Re: Executive Summary of Proposal to CaliforniaSecretary of State

From: Arthur Keller <voting_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Sat Jun 11 2005 - 00:46:06 CDT

It work also work in the 7 counties in California that are proposed
to have mail-only ballots, based on pending legislation. The
counties include San Mateo and Santa Cruz.

Best regards,

At 11:34 AM -0700 6/10/05, Alan Dechert wrote:
>Yes, I believe this is the right way to look at it. UCTS would be
>basically an audit tool for jurisdictions that use precinct based
>optical scanners. Some, however, optical scan jurisdictions do not
>do precinct level scanning. Any guess what percentage? Perhaps none
>in CA -- I don't really know. In other states, this is certainly
>different. Oregon, for example, would not be doing precinct level
>scanning so UCTS could be a replacement for blackbox scanners there.
>Alan D.
>>This may not be germaine, but might UCTS also be attractive to some
>>jurisdictions as a redundant tabulation or auditing mechanism? That
>>is, in addition to buying equipment from the vendor, might it not make
>>sense for some jurisdictions to have multiple independent tabulators
>>and see if they come up with the same results? (of course, only a
>>subset would be audited with UCTS or you'd be counting twice... which
>>I like but eleciton officials wont).

Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
Received on Thu Jun 30 23:17:06 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jun 30 2005 - 23:17:11 CDT