The SOS continues to attack local control of electronic systems.
Why? Oppose SB 5843 - mandating an "election security" system
While reviewing bills which will have public hearings on Tuesday, Jan. 9 I stumbled upon SB 5843, “Concerning security breaches of election systems and election-related systems.”
Haha. The Albert Sensor saga continues.
In 2022, the SOS tried to intimidate the Ferry County Commissioners to re-install a black box “security system.” I wrote about that in Albert Sensors and the Attack on Local Control, which featured an attack by NPR on our little county.
Ferry County had uninstalled the Albert Sensor after neighboring counties were attacked by ransom ware, but NOT notified of the incursion by their “Albert system.” If it’s not going to work as promised, why install it? Besides, the installation made ALL of the county computer systems subject to surveillance, not just elections. Critical employee systems would also be exposed.
The SOS was not happy with the county commissioners. He sent NPR to attack them.
Later in 2022, Secretary Hobbs used a campaign debate to bizarrely attack Ferry County Commissioners AGAIN, which I shared in “Hobbs’ Attack on Commissioners is Groundless. “
Secretary of State Hobbs, used the debate forum to disparage and attack the decision of Ferry County commissioners to remove a device called an Albert Sensor from our county computer network. Hobbs' statement about Ferry County left out facts and misstated others. By trying to advance a political narrative rather than give a factual response about Albert Sensors, he did a disservice to the voters of the state of Washington.
In 2023, the SOS held back funds that our county could have used for election security because the Albert Sensor had not been installed.
Today, I discovered SB 5843, which is scheduled for a hearing tomorrow (Jan 9, 2024). It will MANDATE the installation of an “election security system,” which I assume will be the Albert system.
Secretary Hobbs couldn’t bully Ferry County, and he couldn’t bribe Ferry County…so now a legal mandate is about to be passed into law at his request.
As I’ve been asking from the beginning, WHY IS IT SO IMPORTANT for our tiny county of 5400 voters to install this particular “election security” device? I’m starting to wonder if the SOS will get a kickback when all counties have installed the system. Otherwise, who cares?
This is a battle for the right to have local control over critical employee computer systems and election security, which is run by elected our County Auditor. This is the Secretary of State seeking to grab power that he should not have over local systems.
If you live in WA, you can testify against this bill.
A description of this bill from a friend (JB): This bill requires every county in Washington to install and maintain an intrusion device from a third party to monitor the elections network and disclose malicious activity of their IT (information technology) systems. It gives the Secretary of State power to override the county canvassing board and certify an election if the canvassing board refuses to certify an election. It also creates penalties and specifies election interference violations by election observers and others.
This gives control of local election to the state and brings in a third party to oversee the county's IT network. The unelected third party would not be subject to public records requests or transparency.