Message from a NH Citizen…
“For lasting change, a critical mass of people must be ready to say “no more.’ But sometimes it’s that individual plowing the path in the snow that uncovers possibilities Sakarov, Walesa, Martin Luther King, Gandhi, to name a few. Someone must first have the vision that another reality is possible.” Journal entry, Oct. 19, 1991
Dear Citizens,
Update from warrant articles to return to hand counting. Two more to go, two were tabled without allowing a vote and the rest were voted down. Participants will process what they’ve learned and decide what to do next. Many more citizens are aware of the vulnerabilities in our election system, the obstructions important people place in our paths (and don’t always tell the truth), and remain committed to protect their and their neighbors’ votes.
One town, Danville, passed an article to handcount the Presidential election in November, over the objection of the Secretary of State. Selectmen, however, are reportedly standing firm.
Not sure what year I realized that the Town and City Clerks Association was against voters. The attorney general showed he was in 2016 and now I can add the NH Municipal Association (NHMA) to that list, always leaving the door open for them to change their minds.
See Dec. 24, 2023 communication to NHMA below. I’m not aware it has shared this with any towns, but encourage you to do so. Ironic that it was the Danville moderator who developed this model before 2010 and moderators across the state were using it until the Secretary of State stopped the practice in 2016.
Two moderators who stood up for voters and candidates on the ballot have developed two good models for how to use the computers, comply with their oaths of office and the spirit and intent of our state constitution that requires publicly observable vote counts and for moderators to ensure reported results are verifiable.
They are two have plowed through the snow, making it easier for other local officials who WANT to do the right thing for voters easier, if they have the courage.
I recently sent this to Jaffrey town officials, including the moderator who has now retired after 34 years of service.
“I want you to know that if you [and the Peterborough, Rindge, Swanzey and Fitzwilliam moderators] had stood up for us voters in 2010, we probably would NOT have the NH government of 2024, which has proven to us by clear and convincing evidence that it is against NH voters.
“If you choose, you can help repair the harm Jaffrey’s decision in 2010 and subsequent decisions to side with what has shown us to be an abusive system against voters, or any election official or legislator who dares question it. I knew when Scanlan interfered, Fitch didn’t stop him and I was fired as a ballot clerk for honoring MY oath of office, there was a serious problem with `the system’ in 2010. The problem is worse today.
“Let me know if you want to talk. Please make sure the new moderator receives a copy of this communication.”
I have also officially asked state legislative leaders to initiate an independent investigation and a truth and reconciliation process. You can read it here.
“No law, no state government can prohibit the public from self-governance by transferring control over essential election information to government insiders and private vendors,” I wrote.
https://groups.google.com/g/jaffreyvoices/c/sHgXOUo1izs
John Brakey from AZ is another hearty soul who has been plowing through snow (or sand) since 2004. He is someone I trust and continue to learn from.
He says: “Like many long-term election activists finding themselves in this new minefield, I have had to adjust my approach. Instead of saying,` I want to find out if the election was rigged,’ I now say, `I`m here to prove that the election was real.” The goal should always be to ensure that the election process is accurate, transparent, trackable, and publicly verified, rather than to confirm preexisting beliefs or agendas.”
Me, too! We both (and many others) had good reasons to question Presidential election results in 2000, 2004 and 2016.
Debbie Sumner
Jaffrey, NH
Sent Dec. 24, 2023:
“Accessibility of information assumes and encourages a community of people free to think as it chooses and act according to its collective will.”
Petition of Keene Sentinel, 136 N.H. 123 (1992).
Dear NH Municipal Association,
I believe your members have a right to know this and I hope you will encourage them to establish their own internal controls to protect voting rights, votes and elections in their own communities.
One example developed by the former Danville moderator is below. His town used one computer. The example developed by a former Derry moderator for larger communities with multiple computers, SB 79 (2021) should be linked here.
FACT: You do not need permission from the Secretary of State, Attorney General OR legislature to do this and I can give you a legal opinion from a trustworthy retired attorney if you need it.
May we all have the municipal and state government we deserve in 2024. And MAYBE the federal government will begin to follow our lead. Hope springs eternal, even in the darkest days of winter.
Where the people lead, leaders follow!
**********************************************************************
Parallel Hand Counts—Example of New Hampshire Common Sense
Former Danville moderator Wally Fries always oversaw hand counting of 1-3 contests/ballot questions on election night to ensure an accurate computer count.
Why:
1. had worked with computers for years and knew there could be breakdowns and their reliability needed to be checked. As a member of several state advisory groups he also knew the pre-election ballot testing wasn’t enough. The hand count check made it more likely any error would be detected and accurate results would be reported to Concord (as NH Constitution and state law require).
2. knew there had been reported instances of tampering and wanted to discourage any possibility of that happening in his town’s elections.
3. wanted the public to have confidence in his town’s election results.
How:
1. Selective sampling—he chose contests based on a) expected closeness b) vulnerability to tampering c) importance. (For example, he would hand count just the competitive races in Presidential Primaries on both Republican and Democratic ballots and reconcile the “other” piles with total ballots cast and number of voters.) UNH statistician confirmed the validity of this kind of sampling.
2. Double count hand count using “sort and stack method.” (Election officials sort into piles, first counter cross stacks 25 ballots at a time, second counter verifies count or team determines voter intent, reconciles discrepancy). Public could observe.
3. Verified hand count checked with computer total. Reconcile any differences.
If Wally believed three races might be close, he’d check all three. Recounts cost money, he reasoned and at least candidates would know that one jurisdiction had an accurate count.
Cost: No additional cost for town or state
