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

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?

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