Elections Board Announces Examination of Election Process

[Cookie wookie]

Goal, in the wake of the November 2004 presidential election, is to set new standards for election process

COLUMBUS, Ohio – The Franklin County Board of Elections announced today that it was launching an independent examination into the election process used in last November’s presidential election. The aim is to conduct a thorough review of the Board’s strengths and weaknesses in the wake of the much-scrutinized Bush-Kerry presidential contest in Ohio, and enact changes guaranteeing maximum transparency and accountability in future elections.

Franklin County, home to the state capital, Columbus, has already conducted an internal assessment of areas in need of improvement – such as adequate distribution of voting machines and avoidance of long lines at polling stations – and made the results available to the public last month. But Matthew Damschroder, Director of the County Board of Elections, said he wanted an external, fully independent review as well to make sure nothing was overlooked.

The new investigation is supported by the Franklin County Democrat and Republican parties and will be conducted by Election Science Institute (www.electionscience.org), formerly known as Votewatch (www.votewatch.us), a non-partisan San Francisco-based election monitoring group. Election Science Institute will not be spending taxpayer dollars, but will finance its examination with locally raised private funds. The organization will not be under contract to the County Board of Elections, but will report to a separate independent commission. Its findings will also be made public.

“We want an honest and critical review of our election operation as well as recommendations for improvements,” Damschroder said. “We want this analysis to be above reproach and not simply another government funded study of a governmental operation.”

Election Science Institute was founded in 2002 as the nation's first non-partisan, citizen-driven election monitoring organization that utilizes field research methodologies and statistical data analysis. Election Science Institute is exceptionally well qualified to conduct the examination because of its track record of relying on hard data and comprehensive analysis by qualified experts. It has placed special emphasis on working with county and state election officials in a spirit of collaboration.

In addition to reviewing the past election, Election Science Institute will review a number of areas and recommend positive changes. Among the areas to be reviewed are assignment of voting machines, response time to public records requests, communications with the public, press, state and local officials and outside public interest groups, absentee voting procedures, provisional ballot voting, poll worker recruitment and training, recount procedures and recommendations for legislative changes.

Steven Hertzberg, Project Director for Election Science Institute, praised Franklin County’s willingness to take such an important step in improving elections in Franklin County. “This is a testament to their desire to provide a state-of-the-art elections process and voting system for the citizens of Franklin County. This unique public / private / non-profit partnership should provide a clear understanding of what went right and what went wrong in November. The Franklin County Board of Elections should be praised for their willingness to work with such an independent investigation.”

The examination has been applauded by the Election Assistance Commission, the Washington-based federal oversight body established under the 2002 Help America Vote Act. Gracia Hillman, the EAC Chair, praised the Board of Elections for their decision, calling it “an important step in assuring transparency of the process”. In a letter to Damschroder, Hillman added, “It is my keen hope that the assessment will produce improved procedures for the administration of elections and efficient voting systems for the voters of Franklin County. If so, perhaps the assessment model will become a best practice for election administration in America.”

[EC]

1. This isn't going to amount to shit

Matthew Damschroder is the one that said "everything" ran smoothly, even though all of us saw the lines well past midnight still trying to vote on TV, and on MSNBC they reported that a judge had to intercede and tell them to give the people paper ballots. He was also the one accused of shorting different places of machines even though there were working ones in the warehouse...

[Boredtodeath]

4. Sad

Too bad you condemn a scientific study before you see the work or results.

We've all been begging for a real investigation and study into Ohio. Let's see the results before we condemn it, huh?

[EC]

5. Not only sad, but realistic

this is the guy that threw the election in the beginning for Blackwell, I've been working on this locally for a long time now and I know a red herring when I see one. This is nothing more than the Republicans screaming for ID's as the means to solve fraud. This is just to cover their asses.

On Edit: I do know that voter watch was a good recorder of the inconsistancies and maybe will do a good investigation, but the report that will be produced will be altered by the county just like all the other reports in Bushys administration. I hope it does some good, but I'm not holding out hope on this one.

[Wilms]

2. Is there a link for that article? n/t

[Boredtodeath]

3. Link here

http://electionscience.org/government/ohio1

[emlev]

6. Website contains list of team members and advisers

Notable on the list of advisers: Greg Palast.

I suppose someone could "advise" but not be listened to.

I am very interested to hear about any experiences DUers have had with Votewatch, now Election Science Institute.