Unite4Freedom (U4F) volunteer Mike Cahoon of Colorado, partnered with Peter Bernegger of Election Watch, secured and attended a Help America Vote Act (HAVA) hearing in the State of Colorado on Monday, May 11. With a HAVA hearing in Missouri on April 24, the Colorado hearing is the SECOND such hearing U4F volunteers have secured in just over two weeks, marking a significant milestone in U4F’s success and election accountability for the nation! State by state, we are standing up for the rights of American citizens to have our election complaints be heard and for state officials to acknowledge our evidence of election fraud.

Monday’s public HAVA Hearing, conducted via a Teams Meeting by Colorado Deputy Secretary of State Andrew Kline, is a textbook case in why our election systems cannot be trusted.

U4F volunteer, data analyst, and Colorado State Chapter Director Mike Cahoon; U4F Chairman and government Subject Matter Expert Harry Haury; and Election Watch Founder Peter Bernegger, provided nearly two hours of testimony concerning violations of federal and state election law that are indicated by Unite4Freedom and Election Watch research.
Colorado Secretary of State, Jenna Griswold, did not attend, and the State of Colorado declined to testify, ask questions, or provide witnesses.

What the Data Shows

Evidence of post certification edits to the Colorado state voter participation records was entered into the official record through Unite4Freedom’s Colorado Vote Tampering Report. Mr. Cahoon described in detail the analysis completed for that report—a sequential comparison of snapshots of Colorado’s voter history files and voter rolls obtained from the Colorado Secretary of State’s office across the 2020, 2022 and 2024 elections.

Those comparisons show 487,887 cumulative ongoing, post certification changes.

Comparing the edits exposed by the Vote Tampering Report to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission’s Total Voter Turnout (EAC F1a) for those same elections quantifies the impact of the vote tampering. As Mr. Cahoon testified, “The EAC F1a totals for the three elections are 3,320,607 + 2,539,897 + 3,240,754—just over 9.1 million counted ballots. 487,887 post-certification modifications is 5.36 percent of the official record—it is not statistical noise, and it is not a small number of clerical fixes.”

Why it Matters

Mr. Cahoon also stated that, “Either authorized personnel are executing mass modifications without adequate controls, or there is unauthorized access.” Under HAVA, all states are required to maintain auditable records to confirm reconciliation and records missing from the certified voter participation history violate federal law.

According to Mr. Haury, “The records that are used to issue ballots have to be maintained as part of the record of the election. When they disappear after the fact, it is clearly a violation of the requirement to maintain that record.”

He added, “The Vote Tampering report showing these out of period changes bring up very serious questions as to … why a permanent record is not being maintained, why the permanent records are being manipulated or edited or changed, why voters are dropping off the list after having been shown to vote in the most recent election. There is not a normal National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) process for removing those voters.”

All states are required by HAVA to maintain proper record keeping and proper audits of the changes in order to maintain the auditability of the state of the voter registration roll and most particularly the voter participation history.

When asked if the voter records are technically secure, Mr. Haury responded, “Not at all, not by any standard of security that would normally be required for such lists. … Any standard we use nationally would appear to be violated and the technical security required and the requirement to maintain auditable records both appear to be being violated.”

Citing multiple federal and state statutes, both Mr. Cahoon and Mr. Bernegger explained how the data presented contradicts existing law, including the consequences of violations for HAVA funding from the federal government.

As Mr. Bernegger testified, “The State has continued to receive and expend HAVA money… on the basis of a 2008 State Plan that no longer reflects actual operations. That is the basis for the requested relief, which includes a determination that the State’s compliance certifications under § 253(a) were materially false or misleading, and an order of repayment to the United States Treasury or, alternatively, that all unobligated and unexpended HAVA funds be frozen and placed in escrow pending an updated, compliant State Plan.”

In addition to the repayment of HAVA funding, the complainants are requesting the following relief:

• Investigation and findings of fact identifying who executed the post-certification modifications, the authorizing legal basis, and whether NVRA procedures were followed.
• Determination of violations.
• Immediate cessation of post-certification modifications to voter participation history records.
• Implementation of remedial controls.
• Public audit log summary and a full independent audit.
• Record preservation.
• Referral to the U.S. Attorney General, the EAC, the EAC Inspector General, and Congress.
• Publication of the final determination in full.

The State of Colorado will now investigate itself. U4F and Election Watch are hopeful that Colorado will do the right thing and come into compliance with federal law. The State’s final determination, as required by HAVA, is due by May 21, 2026.

Unite For Freedom

Valid elections are guaranteed in the Constitution and are the foundation of our Republic. Join us to Unite For Freedom (Unite4Freedom.com) and help restore legitimate representative government.