Reply #136: The Wider Picture Underscores the Pattern

[ignatzmouse]

No, the comparitive uses Oregon's correlation as the standard as they are a paper ballot state. Secondly, I did a closer study after preliminary results showed a direct correlation of non-e-voting states having a much higher percentage of amendment voters than e-voting, optical, and mixed states. This proved true regardless of whether the states were red or blue and regardless of geography.

MONTANA
.991 (no e-voting)

OREGON
.9895092 (no e-voting)

UTAH
.986 (no e-voting)

ND
.976 (no e-voting)

MAINE
.975 (no e-voting)

OKLAHOMA
.972 (no e-voting)

NEVADA
.965 (statewide e-voting with paper trail: Sequoia AVC Edge)

WYOMING
.961 (widely varies by county/includes Diebold e-voting in 1 county)

OHIO
.960 (various methods including e-voting: ES&S iVotronic, Sequoia AVC Advantage, Danaher, MicroVote MV 464)

FLORIDA
.959 (11/5/2004 12:19 AM update)
(various methods including e-voting w/no paper trail: ES&S iVotronic, Sequoia AVC Edge)

ARKANSAS
.954
(various methods including e-voting w/no paper trail: Shouptronic 1242, Microvote)

MISSISSIPPI
.952
(various methods including e-voting w/no paper trail: Shouptronic 1242, ES&S iVotronic)

MICHIGAN
.951
(various though largely Diebold optical scan/including at least one e-voting w/no paper trail: MicroVote MV-464)

COLORADO
.945
(various including e-voting w/no paper trail: Hart Intercivic eSlate, Sequoia AVC Advantage, Diebold AccuVote-TS, ES&S iVotronic)

ARIZONA
.933
(Diebold Optical Scan)

KENTUCKY
.911
(113/120 counties e-voting w/no paper trail: Danaher ELECTronic 1242, MicroVote MV-464)

I stress, these are just the quick-look initial numbers and need to be refined with the most current data. The strongest case must be Kentucky where in order to hold Bunning's Senate seat, it appears the numbers had to be "pushed" the furthest.