T
Y
B
>>24997812
The hell?
Friendly fire anon o.0
>>24997847
Are you a bot homie? Your sentence structure is a bit weird. Did my fembot image offend you?
The ABCs of Election Security:
(1/3)
A — Auditable Paper Trails :Every vote should produce a paper record that can be independently audited without redaction.
B — Ballot Secrecy :Only the voter should know which ballot is theirs.
C — Chain of Custody :Every ballot must remain continuously accounted for from issuance through certification.
Everything else follows from these three principles.
The Problem: Redacted Records, Countywide Voting and the Loss of Precinct Accountability = No Auditable Paper Trail
We can no longer audit our elections. Redactions, denials and missing records make it impossible to truly know who won an election conducted with modern US procedures and computerized systems.
For generations, elections were administered by precinct. Every voter reported to an assigned precinct. Ballots were issued, cast, secured, counted and reported within that precinct before becoming part of the countywide report.
The precinct became the smallest auditable unit of an election—the most minute political subdivision available for public review of its election returns. It is also state law to report these results.
This structure naturally preserved ballot secrecy while giving election officials a clear method of reconciliation. Officials could compare voter check-ins, ballots issued, ballots cast, spoiled ballots, provisional ballots and ballots counted without identifying how any individual voted.
The modern practice of allowing regular, non-provisional ballots at countywide vote centers has created significant challenges to all three principles. Countywide vote centers have eliminated the last voting option that inherently guaranteed ballot secrecy—in-precinct voting on Election Day.
Casting all ballots by precinct restores auditability by guaranteeing ballot secrecy and eliminating the need for post-election redaction. It strengthens chain of custody for precinct-level returns by having the evidence of those returns ready and available to be examined without redaction.
>>24997994 (me)
The ABCs of Election Security:
(2/3)
Ballot Secrecy
Ballot Secrecy is one of the oldest and most fundamental principles of American elections. It assures that once a voter lawfully casts a ballot, no one can later determine how that individual voted. This protects every citizen from intimidation, coercion, retaliation or influence.
Election transparency and ballot secrecy are not opposing principles. They are complementary safeguards.
Casting regular ballots countywide destroys ballot secrecy as outlined in several of my reports. Susan Valiant, TX, first discovered this issue while investigating the mysterious voting trend shift in Tarrant County, Texas after the 2020 Election. She discovered that any voter who is the only voter from their precinct, or a husband and wife duo, to vote at a countywide vote center will have their ballot and ballot selections immediately identified.
I do not believe this audience needs explaining the danger of seeing a voters’ choices. Our legislatures also understand this danger, hence why ALL 50 STATES have ballot secrecy requirements per Federal law.
Requiring post-election redaction of public election records inherently destroys meaningful auditability of election records and leaves no readily available physical evidence of precinct returns that are reported out. This is why our states’ election officials redacted a variety of election records. They have allowed the practice to expand, though they knew all this.
The election process should be transparent, observable and verifiable from beginning to end. It is the identifiable selections of the voter—not the administration of the election—that must remain confidential.
Ballot secrecy is best preserved when ballots are issued and cast by precinct. It can be enhanced through sequentially numbered ballots presented face down for random voter selection, as is currently done in Texas. Only the voter knows the identifying number of the ballot they selected.
When elections are designed to preserve voter anonymity from the beginning, more election records can be released without extensive review or redaction. Privacy should be built into the process so that transparency will be built into the record. It’s actually the Law already.
An Auditable Paper Trail preserves the physical evidence of voter intent. Ballot Secrecy ensures that evidence cannot be connected to the identity of the voter. Chain of Custody documents where that evidence has been from the moment ballots are issued until the election is certified and retained.
Together, these principles strengthen one another.
>>24997994 (me)
>>24998012 (also me)
The ABCs of Election Security:
(3/3)
Chain of Custody: The Missing Link
Chain of Custody is the documented history of an item from the moment it is created until it is archived, destroyed or presented as evidence.
It records who had possession, when they possessed it, where it was stored, how it was transported and who received it next.
Elections are evidence-based processes.
Every ballot cast is evidence of voter intent. Ballot boxes, ballot bags, poll books, memory devices, tally sheets, batch reports, registration files and precinct returns become part of the evidentiary record supporting the final election result.
Just as a prosecutor must prove where evidence has been from the crime scene to the courtroom, election officials should be able to demonstrate where ballots have been from issuance to final certification.
The public should be able to ask:
• Where were the ballots stored?
• Who transported them?
• Who had access to them?
• When did custody transfer occur?
• Were seals intact?
• Do ballot counts reconcile with voter check-ins and precinct returns?
These are normal questions for any process that relies upon public trust.
Most election workers are dedicated public servants who perform their duties professionally and honestly. Strong chain of custody procedures protect them as much as they protect the election itself. Proper documentation removes doubt, answers questions and provides objective evidence that procedures were followed correctly.
In the absence of documented chain of custody, citizens are asked to trust the process. In the presence of chain of custody, citizens can verify the process.
Trust is important, but verification is vital.
Moar here: https://tbtx.substack.com/
>you aren't fixing things