Re: Fw: Request time for public comment

From: Kathy Dopp <kathy_at_uscountvotes_dot_org>
Date: Wed Jul 27 2005 - 02:28:31 CDT

Teresa Hommel wrote:

>(3) No count of votes on a random selection of a tiny percentage of VV records is "significant" to our democracy. It only forces people to accept a secret count of the vast majority of votes.
>
Teresa,

Please read this explanation (URL below) of routine independent audits
of the paper record of votes in randomly selected precincts. The
following paper is written for the lay person with the exception of the
appendix, so that you can better understand random audits. Counties or
states should do their own studies to determine more specific audit
procedures, along with a specific method of random selection of precincts.

We mathematicians and statisticians spend many many hours and many days,
at great sacrifice to our personal lives, writing just these three pages
and creating the free spreadsheet to figure this out and explain it to
folks like you because we care about America, so please take the time to
study it:

http://uscountvotes.org/ucvAnalysis/US/paper-audits/Paper_Audits.pdf

Random audits would be highly likely to detect at least one miscounted
precint (even if the percentage of miscounts in each precincts was very
small) that was spread out over a substantial proportion of precincts.

Mathematical analysis of the detailed election results after the
election, would catch any larger miscounts in a few precincts, because
it would analyze ALL the precincts' election results.

Between the two methods above, almost all vote count errors could be
detected immediately post election before candidates conceded.

The ONLY hangups to cleaning up our election systems will be:

1. making sure that there is a way to "independently" audit a paper
records of votes everywhere.
2. making sure candidates do not concede until after they examine the
detailed election data
3. raising the money to build the National Election Data Archive in time
for Nov 06 so that the detailed election data can be examined.

Using the two methods above, many errors will begin to be detected and
corrected in our elections PRIOR to swearing in the wrong candidates,
and many voting systems will be exposed as being the most error prone
and will begin to be replaced as folks realize how bad they are, by
systems such as OVCs.

Best,

Kathy Dopp
http://electionarchive.org
--------------------------------

Please email election-subscribe@uscountvotes.org to receive our email
announcements.

Mission:
The National Election Data Archive is a scientific project whose mission
is to investigate the accuracy of elections through the creation and
analysis of a database containing precinct-level vote-type election data
for the entire United States. By making detailed election data publicly
available and, when warranted, by informing election officials and
candidates of probable errors in local vote counts, our goal is to
ensure that correctly elected candidates are sworn into office in future
elections.

USCV brochures are available:
http://uscountvotes.net/docs_pdf/info/US/USCVbrochure.pdf

US Count Votes
P.O. Box 682556
Park City, UT 84068

_______________________________________________
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 Sun Jul 31 23:17:20 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Sep 15 2005 - 11:43:09 CDT