Jonathan Lange

Numerous voters, including this author, have sent a letter to the Uinta County clerk requesting to inspect ballots and other relevant materials from the 2020 election.

The letter emphasizes, up front, that the signers are making no accusations against any elected officials. It stipulates that they appear to have “faithfully performed their duties as election officials.” And it continues: “Nor do we seek to challenge any prior official results.”

Our officials should not be falsely accused of wrongdoing. Unfounded accusations dishonor public servants and threaten to create an “us vs. them” environment where election officials resist, rather than assist citizen involvement in the vote-counting process. This degrades, rather than strengthens election integrity.

Transparency in legislative and rule-making processes deters unethical behavior while simultaneously bolstering citizen confidence in governance. Conversely, wherever government actions are opaque, citizens begin to imagine all sorts of things — some of which are real. This is the reason for open meeting laws and laws giving citizens access to public records. The same standards should apply to the election process and its public records.

Sadly, transparency has been slow in coming. On April 5, citizens in Park County presented a plan to the county commissioners for a citizen-audit of the 2022 county primary. They waited over 40 days only to be told that their request was denied. They were denied, in part, because of the federal statute requiring that ballots be kept for 22 months. But that statute requires only retention and preservation of ballots and election records. It does not forbid public access.

Nevertheless, rather than contest this dubious ruling, they simply asked to inspect the ballots from the 2020 primary after the 22 months expired on June 18, 2022. That request was almost 60 days ago, and still they have received no response. There is no justification for this.

If Park County cannot cite explicit laws that forbid the inspection of these public records, it should gladly assist any citizens who have the time and the motivation to perform a citizen audit. Citizen scrutiny of election records is a worthwhile endeavor that has no legal downside. It can only help to detect weaknesses and to suggest improvements.

Wyoming signed a contract with Election Systems and Software (ES&S) in March 2020. At that time, State Election Director, Kai Schon, told the Buckrail in Jackson Hole, “Each ballot will be printed on paper—always creating an audit trail that can be used to confirm the accuracy of every single vote.” 

Now, over two years later, nobody yet has been allowed to audit the printed ballots. What gives? The Public Record Request enclosed in the letter addressed to the Uinta County clerk identifies 13 specific categories of records pertaining to the 2020 election. The cover letter enumerates nine points explaining why there is no legal reason that inspection and copying should be denied.

The first two points outline how computerized voting is unacceptably opaque. It is impossible for the average citizen to see inside the machines or to understand the code that processes their vote. Worse, even Wyoming’s elected officials are forbidden to perform these vital tasks! Instead, they are supposed to be performed by nameless technicians in a distant Voting System Test Laboratory selected and paid by ES&S.

The rest of the letter provides legal support for the Public Records Request. It looks at the state and federal laws in play and shows how they are consistent with citizen access. In sum, it argues, “Election records are public records like any other official records and are not privileged or confidential and the disclosure of election records will not cause injury to the public interest.” It continues, “Citizen inspection of all aspects of our voting system must be a routine matter,” for the same reason that independent, certified audits are standard practice in businesses both small and large.

The transfer of governmental power to individuals selected by the sovereign people is the very most sensitive operation of a democratic republic. Any possibility that it could be done without the consent of the governed must be ruled out absolutely. The guarantee of pure elections should not rest of the trustworthiness of election officials, but on the transparency of the process. Wyoming’s Constitution (Art. 6, Sec. 13) “Purity of elections” requires no less.

Secretary of State, Ed Buchanan, has been crisscrossing Wyoming to assure its voters that elections are secure and accurate. We hope that he will see the voters of Uinta County as allies in his quest. By assisting our access to the records requested, he can enlist an army of public-minded citizens to provide the hands-on verification of his assurances. Together, we can strengthen the purity of Wyoming’s election system while simultaneously boosting voter confidence.

(Jonathan Lange is a Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod pastor in Evanston and Kemmerer and serves the Wyoming Pastors Network. Follow his blog at OnlyHuman-JL.blogspot.com. Email: JLange64@allwest.net.)