Top Tweets for #Cosos

19 days ago

Colorado deserves secure elections! How do you feel about James Wiley for Secretary of State? Supporting? Leaning In? Tell us now 👇 https://t.co/PBj9wm05ow #RedFlameOfLiberty #SaveOurSuffrage #COSOS #ElectionIntegrity Paid for by James Wiley for Colorado

redflameliberty's tweet photo. Colorado deserves secure elections!
How do you feel about James Wiley for Secretary of State?
Supporting? Leaning In? Tell us now 👇
https://t.co/PBj9wm05ow

#RedFlameOfLiberty #SaveOurSuffrage #COSOS #ElectionIntegrity
Paid for by James Wiley for Colorado https://t.co/tLDzwqNDLt

591

Jon Caldara

@JonCaldara

5 months ago

The case for independent audits of Colorado elections #copolitics #coleg #cosos This part will disappoint angry people on Twitter: Relax. Put the pitchforks down. I am not relitigating the 2020 election, or mail ballots, or even Tina Peters. But I am saying people don’t trust elections like they used to. And here in Colorado we can do a rather simple thing to reverse that. And progressives should want it most. Saving democracy is all the rage now, and as far as political slogans go, it’s a pretty damn good one. But saving democracy isn’t just about protecting Colorado from President Donald Trump, whatever that vagary means. It’s about fortifying our democratic institutions so the voters’ true will is clearly and verifiably stated. This is where I’d usually rant about how the legislature going around our Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) is more of a clear and present threat to democracy than anything Trump is doing in Colorado — but why state the obvious? Those hell-bent on taking your money will do anything to make sure you can’t vote on it. Again: Save Democracy — Protect TABOR! ‘Trust us’ isn’t proof Confidence in elections isn’t determined by how often some official says the system works. It’s determined by whether the public believes the system is beyond suspicion. Our republic depends on that. And the secretary of state’s office just insisting our elections are fair and honest? That’s not enough. Saying “trust us” isn’t proof. They need to prove it. And they don’t. Not really. When you buy stock in a publicly traded company you have confidence the financial information is accurate because an outside, independent auditing firm checks the books and certifies them. Been the law since 1933. Apparently, elections didn’t get the memo. Colorado’s voting system operates in a way publicly traded companies could never: it audits itself. That doesn’t engender confidence. Now before the Tina Peters acolytes start pointing fingers, I am in no way saying any Colorado elections were rigged or tampered with. I am saying if you want people to believe the results the Secretary of State declares, her office shouldn’t be the one doing the auditing. Or put differently, if Trump-hating progressives want to shut up election-denying MAGA die-hards, simply having outside election audits would go a long way. Counties do the hands-on work, but the critical decisions are made at the top. Right now, the Secretary of State determines which races get audited, what statistical method is used, and what “risk limit” applies. That determines how many ballots get checked. And here’s the kicker: the current system incentivizes auditing the “blowout” races. If a candidate wins by 9,000 votes, you only must sample a handful of ballots to confirm the result. Easy peasy. If a candidate wins by 30 votes? Now you must check a lot more ballots. That’s expensive, time-consuming, and annoying. Bureaucrats hate work. So what does the SOS audit most? The landslides. The current setup rewards picking races easiest to validate rather than races that most need validating. That’s not corruption. That’s human nature. And a little bureaucratic laziness. The case for independent audits And human nature is exactly why we use independent auditors everywhere else. An outside firm or office, with its reputation on the line, would likely choose differently. Besides, it’s just terrible practice for the secretary of state to audit the secretary of state. Even Enron’s accountants would call that sketchy. The beauty of an outside audit is you remove the political suspicion. An independent commission — or maybe the State Auditor’s office — would decide which races are audited, the statistical methods, whether best practices are followed. Nothing about ballots, machines, or voter IDs so the left can’t gasp “suppression.” What changes is who verifies the work. And that matters. If Democrats truly believe Colorado elections are secure — and they say they do — then an independent audit only strengthens that claim. In fact, it’s politically brilliant. Imagine a Democrat secretary of state saying, “Our elections are secure — and we’ve removed all doubt by putting audits in the hands of independent experts.” That’s not voter suppression. That’s voter reassurance. And it beats the current line: “Trust the system. It audits itself.” We don’t save democracy by telling skeptical voters to shut up, but by making the system more trustworthy. An independent auditor is not an accusation. It’s insurance. Even for progressives. Especially for progressives. If the legislature won’t make this change, it’s our responsibility to ask every secretary of state candidate whether they will.

129

Top Tweets for #Cosos

Last Seen Hashtags on Sotwe

Trends for you

Most Popular Users