RE: HB 1227

["Raich, Peter C." <Peter.Raich@xxxxxxxx>]

Unfortunately this link takes us through HB-04 1030 only.  Anyone can suggest another link to access the most recent version of 1227?  I am willing to have a look at it.

Peter

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Ellington, David [SMTP:David.Ellington@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent:	Thursday, May 06, 2004 12:02 PM
> To:	Joe Pezzillo
> Cc:	texico86@xxxxxxx; pklammer@xxxxxxx; davide475@xxxxxxxx; mlambie@xxxxxxxxx; Robert Mcgrath; Raich, Peter C.; TresCeeA@xxxxxxx; Cvv-Discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; donna@xxxxxxxxxxxx; cmehesy@xxxxxxxxxxx; summerstorm03@xxxxxxxxxxx; AlKolwicz@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject:	RE: HB 1227
> 
> Well, it sounds like Bob is working on a meeting to set up the possility of a legal injunction. I would think that a thorough analysis of HB1227, HR2239, and HAVA will be necessary for the injunction to have any teeth. So.....let's keep on truckin'.
> 
> 
> David
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Pezzillo [mailto:jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 11:58 AM
> To: Ellington, David
> Cc: texico86@xxxxxxx; pklammer@xxxxxxx; davide475@xxxxxxxx;
> mlambie@xxxxxxxxx; Robert Mcgrath; peter.raich@xxxxxxxx;
> TresCeeA@xxxxxxx; Cvv-Discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; donna@xxxxxxxxxxxx;
> cmehesy@xxxxxxxxxxx; summerstorm03@xxxxxxxxxxx; AlKolwicz@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: HB 1227
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know more, my e-mail below asks if anyone has reviewed the bill  
> in its final form and if our concerns are properly addressed.
> 
> Here's the link I found, but I don't have the time or expertise to make  
> a thorough analysis:
> 
> http://www.leg.state.co.us/Clics2004a/csl.nsf/bf-3HB? 
> OpenView&StartKey=HB04-1227&count=1
> 
> For example, this bill presumably legalizes the electronic storage of  
> votes since it states that we will eventually resume purchases of DREs  
> (a position I hope we've all rejected), the "permanent paper record"  
> may not be a legally binding ballot, and 1227 may not reverse or change  
> Method of Recount (1.10-5-108), in which case, we're still just getting  
> a false sense of security from a paper slip that may never be counted  
> while the votes are recorded electronically.
> 
> But, I'm not a lawyer and I'm not the best person to do this analysis,  
> so I'm eager for someone else to chime in asap with details.
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
> 
> On May 6, 2004, at 11:31 AM, Ellington, David wrote:
> 
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I'm confused here. Senator Keller specifically stated that:
> >
> > The bill contains three
> > provisions I support :  the proposal that the
> > secretary of state's office oversee the purchase and
> > certification of all county equipment before a county
> > clerk can use an electronic voting machine ( there is
> > no oversite right now and most county clerks are in
> > way over their heads and at the mercy of vendors right
> > now) ; open public meetings are required before the
> > state resumes purchase of DRE machines; and the fact
> > that the bill requires a permanent paper record be
> > available for a recount.
> >
> > Are we having a miscommunication issue here? The excerpt above is from  
> > a response TO Brad Thacker FROM Moe Keller.
> >
> > It seems we need a very clear picture of what we have in HB1227 before  
> > we proceed much further. Joe, are you just responding to the wording  
> > in Sen. Ron Tupa's email or do you know more here?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > David
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert Mcgrath [mailto:mcgrath_mcnally@xxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 9:57 AM
> > To: jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx; Cvv-Discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: pklammer@xxxxxxx; AlKolwicz@xxxxxxxxx; cmehesy@xxxxxxxxxxx;
> > davide475@xxxxxxxx; Ellington, David; summerstorm03@xxxxxxxxxxx;
> > donna@xxxxxxxxxxxx; mlambie@xxxxxxxxx; texico86@xxxxxxx;
> > peter.raich@xxxxxxxx; TresCeeA@xxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: Fwd: HB 1227
> >
> >
> > My fear is that the Sec of State put a fast one over all of the  > 
> > legislators,
> > even those who initially opposed 1227.
> >
> >
> >> From: "Joe Pezzillo" <jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> To: "Cvv-Discuss@Coloradovoter. Net" <cvv-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Subject: Fwd: HB 1227
> >> Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 16:47:06 -0600
> >>
> >>
> >> FYI. I'm not sure my concerns were addressed but apparently he is. Has
> >> anyone analyzed this bill in its final, amended form? I'm more than a
> >> little worried by the casual use of the term "check" here as opposed  
> >> to,
> >> say, "recount", and how the ideal would be the citizens, but perhaps  
> >> the
> >> actual is going to be the SoS. Also, how does this bill impact the  
> >> system
> >> that we didn't want to purchase here in Boulder County?
> >>
> >> Where's the verification of the counting? HB1227 is also one way to  
> >> cement
> >> the problems we've got, too.
> >>
> >> Do any of our representatives listen to the people's concerns?
> >>
> >> Joe
> >>
> >>
> >> Begin forwarded message:
> >>
> >>> From: "Ron Tupa" <senatorrontupa@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>> Date: May 5, 2004 4:36:12 PM MDT
> >>> To: jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx
> >>> Subject: HB 1227
> >>> Reply-To: ron.tupa.senate@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>
> >>> Dear Joe,
> >>>
> >>>  
> >>>
> >>> Thank you for your letter regarding House Bill 1227, a bill  
> >>> concerning
> >>> voting systems. The bill has managed to work its way through both of  
> >>> the
> >>> Houses. The bill has been amended to prohibit the use of mechanical  
> >>> lever
> >>> voting machines and punch-card systems. In essence, the amendments  
> >>> that
> >>> were added addressed your concerns about the electronic storage of  
> >>> votes. 
> >>> In addition, it now states that whichever system is chosen, there  
> >>> must be
> >>> a system in place to perform a check if needed. This check would  
> >>> ideally
> >>> be the citizens of the State.
> >>>
> >>>  
> >>>
> >>> HB 1227 establishes a system of "checks and balances" for the current
> >>> voting system in Colorado. If passed, all voting machines would have  
> >>> to be
> >>> standardized throughout the state, be certified and tested that they  
> >>> are
> >>> operationally sound before use, and also the identifies the terms and
> >>> conditions for the distribution and sale of these machines. If a  
> >>> county
> >>> decides to use an electronic counting method, then the elected voting
> >>> official is required to give all of the software information, program
> >>> source code, and documentation to the Secretary of State. 
> >>>
> >>>  
> >>>
> >>> Our voting system is not without its problems.  As such, HB 1227 is  
> >>> one
> >>> way to address these problems.  Again, thank you for your letter. It  
> >>> is
> >>> always a pleasure to hear from my constituents. Should you have any
> >>> further questions or concerns, please contact me at
> >>> ron.tupa.senate@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>
> >>>   
> >>>
> >>> Sincerely,
> >>>
> >>>  
> >>>
> >>> Senator Ron Tupa
> >>>
> >>> Do you Yahoo!?
> >>> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> >
> >
> >
>