Yesterday I was in an informal meeting about the Mitchell/Madden bill (SB05-079). It was convened by Jenny Flanagan (Common Cause) with Drew Durham (SoS's office), Carol Snyder, (Adams County Clerk), Scott LaBarre, Denver Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind, Faith Gross, Voting Rights Program Coordinator of the Legal Center for People with Disabilities and Older People, Rachael Kaygi from Senator Gordon's office, some other folks, and Senator Shawn Mitchell (briefly at the end). We didn't even get much of a chance to talk about most parts of the bill. From early on, Scott introduced a new twist on voter verifiable paper audit trails (VVPATs). He said he didn't feel a strong need for a VVPAT, but that if a VVPAT was required, that the audit capability must be fully accessible, just like the ability to vote privately and independently. This caused most folks in the room to start saying that the technology just isn't there yet for VVPATs, despite the fact that HAVA doesn't require that functionality, that California and others are going ahead with the requirement and has a legal opinion that it is ok, etc. Senator Mitchell came in at the end and asked if there would be an objection to VVPATs that were verifiable by the vast majority of voters. After he heard from the others, I again tried to clarify that everyone benefits if even a small fraction of voters actually verify their ballots, and that verified paper trail is manually audited, as Mitchell's legislation et al. require. I also said that I feel "blind" and frustrated when confronted with a DRE that doesn't have a VVPAT, since I can't verify my "ballot" as it goes into the memory chips. We have to get a groundswell of people to send that sort of message to him. In addition Drew Durham was continuing his claims that Colorado shouldn't certify equipment like the ES&S Automark Voter Assist Terminal, since they would get sued by people who say it isn't accessible: The Automark, a new voting system, is not accessible for those disabled Buckeyes who cannot handle paper. The Automark is a touchscreen that marks an optical scan ballot. It then ejects the marked ballot. The voter must carry the marked ballot and insert it into the in-precinct tabulator. Individuals who cannot handle paper (or who cannot, because of their disability, independently manipulate paper) must rely on a non-disabled person (who will be able to see the ballot) insert the marked ballot into the in-precinct tabulator. On prototype models of the Automark, for instance, a voter who uses a mouth stick will be able to use the touchscreen but will not be able to handle the paper when it's ejected. -- Jim Dickson Another interesting point of confusion - apparently HAVA talks of using the paper record for a recount, but allows them to just look at the totals printed on the paper rolls, rather than requiring a manual count of each ballot. Trusting the totals on paper is of course just as faulty as trusting the totals in the electronic ballot. It is clear to me that we have to be very levelheaded and careful to call for at least a basic VVPAT and manual count audit capability. I don't know enough about the Automark issue. But so far, the language in the Holt bill (HR 550) before congress seems to me to be the most carefully thought out, most likely to pass, legislation: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-550 (govtrack.us is GREAT!) And we need to get Udall to sign up for that, as he did for Holt's last bill. He's at these numbers: Washington: (202) 225-2161, CO: (303) 650-7820 It seems that the "rewrite" version of Mitchell's bill (SB079_L.001) is not yet available online (i.e. http://www.leg.state.co.us/) over a week after it was handed out to many at the capitol. That's because it wasn't actually heard by the committee, whose schedule was too full. The one online is numbered 079_01.pdf, and line 7 starts with (23.8) "Permanent..." The rewrite has this text on line 7: (50.7) "Voter ..." Again very confusing, since both versions have a "1" in them.... I've put up a wiki page on Manual Count Audits at the CVV wiki: http://www.coloradovoter.net/moin.cgi/ManualCountAudit Please look at it and add your own input. We especially need examples of audits from other states so we can respond to some of the claims of opponents here in Colorado. At any rate, most important is to give Sen Mitchell support for VVPATs and manual count audits. He's at 303-866-4876, shawn.mitchell.senate@xxxxxxxxxxx He asked Jenny to summarize input sent in by tomorrow (Friday), so time is of the essence. Cheers, Neal McBurnett http://bcn.boulder.co.us/~neal/ Signed and/or sealed mail encouraged. GPG/PGP Keyid: 2C9EBA60 I'll leave these numbers here for the record.... > The Senators on the Senate Local Government Committee are: > 1. Deanna Hanna, Chair. 303-866-4857 ( > deanna.hanna.senate@xxxxxxxxxxx ) > 2. Peter Groff, Vice-Chair. 303-866-4864 ( > peter.groff.senate@xxxxxxxxxxx) > 3. Bob Bacon 303-866-4841 ( > bob.bacon.senate@xxxxxxxxxxx ) > 4. Lewis Entz 303-866-4871 ( > lewis.entz.senate@xxxxxxxxxxx ) > 5. Ed Jones 303-866-6364 ( > ed.jones.senate@xxxxxxxxxxx ) > 6. Ken Kester 303-866-4877 ( > ken.kester.senate@xxxxxxxxxxx ) > 7. Lois Tochtrop 303-866-4863 ( > lois.tochtrop.senate@xxxxxxxxxxx )
Attachment:
pgp00001.pgp
Description: PGP signature