Statehouse

2015

The good, the bad, and
the what were they thinking?
Marilyn Marks
Lakewood Tea Party
May 19, 2015

Areas of focus
Elec;on Security
Voter/Ci;zen Privacy
Government Transparency

All under aGack in 2015 session by Rs and Ds.

[No analysis of other areas!]

The Good!
Rep. Patrick Neville (R) sponsored bill to
require signature verica;on on mail ballots in
local elec;ons . GOOD. Killed by Dems. BAD.
Rep. JoAnn Windholz (R) sponsored bill to
reinforce watcher rights to verify all aspects of
elec;ons. GOOD. Killed by Dems. BAD.
Senators Woods and Lundberg sponsored bills
to clean up voter rolls, and allow voters to opt
out of mail ballots. GOOD. Killed
by Republicans not
bringing to a vote. BAD.

The Good!

Two strong warriors RE: three focus areas

#1 Senator Laura Woods Jeco Senate District 19

Kept her promises to

Read every bill in advance of ac;ng upon them in CommiGee or vo;ng on
them on the Floor of the Senate

Determine if proposed bills fall within the role of government to protect life,
liberty and property

Determine the future impact of proposed legisla;on on our kids and grand-kids

Determine if the proposed legisla;on benets or costs taxpayers. Tax dollars
belong to us, not the government

Determine if government intrusion grows or diminishes if proposed legisla;on
passes

Consider the cost on private small businesses and workers

Determine the impact of the proposed legisla;on on your personal freedom

Protect your individual liber;es.

#2 Senator Kevin Lundberg-- Senate District 49 Larimer County

Led the charge to stop Internet vo;ng.
Sponsored elec;on security legisla;on.

Senators Woods and Lundberg

killed bad legislaYon
More important than bringing good legisla;on.
Woods
Pres. Primary bill; Whistleblower bill;
Internet vo;ng provisions of military vo;ng bill.

Lundberg
Private business Open Record threat; Internet
vo;ng provisions of military vo;ng bill.

The Bad and Ugly

You decide, if you can gure out ---

What were they thinking?

SB083 Expand CORA (Open Records)
requirements to private businesses that do
business with any government.
Add major cost and complexity for small
and large businesses.
Would require aGorneys and complex
record keeping.
Sponsored by Owen Hill (R),and
Chris Holbert (R)
Killed in Senate Judiciary ---Lundberg.
GOOD

What were they thinking?

SB 275Whistleblower protecYon
AGack on ci;zen privacy.
All individual private condenYal
records in any state agencies could
be released to state legislators.
Medical records, tax returns, employee discipline
records, adop;on records, divorce records, drug
and alcohol abuse monitoring records, etc. in the
hands of 100 poli;cians.
Legislators --custodians of highly conden;al
records?

What were they thinking?

SB 275 Whistleblower protec;on
(contd.)
Ci;zens were to trust that records would not be
leaked, hacked or abused.
Circumvents AGs oce, DAs oce, US
AGorneys oce, etc. for law enforcement and
whistleblower process.
Woods led the debate opposing. Holbert also
opposed. No others spoke against!
Killed in Senate 18/17 bi-par;san non-recorded
vote.

What were they thinking?

SB 275 Whistleblower protec;on (contd.)
Who brought this bill? First commiGee April 28.
All witnesses opposed.
R-controlled commiGee approved unanimously.
Prime Sponsor-- Senator Kent Lambert
Senators Cadman, Scheel,
Steadman, Carroll
Reps. Hullinghorst, Young, DelGrosso

The bill that must not be men;oned.

What were they thinking?

SB 287Presiden;al primary bill (Crowder/Ulibarri)
Caucus or Primary? Controversial topic
Regardless:
--Introduced in last 5 days with no ;me
for delibera;on.
--$5 million cost not budgeted.
--SOS could prevent candidate from being on
ballot based on allega;ons of improprie;es.
--Clerk would unilaterally cer;fy results. No canvass board
oversight, no recounts, no contests in court, etc.
Woods + Rs 287 killed in AppropriaYons Commiaee.
Party line vote.

What were they thinking?

HB-1130 Military/Overseas Vo;ng and Internet
vo;ng in municipal elec;ons
Sponsors--Nordberg, Hill, Garcia, Ryden
Promoted by SOS Williams
Original bill en;tled Military Vo;ng, but text had
nothing to do with military or vo;ng.
Incumbent protec;ons on elec;on
nomina;ons, vacancies, deadlines, etc.

Internet voYng?? (HB1130)

HB1130 amended arer public tes;mony in House
with no public disclosure un;l arer hearing to
allow--
Electronic transmission of voted ballots.
No rules, no limita;ons.
Tweet your ballot? Ballot seles? Text message
your ballot? Email your ballot?
Passed House UNANIMOUSLY!
Ac#vists mobilized: Calls, leGers,
ar;cles, social media

Internet VoYng??
Ac;vists spent 1,000+ hours aGemp;ng to defeat.
Na;onal organiza;ons opposed.
Internet security experts opposed.
DOD does not recommend.
Republican-controlled Senate commiGee blew o
the expert reports and curtailed public tes;mony.
Yet, sponsors solidly commiGed to Internet vo;ng
un;l just before nal hours.
SOS Williams lobbied for Internet vo;ng against
Woods/Lundbergs amendments on Senate oor.

Internet voYng potenYal deleted

aher 50 amendments drahed
BiGer ght as sponsors seemed caught between
SOS and ci;zens.
Con;nued to amend, un;l all openings for
Internet vo;ng were removed 1 hour before nal
vote.
Woods voted NO on amended bill to express
displeasure at the s;ll poorly drared bill.
Close call---
but ci;zens prevailed.

Internet voYng and privacy

Internet vo;ng subject to hackingno surprise.
SOS contract system in 64 coun;es.

Third-party commercial vendor captures
--voter personal informa;on (SS#, DOB, etc.)
--voters personal ballot choices
likely unknown to voters.

SOS wants to expand the use to any military voter
anywhere, dependents, and all overseas voters.

Its BACK! ---Internet expansion

proposed by SOS Rule
First Comment period ended May 15.

Proposed rule will be published soon with new
comment period.

Scores of ci;zen comments and
GOP state party and county
party comments oppose expansion
of Internet vo;ng.

Stay tuned and oppose.

My conclusions
Mo;ves of Republican lawmakers generally good.
But, bill sponsors fail to:
-- take responsibility for care in draring.
--consider all the consequences of their bill.
--ask the experts. Refuse to hear the experts.
--answer specic ques;ons about bills.
Have too many bills. Not enough ;me.
They trust the sponsor/caucus
without independent review.

What can the grassroots do?

Ask them to explain their 2015 votes or bills
they sponsored.
Write and call next year on bills you are
interested in. Dont leave it to others.
Use social media to get their aGen;on.
Remember that high-paid professional
lobbyists are with them every day.
Demand commitments before you donate
;me or money.

Ques;ons?
Marilyn Marks
Marilyn@AspenOce.com