Al and others,
When I sent info on statutes pertinent to the Vote-PAD, I was copying what had been passed on to me on 1-5-705 (1). In fact, when I looked up the legislation in the library (the online version being down), there is more to the statute than that. In full, it is "A voting system shall include at least one direct recording electronic voting system specially equipped for individuals with disabilities or other accessible voter interface device installed at each polling place that meets the requirements of this section." (p.165, CRS 2005).
So if the shorter version was what John Gardner wrote to Ellen, that is its own puzzle. If there is some other explanation for why I only was sent part of the statute...
In any case, I apologize for unwittingly conveying false information.
Margit
In a message dated 4/17/2006 6:00:19 PM Mountain Daylight Time, alkolwicz@xxxxxxxxx writes:
Margit,
It seems to me that a formal clarification is required.
If in fact the law means that vote marking devices are not permitted, I
would think it appropriate to pursue a "restraint of trade" determination
with the Federal Trade Commission.
Perhaps this is a good "case".
Al
-----Original Message-----
From: joel leventhal [mailto:jleventhal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 3:32 PM
To: Robert Mcgrath; Margitjo@xxxxxxx; attendees@xxxxxxx;
cvv-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: CO statutues and the VotePAD
Hi All,
this info did not come from me; John G. and I have only discussed (mainly by
e-mail) the demo of machines that he did not notify me about after saying he
would. .
Joel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Mcgrath" <mcgrath_mcnally@xxxxxxx>
To: <Margitjo@xxxxxxx>; <attendees@xxxxxxx>; <cvv-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 12:43 PM
Subject: RE: CO statutues and the VotePAD
> Margit,
>
> Joel Leventhal told me that John Gardner stated the second rule disallowed
> any device that required a voter to hand-carry their ballot for deposit
> into a ballot box, since a mobility-impaired voter would not be able to do
> this unassisted. That would rule out all use of paper under this
> interpretation, which I think is reading more into the law than it
> requires.
>
>
>>From: Margitjo@xxxxxxx
>>To: attendees@xxxxxxx, cvv-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Subject: CO statutues and the VotePAD
>>Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:24:35 EDT
>>
>>Hi All,
>>According to the SOS's office, a couple of CO statutes won't allow the
>>Vote-PAD. Notice how Colorado law is stricter than HAVA on the first law
>>mentioned,
>>ruling out alternatives to DREs. I wonder who was behind that one, and
>>why!!
>> I'm not sure why the second law thwarts use of the VotePAD, but an
>> looking
>>into it.
>>
>>1 Colorado Revised Statutes Title 1, Article 5, Section 705, Paragraph
>>1,
>>which reads: "A voting system shall include at least one
>>direct
>>recording electronic voting system specially equipped for individuals with
>>disabilities."
>>2.. Colorado Revised Statutes Title 1, Article 5, Section 704,
>>Paragraph
>>1, part N, which describes requirements for audio ballots as follows:
>> "After the initial instruction from an election official, the elector
>> shall
>>be able to independently operate the voter interface device through the
>>final
>>step of casting a ballot without assistance."
>>Margit
>>303-442-1668/margitjo@xxxxxxx
>>
>>.
>
>
>
|