|
|
Post-Election Audits in Michigan
August, 2008.
MERA has developed a detailed
legislative proposal for post-election audits.
The Michigan proposal was guided by the work of the
National Audit Summit's
State Audit Working Group, which refined
principles and best practices for post-election audits from
expert opinion and experience across the country.
Central to the MERA proposal are statistical or "risk-based" based audits,
which are the most efficient and effective way to confirm election night results.
The statistical audit would begin right after the election and if its findings
showed a different winner of a contest, then the audit results would bind election
officials to certify a corrected result.
In the proposed audits, precincts are selected randomly and the paper ballots
are counted manually (hand to eye) and then compared to machine tallies.
To insure independence, audit teams are selected for each county by a
central audit board, under the authority of the Michigan State Treasurer.
A novel feature of the MERA proposal is an election night audit in each precinct.
One contest is selected at random and hand counted to detect significant errors
in the performance of the precinct's tabulator.
Following a
Minnesota law (see report Appendix 1, Subd. 4 and 8), the proposal
creates a strong market incentive for vendors of electronic voting equipment to
make sure their equipment functions correctly and to eliminate security vulnerabilities.
The vendor of any brand of electronic equipment that fails an audit
would be penalized significantly.
Strong transparency provisions ensure public oversight of the entire audit process,
from setting standards and designing the statistical methods to final reporting.
Other provisions permit challenger groups to conduct hand count audits under the
supervision of election officials, and encourage candidates, parties, issue
committees and others to initiate selective and targeted audits.
There is a striking final provision in the proposal. A new election would be
mandated for any audited contest if the State Vote Audit Board cannot determine
an outcome of the contest with, in its judgment, a reasonably high
level of probability.
Taken as a full package, the proposal would provide Michigan with the
highest level of assurance of election accuracy of any state in the country.
MERA's proposed bill is here:
Post-Election Audits in Michigan.
Post Election Audits Planned for November Presidential Election 2008: By State
Legislative Campaign
MERA is working with the Michigan Legislature now to reform our election laws in accordance with
the Legislative Plan.
The tables below track MERA's testimony and the related bills.
Check here for frequent updates.
MERA Testimony 2012
|
Issues
|
Bills
|
MERA Testimony
|
Status
|
| Voter ID
|
HB 5061
S 751
S 754
|
BenDor, Gold Standard Voter ID
|
|
| Photo ID for Absentee Ballot |
HB 5061
|
BenDor
|
Substitute passed House
|
| Post-Election Audits |
HB 5062
|
Shepard
|
Substitute passed House
|
| Qualified Voter File Management |
S 751
|
BenDor
|
Passed Senate; in House Cte.
|
| QVF File Management: Challenged ballot conflicts with right to secret ballot; no "voter fraud" |
S 751
|
Bedell
|
Passed Senate; in House Cte.
|
| Photo ID to Register |
S 754
|
BenDor
|
Passed Senate; in House Cte.
|
| Third Party Voter Registration: restriction is unconstitutional |
S 754
|
BenDor, Shepard
|
Passed Senate; in House Cte.
|
| Third Party Voter Registration: Clerk's conflict, imposition on voters, work-around, partisan purpose |
S 754
|
Shepard, BenDor
|
Passed Senate; in House Cte.
|
Jan BenDor (MERA) and Rep. George Cushingberry address
a press conference on two anti-caging bills (6/20/08).
Senate Conference Room 352, State Capitol
MERA Testimony 2008
|
Issues
|
Bills/Cte.
|
MERA Testimony
|
Status
|
| Allow voter address different from driver address.
|
HB 4447,
4448
|
Bedell,
Shepard
|
Passed House
|
| Allow no-reason absentee voting.
|
HB 4048
|
|
Reported to House Floor
|
| Allow mailing of absent voter ballot applications without request.
|
HB 4553
|
|
Passed House
|
| Allow any Michigan clerk to register or confirm voter identity in person for any MI jurisdiction.
|
HB 4774,
5739
|
Bendor,Shepard
|
Passed House
|
| Early Voting |
HB 4090 |
Bendor,Shepard
|
In Committee
|
| E-voting security, Enforcement, Voter Access |
Senate - Campaign and Election Oversight |
Bedell, Foster, Shepard |
|
| Tabulators, Enforcement & Recalls |
Senate - Campaign and Election Oversight |
Fealk,
Lirones |
|
|
|
Current Legislature
Senate Committee on Local Government and Elections
Committee Members:
David B. Robertson (R) Committee Chair, 26th District
Arlan B Meekhof (R) Majority Vice Chair, 34th District
Jack Brandenburg (R) 11th District
Coleman Young II (D) Minority Vice Chair, 1st District
House Committee on Redistricting and Elections
Committee members:
Peter J. Lund (R), Committee Chair, 36th District
Ed McBroom (R), Majority Vice-Chair, 108th District
Martin Knollenberg (R), 41st District
Sharon Tyler (R), 78th District
Rick Outman (R), 70th District
Al Pscholka (R), 79th District
Barb Byrum (D), Minority Vice-Chair, 67th District
David E. Nathan (D), 11th District
Woodrow Stanley (D), 34th District
|
|
What You Can Do
There are many avenues for citizens to make their voices heard on election reform
and increase the pressure on the legislature to act. You can contact
your representative
and senator in support of bills, educate and urge your local
officials to support MERA reforms, and organize in
communities and statewide to deepen support.
MERA will assist by facilitating opportunities to testify
at hearings and by providing background, guidelines, examples, etc. for all of these efforts.
Contact Your Representative and Senator
If you share our concerns with the integrity of vote counting in electronically mediated elections
and with improving access to voting, then it is urgent that you let your state representative and
senator know about your concern. Concerns with election integrity are sometimes politicized and
in any case tend to fade from attention between major elections. Yet these issues are of vital
importance in a democracy and warrant the attention of voters of every political persuasion. MERA
welcomes your support, whatever your political affiliation.
Please communicate your comments and concerns, either on the general issues or specific bills,
to your
representative and
senator. You can send email or surface mail, or call.
Please forward a copy of your written comments to the
MERA Legislative Coordinator
For a number of key districts (see yellow panel at left), special attention from
constituents who support the MERA Legislative Plan could be very helpful.
If you live in one of these districts and would like to help, please contact the
MERA Legislative Coordinator,
he will be happy to assist you to have the strongest influence possible.
Mobilize Local Officials
Local groups allied with MERA are encouraged to inform and educate key local election officials
on the MERA legislative plan; set up meetings to discuss the plan, answer their questions, and
hear their concerns; and encourage them to weigh in with the legislature in support of key bills.
Please contact the
MERA Legislative Committee Chair for assistance.
Testify
MERA welcomes testimony from all who share our concerns. To present your testimony as part of
the MERA effort, please contact the
MERA Legislative Coordinator before
the hearing and provide written copy for review.
Other Things You Can Do
- Tell other concerned voters about this campaign and send them this link:
http://MichiganElectionReformAlliance.Org/legis.html
- Subscribe to MERA - Announcements,
and MERA-News - current breaking news and discussion on election reform.
- Find out who is coordinating the effort in your county and get in touch to help
organize the effort there, or volunteer to coordinate the effort in your county by
contacting one of the statewide MERA coordinators: Contacts
- To join MERA's statewide organizing effort contact any
Council member.
Whatever you can do, we thank you in advance for your efforts. It is only through
the due vigilance of citizens like you that we can hope to
preserve and protect democracy in Michigan and America.
|
Background
The actual voting arrangements managed by Michigan election officials consist of many
elements --
such as policies, roles, voting machines, staff training, safeguards and procedures,
budgets and supplies, and so on. Traditionally such elements were integrated into a
functional system that had developed gradually over many years. The traditional system
produced reasonably reliable, efficient, and accurate vote counts that were open to
public scrutiny and trustworthy. Now under the Help America Vote Act new voting
systems based on electronic vote tabulation have been put in place.
In Michigan use of voter verified paper ballots is required by law. During voting, the
paper ballots are fed into and read by optical scan electronic tabulators. When the
polls have closed, the results are passed on in the form of memory cards or tapes to
a central location in each county where the votes are aggregated and results
declared. For each voting precinct, tabulators are programmed in advance of the election
to count the votes, and the
tabulators are then pretested before election day to verify the accuracy of the
programming.
However, this system was established in a relatively short time and, particularly
with respect to security from electronic tampering, has not been adequately understood,
tested, or refined. Traditional
practices to safeguard an honest, accurate vote count are no longer effective with new
electronic voting machines.
In 2006 the outspoken republican
Oakland County Clerk Ruth Johnson (who has now replaced Land as Secretary of State)
sent then Michigan
Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land an important
letter which
documented a shocking list of problems with the operation of the new electronic voting
machines in Oakland County.
Operational reliability, however, is only part of the problem. The trustworthiness of electronic
vote tabulations is no better that the security for the tabulating machines
themselves, including their programming and the memory
cards & tapes. Security was never a criterion for certification!
So now election officials are faced with the disturbing possibility that what appears
to be correct in pre-testing can be altered through either
direct or remote access: machine programs can have hidden instructions activated by the
machine's internal clock, memory cards can be switched (perhaps in the guise of vendor
"upgrades"), internal machine records of illicit manipulations can be erased or never
recorded in the first place, and so forth. For a full account please see the Brennan Center report:
Analysis
of security vulnerabilities in the three most commonly purchased electronic voting
systems.
Now we are in a period of danger. Comprehensive, integrated, functional security policies and
procedures appropriate to the new technology, and to the officials and voters who use it,
have not been created. The current transitional
arrangements are inadequate and vulnerable to breakdown and tampering. The goal of fair,
efficient, and accurate vote counts that are transparent to a concerned public is
still far away.
How can voters know their votes will count and be counted accurately? If nothing is done
to address this concern, then we can't and won't be able to know. We continue to face
the possibility of
extensive breakdowns and malfunctions on election day. Many completely legitimate voters
could be prevented from voting except on "provisional ballots," which may or may not be counted.
With the design and operating system of machines held as proprietary secrets by Vendors, even an
independent, expert computer programmer can not assure the public that the machines will be
secure and reliable on election day. In short,
without concerted action, the outcome of any given election could be spoiled or
hijacked and we would have no way to know and little or no recourse.
MERA has formulated an extensive
Legislative Plan
that would provide the basis for overcoming the security problems of Michigan's electronic
voting systems, while increasing access to voting. If we are to have a system that is secure
and transparent to the concerned public, then it is urgent that we make the plan into law as
soon as possible.
|
© Copyright 2007 - 2012 Michigan Election Reform Alliance
Please email comments on the web page, and additions and corrections to
admin@michiganelectionreformalliance.org |
|