Boulder County DA Should Investigate County Elections Office, Instead

["Joe Pezzillo" <jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx>]

September 10th, 2004

Attn: Letters to the Editor
Boulder County Newspapers

Now that Boulder's District Attorney has decided that elections 
watchdog Al Kolwicz did not violate any laws by trying to test the 
trustworthiness of Boulder County's new elections system, perhaps the 
DA's office should turn it's attention 180 degrees to the Boulder 
County Elections Office, instead.

Here are three areas that I think would be a much better use of Boulder 
County citizen's limited investigative resources, because I think we'd 
all like to feel comfortable that our paid county and state staff, and 
not just some volunteer outsider, are also complying with the laws when 
it comes to elections:

1) Use of Uncertified Equipment
In November of 2003, Boulder County's mail ballot election was 
tabulated using an uncertified version of election equipment. This has 
been documented by several observers, is not refuted by the County, and 
was verified by the Secretary of State's office. Who is responsible for 
this violation and who has been held accountable? We are repeatedly 
told that the certification and testing processes these machines are 
put through protect us, clearly it did not in this case, why will it 
now? Besides, testing can only prove that problems exist in the 
equipment, it can never, ever prove that they are not there.

2) Failure to Meet Public Requirements
Rejecting the studied recommendation of a group of concerned local 
citizens, Boulder County's Elections Office insisted on purchasing a 
system instead of making short-term arrangements to conduct the 2004 
election. Boulder County's Board of Commissioners and these citizens 
repeatedly made clear that any system purchased must be capable of 
performing a statistically valid sample hand count to verify the 
accuracy of the machines. According to independent Boulder County 
citizen analysis presented to the Commissioners after the initial use 
in the mock election, it appears that the system that Boulder County's 
Elections Office insisted on purchasing for $1.5 million dollars is 
simply not capable of supporting this known requirement. In California, 
the State Attorney General is suing an elections equipment manufacturer 
for deception and fraud related to failure to meet requirements.

3) Individually Identifiable Ballots
The system that Boulder County's Elections Office insisted on 
purchasing makes use of paper ballots that have uniquely identifiable 
codes on them that, as the Boulder County Clerk has admitted, can 
"theoretically" be tracked to individual voters. This is a clear and 
flagrant violation of Colorado's Constitution. Boulder County's 
Elections Office says it has a "waiver" from the Secretary of State 
allowing this. Since when has the Secretary of State been allowed to 
issue waivers to the State Constitution? It's my understanding that the 
much discussed Help America Vote Act (HAVA) also calls for criminal 
penalties against anyone who conspires to deprive us of a fair 
election. If the waiver is indeed invalid, which presumably would have 
been known if it was improperly issued (who wanted it issued in the 
first place and why? to attempt to circumvent our constitution, of 
course), wouldn't it automatically become evidence of just such an act?

While some people may argue that Boulder County is a leader in the 
State when it comes to elections quality, that's not saying very much 
in a state where half the precincts will be using paperless voting 
terminals. It certainly does not mean that Boulder County's elections 
are automatically trustworthy, nor does leadership in using paper 
ballots for the casting of votes (compared to those paperless voting 
systems used for casting and counting elsewhere in Colorado) fully meet 
the citizen's requirements for verification of results. There is never 
an excuse for relaxing our vigilance when it comes to protecting Our 
Democracy, and no reason to overlook violations of our elections 
protections where ever and whenever they are found.

If Boulder County wants to claim leadership in its Elections Office (as 
it should), then it should welcome the maximum amount of public 
transparency and oversight of their work. Sadly, there is no indication 
that any such openness or leadership is forthcoming. Instead, not only 
are there serious questions about the activities of our elections 
officials locally, statewide and nationally, citizens are repeatedly 
told to place unquestioning faith in bureaucrats who are themselves 
dependent on corporate technocrats to operate machinery that is too 
complex to be inspected or audited by the average person, all upon 
which the legitimacy of our government is supposed to be built. As the 
New York Times said, "this is no way to run a democracy."

I hope all citizens will join me in calling on all elections officials 
to place their careers on the line to defend Trustworthy Elections in 
the US of A, and reject their repeated attempts to prevent citizen 
oversight of their work. Anything less is simply unacceptable (and 
hopefully not criminal) considering the importance of the positions 
they hold. Our Democracy requires that we all pay close attention to 
our elections and that we demand the maximum accountability and 
verification from the people who conduct and control them.

Who will represent the people and hold the elections officials 
accountable for the increasing lack of voter confidence that they are 
creating? If the people have no say, no representation, and no way of 
knowing our votes are counted secretly or accurately, what then?

Joe Pezzillo, Citizen Activist
Boulder, Colorado USA
jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx