Re: Questions from election officials

From: <dr-jekyll_at_att_dot_net>
Date: Tue May 04 2004 - 23:03:47 CDT

Hi Doug,

Not that different from my TAR (Targeted Audit Recount) suggestion. I've been working on a model whereby the second place finishing candidates get to pick the most precincts for manual recounts. Third place finishers, etc get some but fewer choices based on vote count. I'm also throwing in an optional (paid by candidate) mailing to the homes of those who voted. In Texas, the graveyard vote has been known to swing an election.

The TAR would require fewer precincts to be recounted because the losing candidates will know best where to look for problems -- Much more efficient than statistical tools.

It's also important to establish time deadlines in order that these activities will be done in time to either expand the TAR or officially change the outcome. In the 1986 symposium, one of the presenters had such a problem. It took her until well after the deadlines to get the information she needed. Then, it was too late.


> On May 3, 2004, at 2:38 PM, Alan Dechert wrote:
> >> In any case, California's law mandating a hand recount of paper
> >> ballots from precincts representing 1% of the voters after every
> >> election is good policy! ....
> >>
> > I've heard bad things here. Such a sample should be randomly selected.
> > From what I've heard, election officials give lip service to this. A
> > guy in
> > LA told me recently that precincts for manual recount are selected in
> > advance and not randomly! This is a sham.
> I'd suggest that half the precincts be selected at random
> I'd suggest that the parties be allowed to suggest precincts
> that they wish to see counted, so that a precinct in which the
> first unofficial numbers depart markedly from predictions or
> from some statistical model can be forced into the recount
> pool.
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Mon May 31 23:17:13 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:15 CDT