The Allen County GOP will be asking for a recount in the 2nd District City Council race. Don Schmidt (R) lost to Karen Goldner (D) by 13 votes.
“He is deserving to know he got all the votes he was entitled to,†Shine said
Should be interesting.
DT
If you find this article informative? Consider donating any amount you choose.
No related posts.
Entries (RSS)
How can one do a recount when there’s no paper ballot as a backup? I didn’t think it’s possible to do a recount using these machines. Am I wrong?
Who is going to pay for the recount? Maybe Shine can take it out of his Matt Kelty legal fund.
The machine votes are counted again just like they were on election day, but most of the recount focuses on the absentee ballots which are still paper.
The candidate that calls for the recount pays for it. (100 per precinct I believe.)
Jon, that doesn’t make sense to me. Everything that I’ve read regarding paperless blackbox machine voting suggests that a vote by vote recount is impossible.
Carol, not all votes are cast thru the paperless blackbox machine. When someone votes absentee they actually physically mark a paper ballot. The paper ballot is then fed thru a counting machine. The ballot is marked with a number 2 pencil and if the mark isn’t exactly in the right location or a pen is used the machine does not register the vote. In a recount the cards are physically examined and errors can be found. As I understand it there are 700 paper ballots in the 2nd district. That is not many. It is unlikely that it will make a difference, but it only takes 7 votes to change the outcome of the election.
Carol.
Jon is correct. If you happen to be in California, on business, come some Fort Wayne election. You can request a absentee ballot. They send it by mail. You complete it and mail it back.
People in nursing homes, hospitals, or can not leave their home are part of the group that vote absentee. Even, people who leave for their winter homes in October vote by absentee ballot
So the Election Board will recount eraseable pencil markings on paper ballots. It makes perfect sense to me (not!).
We probably would be better off if the bipartisan board was looking for dimpled chads.
Carol.
The Machines can also be “recounted”. Each machine prints a paper receipt. These paper receipts are what are entered into the official vote count. They will again add these paper receipts up for a total. A simple mistake like tranversing 69 votes for 96 votes.
They will also look for machines with irregular votes totals. In most city council races, there are one to three undervotes per machine (votes per race less than total voters per machine). If there is a machine with a much higher undervote, it could imply that there were some irregularities on that machine. I then believe they have the ability to run a vote by vote tally from that machine, but am not sure.
Each candidate will have watchers present when the recount is performed. These watchers can register a challenge to anything they see that they believe can be used in their candidate’s favor.
You have all validated my point. With computer blackbox voting machines, there is no way to go back and VERIFY each vote. Also, there is every possibility for tampering with the machines. The only thing you are able to verify is that the total number of votes that were cast matches the registers that people sign. But there is no possible way to verify each individual vote. There is too much faith put into the accuracy of these machines, the security of these machines, the programs that run these machines, and the people who write the programs on these machines. The only way I would trust the accuracy of a computer-driven voting machine is if it spit out a verifiable paper ballot that is kept under lock and key.
If our country moves toward paperless voting, then we’re opening ourselves up to program hackers and people behind computer screens “fixing” elections.
The only thing that Schmidt can do right now is re-check all the absentee ballots and verify the TOTALS on the machines. How many absentee ballots were this in this election anyway… I thought I heard 6000 somewhere.
Your right about electronic voting, but paper ballots are just as susceptible to fraud. The system is only as good as those in charge of it. Allen County Election board has done a very good job of providing us with a secure system in the past. This is our fourth or fifth recount in the past fifteen years. There may be 6000 ballots total, but only about 10-15% of those will be in Don Schmidt’s district. So I would say about 600-800.
Carol,
To tamper with a machine is something that I can not see being done. Their are two seals on each machine. They have a number that both the Democrate and Repub. working the poll check. Both the night before and the moring when the poll opens. If the seals are broken it would be reported to the Election Board. The machine would not be used.
One seal is for open the machine to allow a person to get to the black box area. Then in that area there is a second door that has a seal on it. You need to break both seals to get to the black box. Both seals are returned to the election board in a envelope.
When the machine is started on election day the counter displays “000″ for total vote count.
During the day most people working the polls often check their books for the number of people who have signed in to vote compared to the number on the machine.
At the end of the day you total up the number of people who have signed in to vote and compare it to the machine vote count. In the years I worked the polls we never had a case where they did not agree. It is part of the checks and balance.
I do not see anyway that a person could alter the vote count.
That is why people asking for a recount do not attack the votes on an electronic machines. if the machine goes mental it would generally be pretty clear. Like a candidate not getting any votes or that it would not count the vote.
I may be wrong but I do not remember one place that had any tampering with true electronic voting machines.
If you want to follow up call the Election Board and set up a time to go down and see them. They will be happy to walk you through the process and how secure it is. I think you would end up leaving with smile that the machines and processes protect the voters very well.
I know Allen County started using a new electronic machine this year and I do not know if it operates the same as the ones we have used for many many years. But the above comments concerns the older ones. I would guess the new ones are even more secure.
I’ve got a better idea. Instead of calling for a recount how about we get a GOP crew to walk the district and discuss the issues with the people? We can blame all issues on Kelty or we can face reality–people want to be heard. Get off you butt and walk the district and hear the people. Like Matt did. And Karen. And just like the next candidate should do.
When the race is this close, I think a recount should be automatic, and neither candidate should have to pay for it. Goldner won with only one eighth of one percent of the total votes. It should not be a partisan issue admit that is close enough for error.
Carol,
You are being paranoid about these machines being hacked. While it is possible, the time, effort and stealth needed to hack that machines to affect only a few votes here and there is not realisitc.
Each voting machine is inactivated when the precinct judge does not place an activation card in the machine. Once the “cast ballot” button is pushed, the machine will deactivate itself again and not allow another vote until the judge reactivates the machine. The machine of course will only allow for one vote per position (except for city council at large that allowed for three).
At the end of the voting day, the machine does spit out a paper “ballot” that shows the vote totals to the election board. These paper ballots are printed, signed by the precinct officials, placed in sealed envelopes and dleivered to election headquarters and only opened by election officials. The machines themselves are turned off and locked and sealed. Should a candidate want to audit a machine, they can print a voter by voter detailed summary. IE voter 1 voted for these positions…etc, etc. Unless there is no major machine problems or inconsistancies, this won’t happen.
Of course Carol, you are correct, we can return to the 1800′s and each person can place an X next to the name of candidate they want to vote for in each race and we can spend three weeks counting them. We would then have a paper ballot for each vote that we could hold in our hands and put in a pile but Statistically speaking, there is more room for human error and corruption to occur in the older “paper ballot” methods than with the electronic voting machines.
When they do the recount, I hope that they find that Schmidt only recieved 13 votes……….Total!!! Good bye and good riddence to ya Don
Carol …
For such an intelligent lady to turn suddenly naive astounds me. If the ballot is paper, it can disappear, multiply or have its vote changed. There is no foolproof method of vote recording or vote validation.
Photo Id’s will have to give way to fingerprints and retina scans and security will have to reach the levels of bank vaults. Volunteer poll workers will have to be replaced by high tech security companies and the cost of voting will increase 100 fold.
Sometimes I wonder if the design of these machines intentionally leaves out the possibility of an individual vote verification. In fact, all of the hardware exists inside the machines to enable such a feature. The roll of paper inside could record an encrypted print after each vote was registered. It could even be in the form where an optical reader could automatically read the paper vote. All that would be needed is for the voting machine print a bar code representing the vote of each person. Then an individual down to the vote verification could be easily performed. I never could figure out why such a feature wasn’t put in place from the very start.
I’m not being paranoid and I’m not being naive. Furthermore, I am not asking to return to the 1800′s where we all write down our candidate’s name on a piece of paper and stick it in a box with a slot on it. No the paper ballot certainly wasn’t foolproof, but neither are these electronic voting machines. I appreciate Ken Stocker’s answer where each vote is tallied and verifiable. There is evidence and documentation that these electronic blackbox machines can and have been tampered with.
Gadfly, very funny. Thanks for the laugh.
Carol,
i was not trying to say anying about you with regards to the machines.
I did miss the pont that once a person pushes the vote botton the machine can not be voted on again until rearmed by a polling worker.
The next time you vote look at the back side of the machine you will see a red seal tag. That seal tag protects the machine from allow access to the printing and black box area. One you flip the lever you gain access. (I have been told once this happens the machine will no longer accept votes)
Then you can push a button and it will print out what ever number of tapes you want. It to as a security coding number printed on it.
Then you cut a second seal that protects the compartment the electronic cube is in. You then can remove the cube. I have no way of knowing, because I did not ask, if each vote is stored by its self or is the totals is secured within the memory black box.
However, the numbers from the tape and what the box states are compared.
Trying to add votes later on would not work because the polling people have signed paper work as to such. The Election Board people confirm it when everything is turned in and the count is one of them.
Could something underhanded be done? I would guess so but the effort it would take and all the things a person would need to find and destroy makes it nearly impossible to pull off.
I am going to drop an email to the election board and have them type up something we can post. That way we all get the same facts over what many of us remember.
For myself I have a good feel using these machine. But I sure Carol, there are many people out there like you that do raise or think the same thing you have.
I am not picking on you but trying to share what I know with you. I will post on my site once I get a reply back from the election board.