Re: Ms. Tobi's overheated rhetoric

From: Arthur Keller <voting_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Mon Nov 12 2007 - 10:42:41 CST

You can probably reduce your $25/hour cost estimate to whatever the
rate is for San Francisco's living wage ordinance.

How would that cost compare with optical scan machine counts?

Note that there would be audits for both the hand-counts and the
machine counts.

Best regards,

At 1:04 AM -0800 11/12/07, Danny Swarzman wrote:
>Arthur makes some good points. I'll try another slant on estimating.
>See if it passes scrutiny better.
>First, I must admit that the recent election wasn't typical. There
>was a majority for one candidate in the first round of each of three
>IRV contests. Let's try for more typical assumptions.
>That is 48 person/hours get 944*9 or 8496 votes counted.
>The New Hampshire figures come to one person/hour = 177 votes counted
>or one vote costs .0056 person/hours
>San Francisco ballot with 11 measures. Let's say three IRV contests
>are more typical with say six rounds of counting. That would make the
>election equivalent to 11+3*6 = 29 votes counted per ballot.
>29*200000 votes to count. 32768 person hours. If there were 100
>people working at any give shift, it would take 327 hours or 13.6
>days and cost $819200.
>Is that a better estimate?

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
By sending email to the OVC-discuss  list, you thereby agree to release the content of your posts to the Public Domain--with the exception of copyrighted material quoted according to fair use, including publicly archiving at
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
Received on Fri Nov 30 23:17:18 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Nov 30 2007 - 23:17:31 CST