Nebraska Deserves Transparency, Not Blind Trust in Election Systems

Lincoln, NE — A growing body of public statements, documented testimony, and unanswered questions is raising serious concerns about transparency, oversight, and accountability in Nebraska’s election systems under Secretary of State Bob Evnen.

Despite repeated assurances that Nebraska’s elections are “secure,” the record increasingly tells a different story, one of avoided scrutiny, outdated standards, and a troubling resistance to verification.

“Election systems demand accuracy, not promises. Elections aren’t about speed, they’re about accuracy and trust," said Scott Petersen. “‘Trust us, don’t verify’ isn’t accountability. It’s arrogance. And Nebraska families deserve better. Nebraskans aren’t asking for blind faith. They’re asking for transparency, verification, and leadership that respects them.”

Key Concerns

🔹 Refusal to Engage Independent Experts

Qualified experts who have identified vulnerabilities in election systems have not been given a meaningful opportunity to present findings or demonstrate risks.

🔹 Blocking Expert Testimony

Individuals with firsthand experience testing and exposing vulnerabilities in ES&S voting systems have been sidelined or excluded from legislative discussions.

🔹 No Meaningful Inspection of Voting Systems

The Secretary of State has acknowledged that Nebraska does not conduct internal inspections of voting machines neither comprehensively nor randomly.

🔹 Reliance on Outdated Standards

Nebraska continues to rely on federal certification standards developed nearly two decades ago far behind modern cybersecurity best practices.

🔹 Misleading “Made in America” Claims

While voting machines may be assembled in the United States, key components originate from global supply chains, including foreign sources. Assembly is not the same as manufacturing.

🔹 Failure to Meet Modern Federal Expectations

No ES&S systems currently in use meet the updated security expectations outlined in President Trump’s Executive Order 14248.

🔹 Contradictions on System Connectivity

Officials claim systems are not connected to the internet, yet election results are transmitted through internet-connected infrastructure raising legitimate chain-of-custody concerns.

🔹 Missed Opportunity for Transparency

When presented with the opportunity to physically inspect voting equipment alongside state senators, the Secretary declined, reinforcing concerns about a lack of openness.

🔹 Dismissal of Public Concern

Claims that “no one has come forward” are contradicted by individuals who have actively sought to present evidence and engage in good-faith discussions.

A Question of Leadership

At its core, this is not just about machines, it’s about trust.