Texas Legal professional Normal Ken Paxton has lately taken vital motion by demanding the discharge of machine audit logs, aiming to handle the rising considerations over the adjudication of ‘blank ballots’ within the state’s elections, Creative Destruction Media (CDM) reported.
The request follows quite a few open data requests throughout the nation, which have unearthed potential proof of widespread election fraud.
The controversy facilities on the apply of designating a lot of ballots as ‘blank’ by digital voting techniques and subsequently adjudicating them by way of software program—a course of that would alter votes,
A notable instance occurred in Broward County, FL, in the course of the 2020 elections, the place as much as 20% of ballots in some precincts had been marked ‘blank.’
You may learn extra beneath:
Efforts to acquire audit logs of election machines have been met with resistance. Many jurisdictions have refused to launch the information, prompting hypothesis that the disclosure might reveal fraudulent actions.
In Florida, the priority over these revelations was so vital that the legislature handed a legislation, beneath the guise of an ‘election integrity bill,’ to dam entry to those essential stories, in keeping with CDM.
Upon changing into conscious of those points, AG Paxton issued a directive requiring the discharge of those logs inside Texas.
In response to the letter despatched to Jessica Morrison, Assistant County Legal professional:
You ask whether or not sure data is topic to required public disclosure beneath the Public Info Act (the “Act”) chapter 552 of the Authorities Code. Your request was assigned ID# 23-091394 (Ref. No. 2023-1117-PIA).
The Williamson County Legal professional’s Workplace (the “county attorney’s office”) obtained a request for specified tools manuals, audit logs, and communications.
You declare the submitted data is excepted from disclosure beneath part 552.101 of the Authorities Code. Moreover, you state launch of this data could implicate the proprietary pursuits of Election Methods & Software program, LLC (ES&S”).
Accordingly, you state, and supply documentation displaying, you notified these ES&S of the request for data and of its proper to submit arguments to this workplace as to why the data at difficulty shouldn’t be launched. See Gov’t Code § 552.305(d); see additionally Open Information Resolution No. 542 (1990) (statutory predecessor to part 552.305 permits governmental physique to depend on third celebration to boost and clarify applicability of exception within the Act in sure circumstances). Now we have obtained feedback from ES&S. Now we have thought of the submitted arguments and reviewed the submitted consultant pattern of knowledge.
We observe the submitted data consists of manuals and paperwork referring to the usage of digital voting tools offered to Williamson County by ES&S. We observe the requestor has a proper of entry to this data pursuant to part 123.008 of the Election Code. Part 123.008 of the Election Code offers, in related half, as follows:
(a) Every one that sells, leases, or in any other case offers an digital voting system or tools to a political subdivision shall additionally present any person or operator manuals or different directions or paperwork referring to the usage of the system or tools. The final custodian of election data for the political subdivision shall make these supplies obtainable for public inspection within the custodian’s workplace on the request of any individual.
Elec. Code § 123.008(a): see id. §$ 1.005(13) (defining “political subdivision”) 121.003(1)-(2). (4) (defining “voting system.” “electronic voting system.” and “voting system tools). Upon evaluate, we discover the requestor has a proper of entry to the submitted data pursuant to part 123.008 of the Election Code.
You may learn the letter here.
