-------- Original message --------
From: Matt Crane <cccaexecutivedirector@gmail.com>
Date: 3/22/22 13:51 (GMT-07:00)
Subject: Colorado County Clerks Association Response to "Election Integrity" Reports
Dear Colorado General Assembly,
Many of you have received form emails from your constituents asking about allegationscontained in three reports claiming to detail illegal activities regarding our
election/voting systems. Two of these reports are related to the election security breach in
Mesa County last year.
In general, the allegations in these reports are largely what has been alleged and debunked as
half-truths and outright falsehoods for many months now. Two key points you should keep in
mind when discussing these with your constituents.
First and foremost, not a single one incident of fraud or misconduct has been proven in these
reports. The reports actually demonstrate how little the author(s) and contributor(s) know
about election law, systems, and processes. Here is what is true:
• Not one of these reports have shown any evidence that the results of the 2020 election
or any other election were not accurate.
• Our systems specifically use redundant checks and rechecks to ensure that they are
safe. Some of these protections include equipment-related security measures including
restricted access and video monitoring, pre-election testing that includes community
members as witnesses and post-election activities such as risk-limiting tabulation
audits. Strict chain of custody, as demanded by Colorado statute/rule, adds significantly
to our security posture.
• This flurry of reports is a deliberate strategy by grifters and bad actors to create the
impression that something is wrong with our election systems, spread fear, and create
chaos to achieve their policy goals, which include reducing voting to only one day,
potentially disenfranchising our military voters and voters with a disability, and hand-
counting ballots. Ironically, their “solutions” to achieve greater election integrity will
actually have the opposite effect. Their solutions will decrease voter access to the ballot
and make our elections less secure and less accurate.
Here are the top claims repeated in “reports” from Mesa County.
1. The false accusation that voting records required to be retained are somehow deleted
during routine voting system updates, called the Trusted Build
Records required for retention under federal and state election law are not deleted as a part of
the Trusted Build process. Colorado tests voting systems to the 2002 Voting System
Standards. You can find those standards here.
There, you will see that records required for retention under federal and state law come from
the voting system itself, not the full computer operating system.
By design, the Trusted Build process installs the new files and removes files related to the old
build. This is not a violation of federal or state election retention laws. The state retains a copy
of the old Trusted Build and counties retain backups of their election projects from the voting
system. These backups include access and activity logs for the voting system, in compliance with law. Furthermore, each county retains the voted paper ballots from each election for 25
months after each election as required by Colorado law. Those three components allow a
county to recreate/reconstruct the election, recount ballots again if necessary, and audit the
accuracy of the system in tabulating the ballots, which ensures compliance with federal and
state law.
1. The entirely erroneous assertion that the voting system testing lab used by Colorado
lost its federal accreditation and thus the voting systems used in Colorado should be
decertified as a result
Any assertion that the federally accredited voting system testing lab (VSTL) used by Colorado
lost its federal accreditation is absolutely not true. Election Assistance Commissioner Don
Palmer presented at the 2022 CCCA Winter Conference and explained that PRO V &V never had
its accreditation revoked. You can read the EAC response to these false accusations. The VSTL
never lost the ability under the law to test and certify voting systems for use.
1. The false assertion that voting systems are built to connect to the internet
Yes, there is wireless technology on many of our voting system components. Voting systems
are tested and certified for use by the federal government and the state of Colorado with these
wireless components included. The mere presence of these components does not violate
federal or state law. However, the wireless ability is disabled in Colorado as a part of the
Trusted Build process. Counties do have the ability to validate this. Validating that wireless
functionality is disabled will be a part of the Public Logic and Accuracy Test conducted before
every election in every county moving forward.
1. The false assertion that voting systems across counties contain unauthorized software
that could somehow allow access from external sources
This claim is not new and has been debunked on numerous occasions, going back to grifters
making the same claim in Antrim County, MI after the 2020 election. There are two
components of this lie here in Colorado:
a. Microsoft Sequel Server Management Studio (SSMS). On the Dominion system,
this software plays a role in adjudication. Grifters and bad actors contend that
because this part of Sequel was not explicitly identified on the Colorado
application for certification, that it’s use is illegal. This is more
malinformation. While it was not explicitly identified on the certification, it is
common knowledge that SSMS is a normal part of having Sequel
installed. Furthermore, in the product documentation submitted by Dominion
during the certification process, SSMS is CLEARLY identified as part of the
configuration for both standard and express accounts. Here is the link to the
product documentation. The reference to MSMS can be found on pages 39-40.
https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/VotingSystems/DVS-
DemocracySuite511/documentation/2-02-SystemOverview-5-11-CO.pdfOffice to their voting system. According to the grifters and bad actors, this
download is illegal and should disallow counties from using their voting
system. However, Colorado Election Rule 20.2 clearly allows counties to
download additional software to voting systems with the approval of the
Colorado Department of State (CDOS). CDOS has approved the LibreOffice
download.
Once again, either the grifters and bad actors did a poor job of research or they are purposely
spreading disinformation.
Also issued recently by the group calling itself the United States Election Integrity Plan “USEIP”
is an attempt to report on what they describe as a “voter canvass.” You can see that full report
here. In general, it is impossible to respond specifically to any of its assertions because we
know too little about the canvas itself. Important questions that the report does not answer
include:
• Who are the canvassers?
• How did the canvassers interact with the voters?
• Did the canvassers use a script? Was the script biased?
• What voters were surveyed?
• How did they overcome the bias of talking to only one person in a house with multiple
voters?
• Are the neighborhoods surveyed representative of the county?
• Are the counties surveyed representative of the state? (Obviously Douglas, El Paso,
Pueblo, and Weld are not representative of the entire state)
• Why were results from other counties not included in the report?
Furthermore, it’s fair to ask why USEIP has not turned over the data and/or affidavits that
support their claims. If they have evidence of poor voter rolls and illegal activity, they should
have turned that information over to be investigated when they released their report. If the
information is accurate, having the data would allow counties to update voter rolls and pursue
legal charges if warranted.
One other important thing to note. USEIP members collected a list of approximately 750
deceased people who they claim had cast a ballot in the 2020 General Election. They submitted
this list to authorities in El Paso County last year. Upon investigation, they were correct about
only ONE voter. However, the El Paso County Clerk and Recorder’s Office had caught this
attempt at fraud during signature verification, the ballot was not counted, and the matter was
referred to the district attorney for further investigation.
We understand a new report regarding the Mesa County election security breach has just been
introduced. We will study that report vigorously as well. Based on the poor
assumptions/conclusions from the first two reports, it is fair to say we are cynical about any
claims in this new report.
No comments:
Post a Comment