A Senate panel voted late Monday to require all ballots be counted by hand, despite the concession by one Republican who supported it that it just can’t be done. The action by the Government Committee came after various people testified about what they contend was fraud in the 2020 election when the official tally showed more Arizonans voted for Joe Biden than Donald Trump. Many Republicans have refused to accept the results despite the fact that various claims of irregularities have either been debunked outright or failed to gather corroborating evidence. House Bill 2289 is a grab-bag of proposed changes to election laws, but there are two key provisions. One would eliminate the opportunity of most Arizonans to cast early ballots, despite the fact that nearly 90% of those who voted in 2020 used that option. Instead, that right would be reserved for those who are in hospitals, nursing homes and those who would be out of state on Election Day. Sen. J.D. Mesnard, R-Chandler, said he has no problem with that. He has questioned the on-demand early voting that has been the law in Arizona since 1991, saying it doesn’t have the kind of checks that occur when someone shows up at the polls and has to present identification. Instead, current law requires only that the person sign the outside of the ballot envelope, with that signature compared with others the county election officials have on file. But Mesnard said he is having real heartburn with the other key provision: Having all ballots counted by hand, at each polling place, within 24 hours of the polls being closed at 7 p.m.
National: Securing the Midterms: Smarter Tools Watch Over Voter Records | Jule Pattison-Gordon/Government Technology
Can automated alerts and machine learning help midterm elections go smoothly and securely? That’s the hope of a Harvard University technology lab and Protect Democracy, a nonprofit focused on preserving democracy in the U.S. Each group offers its own free tool designed to monitor for any unwarranted changes to voter registration records and deliver timely alerts. Harvard Public Interest Tech Lab’s VoteFlare is designed to alert voters, while Protect Democracy’s VoteShield is for election officials’ use. If all goes well, the tools will help constituents and public officials closely monitor for any signs of honest errors or deliberate attacks, allowing them to sort out voting registration discrepancies quickly before they impede ballot casting. Constituents whose information does not match that on their voting records could run into difficulties. Having the wrong party affiliation down prevents voting in the closed primaries, for example. Meanwhile, a mismatch in addresses could block individuals from voting entirely, restrict them to casting a provisional ballot — which is not always counted — or require them to somehow figure out the address on record so they can vote in that precinct, warned Latanya Sweeney, Ji Su Yoo and Jinyan Zang in a 2017 report. Two of those report authors — Sweeney and Zang — helped create VoteFlare. Sweeney, a Harvard professor of the Practice of Government and Technology, led the team.
Full Article: Securing the Midterms: Smarter Tools Watch Over Voter Records