaw until it was
> too late. It's one thing to put a machine on Mars that doesn't work and
> can be fixed remotely, it's another to trust any such device to protect
> our Democracy.
>
> ###
>