You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #54: By law, NJ's audit must meet certain requirements that would require escalation: [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-20-10 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #53
54. By law, NJ's audit must meet certain requirements that would require escalation:
Edited on Fri Aug-20-10 12:09 PM by Bill Bored
(1) Any procedure designed, adopted, and implemented by the audit team shall be
implemented to ensure with at least 99% statistical power that for each federal, gubernatorial
or other Statewide election held in the State, a 100% manual recount of the voter-verifiable
paper records would not alter the electoral outcome reported by the audit. For each election
held for State office, other than Governor and Lieutenant Governor, and for county and
municipal elections held in 100 or more election districts, any procedure designed, adopted,
and implemented by the audit team shall be implemented to ensure with at least 90%
statistical power that a 100% manual recount of the voter-verifiable paper records would not
alter the electoral outcome reported by the audit. Such procedures designed, adopted, and
implemented by the audit team to achieve statistical power shall be based upon scientifically
reasonable assumptions, with respect to each audited election, including but not limited to:
the possibility that within any election district up to 20% of the total votes cast may have
been counted for a candidate or ballot position other than the one intended by the voters; and
that the number of votes cast per election district will vary. Such procedures and
assumptions shall be published prior to any given election, and the public shall have the
opportunity to comment thereon.

(2) Any procedure designed, adopted, and implemented by the audit team for each county
and municipal election held in fewer than 100 election districts, but more than a single
election district, shall be conducted in at least two election districts.

(6) ...the audit team shall
have the authority to cause audits to be conducted of any election district or audit unit which
has not been randomly selected for auditing in which a majority of the audit team determines
from the un-audited election results, past election results, or other data that the votes are
likely to have been miscounted.

(9) If the Attorney General, based on a recommendation of a majority of the professional
audit team, determines that any of the hand-to-eye counts conducted under this section show
cause for concern about the accuracy of the results of any election in the State, or in a county
or a municipality, or with respect to a particular election, the independent audit team shall
oversee, supervise, and cause to be conducted hand-to-eye counts under this section in such
additional election districts or audit units as the Attorney General considers appropriate to
resolve any such concerns. The Attorney General shall issue previous to any election the
criteria to be employed to determine whether the hand-to-eye counts show concern about the
accuracy of the election results in order to trigger further hand-to-eye counts. Such criteria
shall be published prior to use in any given election, and the public shall have the
opportunity to comment thereon. Notwithstanding the requirements previously set forth in
this paragraph, additional hand-to-eye counts shall be conducted if in the initial audit
conducted pursuant to the procedures set forth in this subsection, any discrepancy or
discrepancies attributable to the electronic counting system would alter the vote share of any
candidate or ballot position by one tenth of one percent or more of the hand counted votes in
the sample. Under such circumstances, the audit of the election shall be expanded using the
same number of election districts and when possible, audit units, as the initial audit and shall
be conducted under the same procedures used to conduct the initial audit, provided, however,
that if the initial audit comprises more than one half the total number of election districts and
audit units in the election, the expanded audit shall be a full hand-to-eye count of the
remaining un-audited election districts and audit units. Further hand-to-eye counts shall be
conducted if any discrepancy or discrepancies attributable to the electronic counting system
detected by the initial or subsequent expanded audit indicates a substantial possibility that a
complete hand-to-eye recount would alter the outcome of the audited election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
  -Audits in Primary Elections? garybeck  Aug-05-10 07:27 PM   #0 
  - How many states have mandatory audits? And what are they? 1%?  Stevepol   Aug-05-10 08:19 PM   #1 
  - that doesn't answer my question but...  garybeck   Aug-05-10 08:43 PM   #2 
     - Caveat Emptor  Wilms   Aug-05-10 10:25 PM   #3 
     - I agree with what you're saying but that doesn't answer my question  garybeck   Aug-06-10 12:25 AM   #4 
     - I don't think that's "PERIOD" at all  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-06-10 07:57 AM   #8 
        - You say 1% is huge in CA, without suggesting a reported margin.  Wilms   Aug-06-10 11:08 AM   #10 
           - jeepers  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-06-10 11:41 AM   #11 
              - Lots of problems with audits though. (And I don't get paid to deal with them either!)  Bill Bored   Aug-06-10 12:51 PM   #14 
              - yeah, county-by-county escalation makes little sense  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-07-10 10:02 AM   #23 
                 - *cough*  Wilms   Aug-07-10 10:38 AM   #25 
              - Don't take it personnel.  Wilms   Aug-06-10 01:05 PM   #16 
                 - hang on, which state?  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-06-10 08:38 PM   #20 
                    - What do we call medical treatments with low probability of helping?  Wilms   Aug-06-10 09:22 PM   #21 
                       - hmmmm  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-07-10 08:12 AM   #22 
                          - Seems like you're overemphasizing that an audit with low confidence could still reveal a problem.  Wilms   Aug-07-10 10:37 AM   #24 
                          - I'm hardly making that point at all  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-07-10 07:40 PM   #27 
                             - OK, then. Can you name any races with a 2% margin where an audit achieved >90% confidence?  Wilms   Aug-07-10 07:53 PM   #29 
                                - How 'bout a 2% margin in a US House, State Senate or State House (or Assembly) race?  Bill Bored   Aug-07-10 11:24 PM   #30 
                                   - Yep. If guess if we exclude President, US Senate, and Governor, it's really game over. n/t  Wilms   Aug-08-10 02:01 AM   #31 
                                      - Well there is the argument that if errors happened on EVERY machine, ANY audit would find some.  Bill Bored   Aug-08-10 03:06 AM   #34 
                          - NY's audit has already been gutted. The SBOE's version was dumb but the election law's is dumber!  Bill Bored   Aug-07-10 01:37 PM   #26 
                             - as long as we're waxing metaphorical  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-07-10 07:42 PM   #28 
                                - Being a bit harsh?  Wilms   Aug-08-10 02:24 AM   #32 
                                - Well if that's the best you can come up with...  Bill Bored   Aug-08-10 03:00 AM   #33 
     - AFAIK the best resource for this kind of question  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-06-10 07:32 AM   #7 
  - NY does. That's close enough to VT. nt  Bill Bored   Aug-06-10 01:17 AM   #5 
  - But do you know, generally, if primaries are included, or not? n/t  Wilms   Aug-06-10 02:51 AM   #6 
  - No, I don't. Some states definitely include them. NY, NC, maybe others. nt  Bill Bored   Aug-06-10 12:38 PM   #13 
  - do you know if they audit their primary elections? n/t  garybeck   Aug-06-10 10:27 AM   #9 
     - YES, as I said, NY audits primary elections. I'm not sure what the other states do. nt  Bill Bored   Aug-06-10 12:35 PM   #12 
     - Here's the NY audit law:  Bill Bored   Aug-06-10 01:01 PM   #15 
        - thanks very much!!!! n/t  garybeck   Aug-06-10 01:42 PM   #17 
           - You're welcome. You might also look at what CT does.  Bill Bored   Aug-06-10 01:53 PM   #18 
              - Thank Bill.  Wilms   Aug-06-10 02:25 PM   #19 
  - Kicking for audits with high confidence levels. Anyone got one? n/t  Wilms   Aug-14-10 02:05 PM   #35 
  - I've seen some where they audited up to about 75% of the vote to get to about 75% "confidence."  Bill Bored   Aug-15-10 12:53 AM   #36 
     - Well, I kind of figured that was the case, and the reason OTOH didn't respond.  Wilms   Aug-15-10 01:18 AM   #37 
        - you were?  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-15-10 01:59 PM   #38 
           - You're having a real tough time with this. Aren't you?  Wilms   Aug-15-10 02:47 PM   #39 
              - there go the goalposts again  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-16-10 11:03 AM   #40 
                 - How about running the same numbers for VT since that's what this thread was supposed to be about? nt  Bill Bored   Aug-16-10 08:13 PM   #41 
                 - Don't waste his time unless it's a real audit in VT.  Wilms   Aug-17-10 12:02 AM   #43 
                 - not even  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-17-10 08:31 AM   #44 
                    - Inconvenient truths prevent a direct reply?  Wilms   Aug-17-10 10:10 AM   #47 
                       - yadda yadda yadda  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-17-10 06:21 PM   #48 
                          - You didn't answer a single question. Pathetic.  Wilms   Aug-17-10 06:47 PM   #49 
                 - Wanting to know the confidence level of various elections isn't moving the "goal post".  Wilms   Aug-16-10 11:59 PM   #42 
                    - I think your actual posts have been sloppy  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-17-10 08:59 AM   #45 
                       - In other words, none of these audits provide high confidence levels. Correct?  Wilms   Aug-17-10 10:07 AM   #46 
                       - Ohio didn't provide for a proper escalation procedure, so it's no exception. nt  Bill Bored   Aug-17-10 10:43 PM   #51 
                          - Does NJ's audit law provide for escalation?  Wilms   Aug-20-10 04:33 AM   #53 
                             - By law, NJ's audit must meet certain requirements that would require escalation:  Bill Bored   Aug-20-10 12:04 PM   #54 
                                - OK. That's how it looked to me.  Wilms   Aug-23-10 02:03 AM   #55 
                                   - NJ's audit is the only one with a large chance of finding and correcting serious miscounts in all  Bill Bored   Aug-23-10 07:10 PM   #56 
                                      - Thanks Bill.  Wilms   Aug-31-10 11:08 PM   #57 
                       - So how 'bout Vermont then, since it's garybeck's thread?  Bill Bored   Aug-17-10 10:18 PM   #50 
                       - Of course Florida does not "pick a contest and audit it statewide." nt  Bill Bored   Aug-17-10 10:48 PM   #52 
  - OK. Jersey (and did someone say NC?) have statistical audits.  Wilms   Nov-01-10 09:12 AM   #58 
     - New Mexico. But don't count Jersey because they don't have paper ballots. nt  Bill Bored   Nov-01-10 07:25 PM   #59 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC