Reply #2: Thanks Brad, Did you see this report out of OSU Election Law on PA: [View All]

[mod mom]

OSU Moritz School of Election Law: PA SUFFERS FROM VULNERABILITIES THAT COULD MAKE RESULTS LESS CLEAR

Pennsylvania’s April
22nd primary will be
important to determining
the Democratic nominee
for President, and many analysts
believe that Pennsylvania will
be important to determining the
result of the general election as
well. While its 2004 and 2006
federal elections went fairly
smoothly, Pennsylvania does
suffer from some vulnerabilities
that could make the result of the
2008 election less clear. The state
suffers from a history of absentee
ballot fraud that could corrupt the
result of a close election and lead
to litigation. It also suffers from a
lack of central control that allows
local officials to follow inconsistent
procedures, heightening the
likelihood of disenfranchisement
flowing from administrative
error. Finally, Pennsylvania
relies heavily on controversial
touchscreen voting machines that
have been attacked as unreliable.
But before discussing these issues
in depth, it is appropriate to give
the reader some background with
the following nine-topic digest of
the state’s election administration
system.


The 21-page report is available at

http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/docs/50Q_for_PA.pdf

and here is the intro to it:

Key Questions for Key States: Pennsylvania
This new feature provides an analysis of Pennsylvania's election system going into the 2008 Presidential election. Part I digests nine key areas of the law that together cover the entire administrative system. Part II analyzes three challenges faced by the system and attempts to predict the outcome of three hypothetical post-election lawsuits that might arise as a result of these challenges. Visit http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/index.php to read the report.