-->
Friends,
We just discovered that the Secretary of State is making election
rules changes on September 30^th . The NOTICE is published at
http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/rule_making/cpf_rules9-30-04.htm
Some of the planned modifications are objectionable. For example, the
proposed rules authorize voting by FAX machine (rule 25).
* In our quick reading of the Statutes, we found no Colorado
Statute authorizing voting by FAX machine.
* The rule does not address the federal statement, “Faxing may be
an option, but the ballot **must be mailed** as well.” How does
this work with a recount?
Some of these rules are inadequate. For example the rules for RECOUNT:
* The proposed recount rule (14.3) does not start the recount at
the raw cast ballots (including absentee and provisional
envelopes). This means that ballot qualification errors will not
be detected.
* The proposed recount rules (14.4.4) appear to transfer the
statutory authority for conducting the recount from the canvass
board to the Secretary of State.
* The proposed recount rules (14.5.4) require that paper ballots
be RE-counted in groups of 25 (GOOD) but the rules do not
require that the original count be done in batches of 25 (BAD).
The consequence is that there is no way to verify batch counts.
* The proposed recount rule (14.5.5) for how counts are recorded
is incomplete and inadequate.
* The proposed recount rule (14.7) for re-counting optically
scanned ballots does not require that the votes counted for each
ballot image be verifiable against the original ballot.
* The proposed recount of Ballot Now equipment does not require a
verifiable vote record, and does not prescribe statistical sampling.
* The rules for recount of Direct Record Electronic voting
equipment are missing.
And the rules for WATCHERS:
* Fail to provide process-specifications and process-training for
watchers.
* Fail to require that all processes be identified, and that a
schedule of operation for every process be published in advance
of the election.
* Fail to address the rights of watchers to actually read what is
happening.
* Fail to permit multiple watchers for the same candidate as long
as the watchers are observing different processes.
* Fails to require that all electronic data be instantly available
to watchers – such as electronic poll books and vote
interpretation records and electronic voter registration books.
* Fails to require that all election workers be identified with a
badge containing very legible badge identification of their
role, who they represent, and their name/number.
Some rules are missing:
* There is no rule requiring that the version of each piece of
equipment and software (including operating system, PROM, and
utility applications) be verifiable.
* There is no rule requiring that the certification documentation
be available.
* There are no rules regarding the operation of the canvass board.
* There are no rules regarding the conduct of the Logic and
Accuracy Test.
* There are no rules describing what happens when an
error/deviation is detected – for example absentee ballots that
were erroneously not counted.
* There is no rule creating an independent oversight of issues
where the Secretary of State or a County Clerk is the subject of
the complaint.
September 30th is an inappropriate time for the Secretary of state to
be conducting a rulemaking hearing on a 100 page document.
Nonetheless, it is done, and we must respond.
The draft election rules to be considered at September 30^th hearing
are published at
http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/rule_making/proposed_election_rules9-30-04.pdf
The current election rules, September 13, 2004, are published at
http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/rule_making/electionrules.doc
Al
Al Kolwicz
CAMBER
Citizens for Accurate Mail Ballot Election Results
2867 Tincup Circle
Boulder, CO 80305
303-494-1540
AlKolwicz@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:AlKolwicz@xxxxxxxxx>
www.users.qwest.net/~alkolwicz <http://www.users.qwest.net/%7Ealkolwicz>
http://coloradovoter.blogspot.com