Errors in Skagit (WA) vote count point to statewide problem

[kurtyboy]

http://www.skagitvalleyherald.com/articles/2004/12/02/news/news02.txt

This article points out the importance of a hand recount in Washington--just for starters. ES&S allows that one out of every 10,000 ovals are miscounted (this county's ballots had from 91-99 ovals each). WHEN THE BALLOTS ARE FLAT---WE (Skagit Co.) HAVE NEARLY 60% ABSENTEES--READ: FOLDED, WRINKLED, TRASHED!!!!This means that BEST CASE, as the article says, that at least 21 (my calcs show 22) ballots are miscounted (by the machines) each time for governor, just in this one race. The President's race has an extrapolated error rate of 55 votes for this county--a county that accounts for less than 2% of the state population!!!

Here's a few troubling snips:

<snip>
Skagit County uses optical-scan ballots, as do most of Washington's 39 counties. Errors of a similar scale throughout the state would mean that the count's margin of error substantially exceeds the narrow gap produced in the recount.
<snip>

<snip>
Kubischta said she was told by Election Systems and Software, the machine's Nebraska-based manufacturer, that even when all the ballots are flat, the machines have an error rate of about one for every 10,000 ovals it must read.

With four ovals in the governor race - for Rossi, Gregoire, Libertarian Ruth Bennett and write-ins - that means one per 2,500 ballots. Skagit County had 52,724 ballots counted, which means about 21 mistakes can be expected in each count of the governor race.
<snip>

<snip>
A mistake that resulted in a higher count for a candidate could be one of those factors. Or it could be a machine mistake - a vote missed on the first count, or counted twice on the second count. Elections workers didn't keep proper records during the first count, Kubischta admitted, so it's unknown exactly how many of those ballots were missed.
<snip>

So, not only did the machines provide at least the expected error rate on recount, there was obvious human error compounding the issue. At least in the recount by hand, two humans have to eventually agree on the result--

By the way, the woman in the article, Erika, is a friend of mine. If she had not been absent during the initial count, I doubt the recount would have departed so radically from it---but I dunno.

It doesn't matter!!! Clearly the machines have significant troubles. Fund the Washington Governor's HAND recount today--tomorrow (Saturday) is too damned late.....

Do it here:
http://www.wa-democrats.org/site/contribute.php

Peace
Kurtyboy

EDIT TO ADD THIS:

I was the DEM observer of state-mandated Logic and Accuracy (L&A) tests for these tabulation machines in this county--For the primary, the general, and the recount. In the Primary and the General the Election Supervisor had trouble with the compilation software of the central PC (With ES&S, the software is named ERM--with Diebold, it's named GEMS...).

Here are some of the notes I faxed to the Gregoire campaign on the L&A test for the recount:

arrived in the Elections Department at 2:50 PM. At that time Erika explained that this recount will be performed using only the direct output of the ES&S tabulators (printouts). There will be no utilization of the ERM software to compile the results into a single report. Erika explained further that she decided against using the ERM software because she was not satisfied with its performance in L&A pre-testing. Erika did not elaborate the reasons for her dissatisfaction.

Still waiting to find out what it means. I bet the hand recount is a blast! If we get it. I'll be there watching.....

[DoYouEverWonder]

1. How many counties across the country use ES&S Optical Scanners?

This is ridiculous. Why didn't any of these Supervisors of Elections let people know about these problems BEFORE the election?

Just one more reason to Hand Recount the whole friggin country, no matter how much it costs. What is more important than knowing who really won, especially in a race such as important as governor or president?

Oh by the way, in close races the error rate of these machines is a lot higher than the amount that would trigger an automatic recount. It would be a good reason for overruling any laws that specify the difference required for automatic recounts. The citizens shouldn't have to be taking up collections in order to get recounts everywhere. Maybe ES&S, Diebold and the other makers of this crap equipment should be made to pay for the recounts instead?

[kurtyboy]

2. I'm with you.

"in close races the error rate of these machines is a lot higher than the amount that would trigger an automatic recount. It would be a good reason for overruling any laws that specify the difference required for automatic recounts."

Here in Washington, if every county used ES&S (and had no absentees and their attendant wrinkles. folds, etc...), we could expect an error rate in the Pres race of around 30,000 votes statewide.

Let me just say:

Holy Shit!

Do you mean to tell me that in the best of circumstances,

with no fraud,

that my state's votes coulda been off by that much?

Sheez, throw in a little fraud, and whaddya got?????!!!

Huffing disgustedly,

Kurtyboy