Reply #22: You should "decide on the trigger" BEFORE the audit is started!

[Bill Bored]

Here's the deal:

If the canvass report finds things like missing precinct tallies, or tallies that were copied incorrectly to the server or some other central reporting system, then this has to be corrected.

If the audit finds discrepancies within the precincts, this should also be corrected and the audit may have to be expanded.

HAVA requires a paper record to be used for audits/recounts. It's NOT the paper ballot or VVPAT. It's the "poll tape" or results report. If the audit compares hand counted tallies to the tallies on those tapes, it can be done as soon as the tapes are available -- even on election night if warm bodies are available. If the poll tapes and the hand counts agree, there is no trigger or escalation of the audit, but the election-night poll-tape tallies must still be compared to the officially reported results for ALL the precincts. That's the canvass (or recanvass).

I think as long as the audit compares hand count tallies to poll tape tallies, it doesn't matter when it takes place, assuming the chain of custody is secure.

Similarly, as long as the central tallies are compared to the poll tape tallies, it doesn't matter when that canvass takes place.

I think the order of preference or control for these tallies should always be:
1. Hand count
2. Poll tape tally
3. Central tally

Any discrepancies between 2 and 3 should use 2.
Any discrepancies between 2 and 1 should use 1.
Any discrepancies between 3 and 1 should use 1 (this can happen if the audit corrects a poll tape tally).

Now, it would be preferable if CERTIFICATION did not take place until after both the audit AND the canvass were completed, but that's another issue and it also depends on when candidates can ask for full recounts if the audit doesn't trigger them.

How does that sound?