Re: suggested proposals for federal election integrity legislation

From: Arthur Keller <voting_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Thu Nov 30 2006 - 19:55:51 CST

At 4:34 PM -0800 11/30/06, Ginny Ross wrote:
>Arthur Keller wrote:
>
>>On another note, I am wondering what people on this list think about
>>all paper ballots (either hand-marked or computer-marked or
>>-printed); in-precinct cast ordinary ballots (not provisional, not
>>absentee) are scanned by in-precinct optical scan and then a
>>confirming hand count is made at the close of polls. The optical
>>scanner checks for blank ballots and overvotes.
>>
>>The hand-count tally is a check on the computer tally and vice-versa.
>>
>>
>Arthur, is the hand-count a full count or a sampling? Speaking as a
>lawyer, I can see where there would be a battle over primacy. Would one
>of the counts be the 'count of record'? Seems that if the hand count
>is the count of record, why even bother with all the machinery. Also,
>if the machine count is the count of record, why do a full hand count as
>well.
>
>It would sure be nice of course, to have both. But how would it fly
>politically and economically?

I'm not a lawyer, and I don't even play one on TV.

If you don't use PCOS with hand marked ballots, you can't check for
overvotes. That's one thing that HAVA now requires and I think it
will be hard to justify to the Congresspeople that make the decisions
giving that up for HCPB.

Best regards,
Arthur

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 list
OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
==================================================================
= 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