Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

"Best Practices For Post-Election Audits"

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
garybeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-17-08 01:07 PM
Original message
"Best Practices For Post-Election Audits"
This new report has been endorsed by the Brennan Institute, Common Cause, Verified Voting, and more. It's good fodder to send to your SoS if you don't have audits, or if your audits are inadequate.

the one thing I can't find in here is where it says that ALL races should be audited. I think it's assumed based on what the document contains... but my problem here in Vermont is that the SoS is saying only 2 races will be audited and she won't say which ones. So I was hoping there would be something here saying you need to audit ALL and I could send it to her.

Still, it's a decent doc that can be useful to demonstrate the argument for audits and how they should be conducted.

The summary is as follows:

1. TRANSPARENCY: Elections belong to the public. The public must be allowed to observe, verify, and point out procedural problems in all phases of the audit without interfering with the process.

2. INDEPENDENCE: The authority and regulation of post-election audits should be independent of officials who conduct the elections. The actual work of post-election audits may be best performed by the officials who conduct the elections.

3. PAPER RECORDS: Ideally, post-election audits use hand-to-eye counts of voter-marked, voter-verified paper ballots. Where such paper ballots are not available, other forms of voter-verifiable paper records should be used.

4. CHAIN OF CUSTODY & BALLOT ACCOUNTING: Robust ballot accounting and secure chain of custody of election materials and equipment are prerequisites for effective post-election audits.

5. RISK-LIMITING AUDITS: Post-election audits reduce the risk of confirming an incorrect outcome. Audits designed explicitly to limit such risk (risk-limiting audits) have advantages over fixed-percentage or tiered audits, which often count fewer or more ballots than necessary to confirm the outcome.

6. ADDRESSING DISCREPANCIES and CONTINUING THE AUDIT: When discrepancies are found, additional counting and/or other investigation may be necessary to determine the election outcome or to find the cause of the discrepancies.

7. COMPREHENSIVE: All jurisdictions and all ballot types, including absentee, mail-in and accepted provisional ballots, should be subject to the selection process.

8. ADDITIONAL TARGETED SAMPLES: Including a limited number of additional targeted samples of ballots can increase audit effectiveness and public confidence. Such samples may be selected by candidates, issue committees, parties, election administrators, or others as provided by regulation.

9. BINDING ON OFFICIAL RESULTS: Post-election audits must be completed prior to finalizing official election results and must either verify the outcome or, through a 100% recount, correct the outcome.
Refresh | +3 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
ChiciB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-17-08 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. Thanks For This!! Living In Florida... Well YOU KNOW!! Plus I Live
in one of the WORST counties here! Katherine "Curella" Harris' old stomping grounds! Jennings lost to Buchanan last time out by 369 votes, but 18,000 plus just kinda/sorta got lost! Working with the so called "recount" group was a REAL FARCE!

Going to a function for Democratic Candidates tonight, and yes we DO have some, but they rarely win. I will be seeing Jennings for sure, but the ONE person I REALLY want to see is Barry Sullivan who is running against the other Supervisor of Elections Witch around here... KATHY DENT!

Oh, how I want her GONE!!!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-17-08 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Note that FL's SoS Browning put the kibosh on audits of the type being suggested in the OP.
Edited on Wed Sep-17-08 07:59 PM by Bill Bored
It's time you called him on it but people don't get angry enough about this stuff because they don't realize that audits can be used to confirm (or overturn) the outcomes of elections in the first place. A lot of this is due to the misuse of the term "audit" by those who haven't studied the problem but who have nonetheless proposed legislation to fix it that really doesn't -- unlike the excellent bills in the FL legislature that failed to pass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
ChiciB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-08 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Aw Shucks... Should Have Known... It's FLOR-EE-DUH!!! N/T
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Jul 20th 2017, 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

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

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
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