I got this yesterday and I have a feeling that there are a lot of other folks around the State of NH harboring similar thoughts when it comes to counting ballots. Can’t say I blame them!
Emphasis mine:
Hi Skip,
I have started an effort in Raymond NH to stop using voting machines. We have talked to the BOS and they are going to investigate how the town started using machines so we can find the remedy to get rid of them. (warrant article or simply a vote of the BOS).
I would like to make a petition and gather signatures before the meeting on Aug 9, but I need some direction. Do you know who I could talk to? Or has anyone done this before? I want to know the wording on the petition, and I also want to know if I should ask just to get rid of the machines, or also ask for an audit, or a recount of November 2020? Raymond’s voting machine tapes show that machine 3’s votes were skewed— the results were very different from both machines 1 and 2.
Any direction would be appreciated. Thank you
Well, a step in the right direction in my opinion.
Hand counts eliminate a whole lot of issues, real or perceived, for a lot of people. It doesn’t come without a cost, for sure, and other issues may well rise up as well (The Law of Unintended Consequences is ALWAYS lurking around – try to plan for it but knowing that you’ll never outsmart it). But does Raymond have a “Windham Incident” sequel in the making, if one machine is far different than the others?
Is there a folding machine in there somewhere?
I had to admit – I didn’t know. But GraniteGrok KNOWS people – a lot of them and we can generally find answers and often, within the circle of the Grokster writers:
Hi,
To be honest, I’m not sure how to proceed. That said, “I KNOW PEOPLE!” and I have CC’d Steve in on this. I’ve also BCC’d (I don’t like to expose folks’ email addresses without permission, generally) Norm Silber and Ed Naile on this question of yours as they’d know far more than I. Norm is a lawyer and a NH State Rep that sat on the Elections Committee in the NH House and Ed just seems to know about everything about voting there is to know.
Guys – thoughts?
And Ed has the goods not just for our Letter writer but for everyone! And I’ve emphasized what I think are the important bits for the answers to the question:
The BOS decides to use the machines by a vote.
They can decide to not use Gardner’s machines.
There is a statute I would have to dig up. I have sent this info to several towns.
You can call Gardner’s office and ask on a weekday.
They should tell you.
The worthless ballot law commission approves the town decision.
656:43 Lease or Purchase. – Any town or city authorizing the use of an electronic ballot counting device for the counting of ballots shall pay the cost of lease or purchase. When such a device is purchased by a town or city, the person from whom such device is purchased shall give to the secretary of state a suitable bond with sufficient sureties to keep such device in good working order for not less than 2 years at the seller’s own expense.
Source. 1979, 436:1. 2009, 70:4, eff. Aug. 8, 2009.
656:41 Approval by Ballot Law Commission. – The ballot law commission shall act as a board to examine devices for the electronic counting of ballots. The commission shall, whenever requested, examine any device which may be capable of meeting the requirements for elections held in this state and shall, at least every 5 years, review current and new devices to determine whether the devices require upgrading. The commission, after such review, shall file an explanatory report with the secretary of state within 30 days of its determination that outlines the basis for its determination, taking into account such factors as hardware and software standards, policies and procedures, security requirements, and usability. The commission shall approve a device upon request in its discretion, and no device shall be used in any election in this state unless it reads the voter’s choice on a paper ballot and is of a type so approved by the ballot law commission. Any device that is altered must be re-approved before it is used in any election in this state. For the purposes of this section, a device shall be considered altered if any mechanical or electronic part, hardware, software, or programming has been altered.
Source. 1979, 436:1. 1994, 118:2. 1998, 311:2. 2009, 70:2, eff. Aug. 8, 2009. 2019, 128:1, eff. Aug. 24, 2019.
656:42 Rules. –
I. The ballot law commission shall make such rules as may be necessary to ensure the accuracy of electronic ballot counting devices, including rules for the testing of electronic ballot counting devices prior to each election and the submission of testing records to the secretary of state. The ballot law commission shall make such rules as may be necessary in order that electronic ballot counting devices may be used in this state in such a manner that the election laws may be complied with as far as possible. Said commission shall have the power and authority in making rules to declare certain laws relative to distribution and marking of ballots and other requirements inconsistent with the use of electronic ballot counting devices ineffective in towns and cities adopting such a method of voting. The presiding officer at each polling place shall enforce the rules of the ballot law commission made under the authority of this section.
II. Consistent with the rules of the ballot law commission the secretary of state shall include protocols for the testing of electronic ballot counting devices in the election manual authorized by RSA 652:22. Each device shall be tested after installation and prior to each election.
III. Any company, partnership, proprietorship, or other person, wherever located, which supplies, maintains, or programs electronic ballot counting devices which are used in elections in New Hampshire is subject to regulation by this state.
IV. Each person described in paragraph III shall designate, in writing, an agent for service of all process, including, but not limited to summonses, writs, orders, petitions, and subpoenas, and shall agree in writing that the attorney general, in conjunction with any election investigation, may inspect its records, machines or other devices, and premises.
V. Any such person described in paragraph III who fails to properly program and test electronic ballot counting devices shall be liable to reimburse the state for the cost of any recount which is necessitated by such failure.
VI. Any person who knowingly violates the testing procedures established under this section or the rules of the ballot law commission shall be guilty of a misdemeanor if a natural person, or guilty of a felony if any other person.
VII. Each electronic ballot counting device shall have a removable memory device which can be secured in the device with a tamper evident seal that will disclose unauthorized access to the hardware and software inside the device. Electronic ballot counting devices that are stored in a canvas bag or storage case when not in use shall have a bag or case that is capable of being secured with a tamper evident seal.
VIII. (a) Before each election, the vendor for any electronic ballot counting device shall provide the secretary of state with an exact electronic record of the data written to each memory card to be used in the election.
(b) The town or city clerk shall preserve each memory device used at each election until after the recounts for such election are complete and any and all legal challenges to the outcome of that election are adjudicated.
(c) The town or city clerk shall securely preserve each memory device used in any election as directed by the secretary of state.
(d)(1) To help ensure that the counting device cannot be tampered with or improperly accessed, the town or city clerk shall employ electronic ballot counting device seals specified by the secretary of state and seal the electronic ballot counting device in the following areas:
(A) The connection of the zippers on the closed canvas cover of the counting device carrying bag, case, or the device base for devices stored in their bases.
(B) The memory device.
(C) Electronic ballot counting device housing and all ports or access points to the device hardware or software, such that the seal(s) would be broken if the device is accessed.
(2) The town or city clerk shall update an activity log supplied by the secretary of state to keep a record each time a counting device seal is broken and a new one installed, and the reason for which the seal was broken.
(3) No person shall break a counting device seal without the presence of 2 witnesses. Upon breaking such seal, the person responsible shall update the activity log, obtain the signatures of each witness, record the reason for breaking such seal, ensure that it is resealed with a new seal immediately, and properly record the new seal number in the activity log.
(4) Before the moderator places into service a counting device on election day, the moderator shall verify all counting device seals have been maintained intact, and any seals which have been broken have been promptly resealed and the activity log properly recorded and signed.
(5) If, on election day, the moderator notices that any seal on the counting device appears tampered with or broken without an adequate record in the activity log, the moderator shall refrain from using the counting device in that election, and shall report the apparent tampering to the attorney general, the secretary of state, the town or city clerk, and the selectmen.
(6) The counting device and the activity log shall be subject to review by the attorney general or secretary of state at any time.
(7) Whenever the town or city clerk receives a memory device from the vendor, the clerk shall break the memory device seal, insert the memory device in the electronic ballot counting device, and apply a new seal. The clerk shall lock any programmed memory device not inserted into an electronic ballot counting device in a safe and record the names of individuals that have access to such safe on the activity log.
(8) Whenever the town or city clerk removes the memory device from the electronic ballot counting device, the clerk shall immediately return it to the memory card programmer or, if programmed locally, secure the device in a safe and reseal the empty memory device slot or port.
(e)(1) The town or city clerk shall give public notice of the date and time of a pre-election test of the electronic ballot counting device and ballots.
(2) Upon receipt of the official ballots from the secretary of state, the town or city clerk shall remove the number of ballots needed to test the electronic ballot counting device from among the official ballots and keep them separate and secure from the remaining official ballots thereafter.
(3) The town or city clerk shall mark any ballots used for testing with the words “TEST.”
(4) The town or city clerk shall mark the test ballots in such a way as to demonstrate a vote for each candidate on at least one test ballot, as well as votes for less than and more than the number of candidates that may be voted for an office, write-ins, multiple votes for a candidate who appears in more than one party column for the same office on a general election ballot, and ballots on which there are no votes. The clerk shall mark as many as possible of the combinations of choices that a voter may indicate on the ballot.
(5) The town or city clerk shall run each of the test ballots through the counting device in the following orientations: Top first with side one face up, bottom first with side one face up, top first with side one face down, and bottom first with side one face down.
(6) The town or city clerk shall count the votes marked on the test ballots run though the electronic ballot counting device and multiply the results by 4 to account for the 4 different orientations, and check these results against the tally from the electronic ballot counting device.
(7) If the electronic ballot counting device’s tally does not match the count of the town or city clerk, the clerk shall notify the moderator, who shall order that the electronic ballot counting device not be used at the election.
(8) The pre-election test shall be completed no later than the Wednesday immediately prior to the election.
(9) The town or city clerk shall document the pre-election test by preserving:
(A) The test ballots.
(B) The count of votes on the test ballots made by the town or city clerk.
(C) The results from the electronic ballot counting device that was tested.
(10) The clerk shall test all electronic ballot counting devices and memory devices in the possession of the town or city.
(11) Prior to placing the electronic ballot counting device or any memory device into service in an election, the moderator shall certify that there is evidence that pre-election testing was conducted on each electronic ballot counting device and each memory device in the town or city clerk’s possession, and that these ballot counting devices and memory devices have passed the test.
IX. Any electronic digital image of a marked ballot made by a ballot counting device, whether stored on the device, on a removable memory device, or on a government computer, shall be non-public and exempt from RSA 91-A.
Source. 1979, 436:1. 1998, 311:3. 2009, 70:3. 2010, 317:70, eff. July 18, 2010. 2020, 23:2-7, eff. July 17, 2020.
So, if anyone looks at this and thinks to themselves “I CAN do this, too!” – let us know! After all, WE are supposed to be in charge, via our Representatives, right?
