Griswold Proposes Additional Election Rule Changes: More Action Required.

In addition to the election “emergency rules” changes, Griswold is adding a whole new set of election rule changes. In summary, these additional rule changes seek to place the power of elections into the state’s hands. Centralizing election power is the enemy of a free Republic. Griswold’s new rules essentially rip the power from the people. Griswold is in direct contradiction to Abraham Lincoln’s notion that elections belong to the people.

Between every election, election rules change. Usually, the new rules are proposed, the SOS takes in written and verbal comment, a few adjustments are made, and the rules enacted. 

Using emergency rule status means the rules are enacted first, public comment via written input and public hearing comes second. 
The August 3rd hearing being held by the Secretary of State on rule making is the usual hearing on pending rule changes that have not yet been enacted. It now is also going to address the already enacted emergency rules about third party audits. 

There are two times listed for this hearing in various communications from the Secretary of State’s office: 1pm and 1:30 pm. 

Below is the file that goes over the changes in election rules that have been proposed through the normal process. The easiest way to review is by starting at page 17 of the pdf file. Unless the SOS changes course due to input, these rules will be enacted for the next election cycle. 

A few of changes being made by these proposed rules (if enacted): 

2.13.2  – Sec of State will now handle inactive voter registration cancelations. (Used to be handled by county clerks.)

7.3.2 through 7.3.5 – Significant reduction of electronic voting/ballot standards, elimination of ballot logs, tracking, etc. 

7.6 – Gutting of checks and balances to prevent abuse of online electronic balloting voters with disabilities.
More information about accessible electronic ballots: ballots can be printed at home on any printer and mailed in via any envelope at this website: In the past, there was an application with an affirmation statement verifiying qualifying disability. It appears these signatures/ballots pinted on home printer paper are to be processed even without the application and in some cases where ID is required, without that ID submitted.

7.7.1 – Counties that use bipartisan judges for 1st level of signature verification of mail ballot signatures (the main way mail ballot voters are determinrined eligible) are no longer allowed to do so. It MUST be only one person of one party.

7.7.13(a) – Automatic signature verification software no longer has to be tested prior to the election.

8.10.2 – As per SB 250 and new state law, watchers are no longer allowed to challenge mail ballots based on discrepant signatures…
8.13 – The alternative of signature escalation cards are also eliminated. (Esclation cards allowed watchers to require a set number of ballots signatures be reviewed at a second level by a second team before acceptance.)

9.2.2 –  Rules around election judge handling of mail ballots of voters determined to be dead by bipartisan election judge teams are very unclear to many.   

10.1.5 – Canvass board role is gutted. If canvass board members or the county clerk finds an issue, they no longer have a rule allowing them to contact election judges to resolve it or for an explanation or correction.

10.3.2 – Canvass board no longer accounts and balances the election. They no longer certify the official abstract of votes. They no longer reconcile the number of ballots cast to the number of voters who voted by reviewing a variety of documents they reveiwed in the past. They used to review detailed logs and statements of ballots. Now they are not required to review these documents.

10.3.3 — If the canvass board identifies a discrepancy in a Statement of Ballots form (which they are no longer required to see) the board may no longer review the particular ballots at issue to identify, correct, and account for the error.

20.11.2 – Elimination of seals, chain of custody logs, transfer logs of voting equipment used in vote centers. Reduces ability to catch acts to tamper with machines store overnight in vote centers.

20.19.5 – Secrecy envelopes no longer required in vote centers. No longer required to track serial numbers of voting equipment or log those who are using admin functions to allow election judges to change counting of overvotes.

Action 1). Written comment on all election rules including these can be found here:

Action 2). If you have concerns about any of these changes, you can email your comments to or register to give verbal comment here:

You can give comment about the emergency rule use regarding third party citizen audits and any other issues with the other election rules as well. 

Action 3). Sign and share the “emergency rules petition”

Action 4). Read Griswold’s Rules

Action 5). Monitor when your petition was received by the SOS

One thought on “Griswold Proposes Additional Election Rule Changes: More Action Required.

  1. Colorado wants to institutionalize voter fraud, making CO a third world permanently Blue state. And the CO GOP has no problem with it. “Oh, we’ll just change our messaging and GOTV and all will be well!” they say.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: