You are so right re this being a tragedy. And w/ Sequoia/AVC/Dominion in addition to ES&S - though they are apparently different arms of the same entity...
I think I was on the wrong track with my original question here. Im thinking that election manipulation --application of an algorhythm (right word?) would be easier to get away with in large wards of 1,000 than in small wards.
Here is one of the changes the GOP has proposed to our election laws:
Reporting of election returns by municipalities
Currently, the voters of each ward vote at the same polling place, which is generally separate from other polling places in a municipality. Election returns are reported by ward unless otherwise authorized by law. Currently, no later than 60 days before each September primary and general election, and no later than 30 days before each other election, the governing body of a municipality may combine two or more wards for voting purposes to permit the use of a common polling place. In municipalities with a population of 35,000 or more, a municipality must continue to report all election returns by ward even where wards are combined for voting purposes at a single location. Other municipalities may report returns for combined wards together unless a separate ballot is required in a partisan election, in which case separate returns must be reported for the offices listed on each separate ballot so that the results of the various elections may be determined.
Under this bill, any municipality having a population of 35,000 or more may provide that election returns for any ward having a population of 20 or less will be combined with returns for any adjacent ward, unless separate returns are required to determine the results of an election. A municipality, however, may not combine wards if the total population of the combined wards would exceed the applicable population range for wards in that municipality.
The bill allows the municipal clerk to estimate ward populations for the purpose of combining returns if the population cannot be determined from census results.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is what concerns me -- do you see anything I am missing or misinterpreting?
-- Co-mingling the data makes it less transparent and accountable. This will affect our ability to analyze election results at the precinct level and do any historical comparison. Seems to tie in with their gerrymandering shell games.
-- Gives power to the clerk to "estimate" populations for the purpose of combining ward returns. Could this be used to commit or cover up election fraud via machines or paper ballots? EG: Estimate high and throw in a few more ballots for candidate of choice. Estimate low to validate machine counts that purged votes.
THANK YOU AGAIN!
= new reply since forum marked as read
