Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

SPEAKOUT: Paper ballots way to go

By Al Kolwicz

Published March 14, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

More Speakout

More stories »

Despite assurances to the contrary, Colorado county clerks do not know best. Their job has changed. It used to be an administrative job, overseeing people, procedures and paper. It is now a systems manager job, overseeing the design, purchase, testing and operation of complex computerized election systems.

Not many county clerks are qualified to do the job they have chosen. Not surprisingly, clerks delegate responsibilities to equipment suppliers who claim to know what's best. Clerks have an unhealthy dependency on these suppliers. The supplier's agenda is not the electorate's agenda.

Clerks shun accountability and public debate. They hold secret meetings. They withhold data needed to detect election errors and fraud. They block public participation in election planning and oversight. To promote their agenda, clerks use public resources to lobby against the interests of the electorate, and they make misleading statements that disparage watchdogs and give false assurances to voters.

Most county clerks give convenience and cost their top priority. Many claim that voter confidence tops their list. But voter confidence is not based on convenience and cost. Voter confidence is earned when an election is transparent, each process is independently verified, and every problem is publicly disclosed. Clerks might know what is best for clerks; but clerks don't do what is best for the electorate.

In his recent Speakout column, "Colorado's county clerks know best" (March 13), Secretary of State Mike Coffman puts words into the mouth of election system activists and practices revisionist history. He says that clerks know best, but he does not support this assertion.

Coffman says that the "ultimate goal" of so-called voter activists "is to prohibit the use of all electronic voting devices." This is not true, and it has never been true. Election system activists want election systems that are transparent and verifiable. The systems certified by the secretary of state are neither.

Coffman says that the court-ordered recertification was only about documentation. This is not true. The court decision was about standards and competence. The new standards are weak and the recertification team largely ignored them. All of the equipment failed to meet these weak and selectively tested standards. Ignoring problems does not make them go away.

We agree with Coffman when he originally said, "I have more confidence in having votes cast on paper ballots at the polls rather than relying exclusively on electronic voting machines or in voting by mail" ("Secretary of state backs paper ballots," Dec. 27, 2007).

We disagree with Coffman when he now says, "The legislature and the governor should defer to Colorado's county clerks . . . " Colorado county clerks do not share the electorate's agenda, they refuse to be accountable, and they resist transparent and verifiable systems.

Election system activists do not know everything about election law, but they do know some. And they know a great deal about computers, software and systems. It is time for Colorado's clerks to acknowledge their limitations and to work toward a transparent and verifiable election system.

People should trust their clerk, but independently verify their elections.

Al Kolwicz writes on behalf of the Colorado Voter Group. He is a resident of Boulder.

Comments

  • March 14, 2008

    2:51 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    peterpi writes:

    Here we go again. Another paper woshipper. There have been paper ballot elections where the combined votes cast were greater than the number of eligible voters. But I guess they were transparent and verifiable -- "Yep, we have a paper ballot for every vote counted!" -- so that makes it OK!