WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 1232

AN ACT IMPLEMENTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE RISK-LIMITING AUDITS WORKING GROUP.

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Matt Blumenthal

Connecticut SB 1232 establishes risk-limiting audit procedures to statistically verify election results through targeted ballot sampling instead of full recounts.

FAV. RPT., TAB. FOR CAL., SEN.
#absenteeballots #audits #ballots #candidates #canvassandreturnsofvotes #complaint #electionofficials #elections #investigations #municipalelections #pilots #presidentialelections #primaries #regionalcouncilsofgovernments #registrarsofvoters #reports #secretaryofthestate #stateelectionsenforcementcommission #universityofconnecticut #voterregistration #voters #votingdistricts #votingtabulators
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 1232

Legislative bill overview

SB 1232 implements recommendations from Connecticut's Risk-Limiting Audits Working Group, which studies post-election verification methods. The bill establishes procedures for conducting risk-limiting audits (RLAs)—a statistical method to verify election results by manually recounting a small sample of ballots rather than conducting full recounts. This aims to detect potential errors or tampering while reducing audit costs and time.

Why is this important

Election auditing directly affects public confidence in voting integrity. Risk-limiting audits provide a mathematically rigorous way to confirm election outcomes without the expense and logistical burden of full recounts, while still offering strong statistical guarantees of accuracy. Implementation affects how Connecticut certifies election results and could serve as a model for other states seeking modernized verification systems.

Potential points of contention

  • Cost and implementation burden: Counties must invest in new equipment, staff training, and procedural changes; unclear funding mechanism or state support allocation
  • Ballot design requirements: RLAs may require specific ballot formats (hand-marked paper ballots) that necessitate changes to existing voting systems, creating potential compatibility issues
  • Scope ambiguity: Bill details unavailable, but working group recommendations sometimes propose varying audit thresholds—disagreement possible over which elections trigger mandatory audits versus optional ones

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.