UPDATE: El Paso County Logic and Accuracy Testing of Secretary of State Primary Race Raises Several Questions
We learned Friday that El Paso County, Colorado had a highly unusual Logic and Accuracy test for the 2022 Secretary of State Primary recount.
This is the same primary in which retired US Air Force officerLynda Zamora Wilson was told she lost a race she had just been declared the winner of by a significant margin, only to have it stripped away 38 minutes later with no explanation. Wilson won her convention seat against her opponent 52% to 48% in April with just a two week old campaign.
of course, this is highly unusual and irregular. How can machines be kicking out over 50% of the ballots?
After a couple of interviews today with people that were at the test (one was in the sound proof room that cost thousands to be inside), we now know that:
1.) they changed the parameters of the machines to test the ballots
Why are they changing parameters to these machines before a recount? Who authorized these changes and who performed them? Were they re-certified to EAC standards after the changes were made?
2.) the test ballots were computer generated by “the computers”
First, Colorado law requires the ballots be “voter verified ballots” (more on that below). Secondly, if the test ballots were generated by computers, why wasn’t it disclosed and prepared for when they began? Is simply telling participants that these should generate 2266 adjudications is too much for something they’re paying tens of thousands of dollars for? This would actually be another way to ensure the machines are working properly: tell the candidates how many under votes and over votes there should be contained in the test deck! And it would prevent people from asking questions like these.
Instead, we are left with a 54% adjudication rate, a seemingly unauthorized and uncertified update to the election machine, and more “trust us”. Individuals inside the room during the count said that it was not expected and officials were scrambling to find election judges and watchers.
3.) the Secretary of State dictates that they look for a broader range of errors when conducting the Logic and Accuracy test compared to the election itself
Why are more errors looked for in a recount?
Why are blank votes “adjudicated”? They should just be blank! If we chose to skip over a race, there’s a possibility someone will get the opportunity to determine my intent for that vote I deliberately left blank?
Why do the machines need to be altered in order ensure they worked properly the first time?
El Paso originally requires a test of a minimum of 25 ballots. Is the El Paso elections department so over-zealous that they surpassed the county mandate by a 4,241 ballots?
There shouldn’t be any adjustments needed for these machines. They should be ran as they were on June 28th, 2022 to simulate the election.
4.) –each of the 2266 ballots need to be adjudicated with each count. There are seven counts. They may have finished 4 today, which means tomorrow they have 3 more. At this point, why wouldn’t they have just done a hand count? I’m glad you asked:
Thanks to Ashe in America, we know that CRS 1-10.5-102 Sec 3 Paragraph “a” states that:
“Prior to any recount, the canvass board shall choose at random and test voting devices used in the candidate race, ballot issue, or ballot question that is the subject of the recount. The board shall use the voting devices it has selected to conduct a comparison of the machine count of the ballots counted on each such voting device for the candidate race, ballot issue, or ballot question to the corresponding manual count of the VOTER VERIFIED paper records.” (Emphasis added)
This means that the county should be mandated to count these ballots by hand, and, more importantly, they must be voter verified, not “computer printer verified”.
The test deck being used for this test is reportedly the same deck that was used in the 2022 primaries several weeks ago. El Paso Co Clerk candidate Peter Lupia mentioned that previously, and it was confirmed from a few clerks as being discussed in a call with the SOS today. This “test deck” originally had 6 to 7 adjudications per batch when it was run back in May of 2022. The fact that the original Logic & Accuracy test had adjudications in and of itself is disturbing. What’s even more disturbing is that the “expanded” parameters somehow have found 2266 errors on ballots that previously only had 6 or 7 per batch. And what’s most disturbing is that this seemed to take everyone at the El Paso Elections Department today by complete surprise as they scurried to find the personnel to accomplish their task.
I am also being told that at least one other county in Colorado has unbelievable adjudication rates. More to come.