Re: suggested proposals for federal election integrity legislation

From: Ginny Ross <Ginnypdx_at_comcast_dot_net>
Date: Thu Nov 30 2006 - 19:31:13 CST

Alan Dechert wrote:

>Ginny, I highly recommend that you go back and read relevant discussions on
>this topic.
Hi Alan,

I will do it -- shall I go to the archive and do a word search or the
like? In any case, your explanation helped. I'm a little unclear on
what a summary paper ballot is, though. Does this mean I can't bubble
in my own bubbles anymore? This will be a tough row to hoe in Oregon,
where we like bubbling our own bubbles as much as we like our craft

Side question, when are you going to DC? We at the Oregon VRC are
preparing bake sales and car washes, so let us know when the trip is
planned! Seriously, this looks like a fantastic opportunity for you
and we support the effort whole-heartedly. We will do what we can.

> It's not quite either/or as you imply with your question. With
>the ballot printer design, the summary paper ballot is the fundamental
>representation of the vote. You also have the electronic record in the form
>of electronic ballot images (EBIs).
This is where the paper goes through the scanner and the EBI's are
created as a digital record? Will this be an option too for those of us
who won't give up our hand bubbled ballots?

> The "count of record" as you put it,
>comes from a mechanized tally arrived at by running the paper ballots
>through a scanner.
Tallied by OS software, of course, right?

> The tally is verified by checking against the EBIs
>(software routine) AND by spot checks by hand. Ordinarily, a complete hand
>count would not be necessary. If hand spot checks reveal a problem or the
>electronic record (the EBIs) was somehow lost, then a complete hand count
>might be needed.
>If the system is well designed and implemented, a complete hand count should
>never be needed. Unlike handmarked ballots, there should never be any voter
>intent issues with computer generated summary paper ballots.
<>The system would work well with a hand count
sample audit procedure as well, it seems. Thanks for the explanation.

By the way, there is an interesting discussion about federal election
legislation, hand counting, opscanning, and other juicy stuff over at
the EI Leg list, so I would like to invite anyone interested to come on
over. :-) Click the pic >>>>


Ginny Ross
Oregon VRC

OVC-discuss mailing list

= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Thu Nov 30 23:17:18 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Nov 30 2006 - 23:17:19 CST