So Connecticut is doing a 20% audit. How about your state?

[Bill Bored]

Audits in Connecticut
By George Barnett, TrueVoteCT
November 17, 2006

The Connecticut Secretary of the State, Susan Bysiewicz, announced that Democrat Joe Courtney defeated the incumbent Republican Rob Simmons in the 2nd Congressional District (CD-2) House race after a recanvass was completed. Courtney, who led by a mere 167 votes after the original count on election night, ended up with only 91 more votes than Simmons. Secretary Bysiewicz went on to explain the audit procedures that will take place in the Connecticut towns, outside of CD-2, that used optical scanners in the 2006 election.

In August of 2006, optical scan voting machines were selected to replace the lever machines in 25 out of 169 towns in Connecticut. In addition, the IVS telephone voting system was purchased for every town in the state to meet the accessibility requirements in the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). Connecticut chose to purchase AccuVote-OS optical scanners from Diebold Election Systems, Inc.. LHS Associates of Massachusetts was designated to carry out the provisions of the state’s contract with Diebold. Several computer scientists, including Dr. Alex Shvartsman and the University of Connecticut's Department of Computer Science and Engineering, have found serious security flaws in the AccuVote-OS optical scanners.

Bysiewicz told a crowded room of reporters at the press conference that 17 machines, or 20% of the scanners used outside CD-2, would be recounted by hand. The totals from the hand recounts would then be compared to the totals calculated by the scanners. This type of audit should determine if the scanners counted the ballots accurately. The audits will be completed by Nov. 28, before the elections are certified. After Bysiewicz fielded questions from the press, a League of Women Voters representative randomly selected papers from a box to determine the 17 scanners that will be audited. A different League of Women Voters representative and a TrueVoteCT member verified that each scanner outside of CD-2 had a properly marked piece of paper in the box before the selection took place.

-snip-

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2054&Itemid=113

[Wilms]

1. 20% down. 80% to go.

Hand count the whole pile. Sell the machines to the Saudi royal family.

[Land Shark]

2. We used to have 100% "audits" prior to first results in transparent paper ballot elections

now we are supposed to compete and feel good about late, partial 'audits' in the 1% to 20% range. They're ALL inadequate. There's no substitute for public supervision of the FIRST count. Or, should I call it now, electronically, the FRIST count, since that was my first spelling of that word? : )

[Febble]

3. Yes, you are supposed to feel good

about that.

Jeez.

[Bill Bored]

4. Well unfortunately, the Republican, what's his name, conceded.

He could have asked for a full hand count, but he dropped the ball.

The State AG had it all set up by NOT doing ANY hand counting in his district, but he decided to throw in the towel instead of asking for one.

Isn't that interesting?

So, how about your state? Got any auditing there?

[truckin]

5. Thanks for posting this Bill. It would be good to see audits at this

level in other states as well.