RE: VVPAT under attack in Mitchell/Madden bill - call Friday

["Michael Melio" <meliom@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Members of CFVI:

It's time to act. (see Neal's email below).

I will use the email I sent that begins with "Partial
Summary" in the subject line, wherein I summarized the vote
we took at Tuesday's meeting. Please review it.

Unless there are some objections by Tomorrow morning by
10am, Friday, I will be emailing our 275 members and 360
petitioners to contact everyone on the committee to oppose
the Mitchell/Madden bill in it's current revision
(SB05-079.1). I will also mention that 2 minor changes to
the bill will win our support.

Speak up now if you have any reservations.

Sincerely,
 
Michael David Melio
Jefferson County, CO.
meliom@xxxxxxxxxxx
 
"I am not among those who fear the people. They, and not the
rich, are our dependence for continued freedom." --  Thomas
Jefferson

 
 
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 )