Re: Legislation regarding adequate numbers of voting machines

From: Kathy Dopp <kathy_at_directell_dot_com>
Date: Fri Jan 14 2005 - 21:24:29 CST

> I received this from someone in the CA State Assembly. S/he assumes
> this is out of our area of interest. But is it?
>
> I don't know if we want to get involved here, but maybe we do. For
> expensive machines, there is an incentive to buy as few as possible to
> get by. If legislation required a generous number of machines (to
> minimize lines, to minimize the need to push early voting, etc.), this
> improves the advantage of using an inexpensive system.
>
> I think it's probably worth the effort if we have people interested in
> getting involved.
>
> ************
> I know this is out of your area but [assemblymember]
> is interested in doing a bill that requires the adequate
> number of voting machines in each polling place in
> the state based upon per capita. Any leads to an
> organization that is hot for this concept.

Alan, This is a question more for statisticians than computer scientists
IMO. Voting machines should be allocated by "likely voters" or "active
voters".

Here is a statistical analysis of voting machine allocation in Franklin
County, OH that explains a couple of different methods for allocating
voting machines and shows the statistically significant effect when voting
machines are misallocated.

http://uscountvotes.org/ucvAnalysis/OH/FranklinCountyReport_v2.pdf

Kathy Dopp
http://uscountvotes.org

> _______________________________________________
> OVC discuss mailing lists
> Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to
> arthur@openvotingconsortium.org

_______________________________________________
OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to arthur@openvotingconsortium.org
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Sat Jan 7 22:28:57 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Jan 07 2006 - 22:28:59 CST