Info On Ohio Recount

[righteous1]

Here is just a bit of general information concerning the upcoming Ohio recount. The Ohio SOS has 10 days to prepare and organize the recount post the official recount request.

Aproximately 3% of the votes will be hand counted and then run through the machine. If the totals match or are reasonably close the remaining ballots will be run through the machine. If not they will be hand counted

The cost of the recount above the $113,000 will be bourne by the Ohio taxpayers ~1.5 million


The 93,000 undervotes will be hand counted. Unlike FL. 2000 Ohio has strict rules governing these undervotes. Only 2 fully detached corners or more will be considered a vote. Dimpled chads are not considered votes.


Generally these votes break for the candidates about like the general election. 10% would be the high end of what would likely be considered discernable presidential votes

2 Republicans and 2 Democrats will be at each counting location to monitor the count.

[New Earth]

1. no offense

but i'll wait for an update from votecobb.org.

i believe nothing that i read on this board anymore regarding the recount.

[righteous1]

6. This information came from the Ohio SOS.

Whether or not you give it creedence is entirely your perogative

[Wordie]

9. If you want to get accurate info, Faye, here is a good source.

This is the election law site of a law school in OH:
http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/news.html

They have a search function on the site, and also have a lot of material besides the laws themselves which makes things a LITTLE bit more understandable.

[truehawk]

2. Hi , do you have a link where it says 3%?

I think we are going to have to sort cards to make sure they are counted in the right precinctr at the very least.

[bemis12]

5. I saw Blackwell

on TV last night. He gave the same info re the 3% hand count, and machine counting the rest if they agreed.

I hope they don't take the whole 10 days to prepare. That's going to look so blatantly partisan.

[pgh_dem]

12. blatantly partisan

Heh, yeah, they've looked soooo non-partisan up til now.

[ahyums]

13. if who agreed? someone has to agree to it?

so all it would take to get a full or much larger hand count would be not agreeing?

[righteous1]

14. I suppose that if the 4 county officials couldn't come

to a concensus, they would need to hand recount

[pgh_dem]

16. right, a combination of this and my downthread post

the 2 dems and 2 republicans (edit: maybe just 3 out of 4) would have to agree that the 3% machine counted 'agreed' closely enough with the totals and distribution to decide that the machines were accurate enough to just let the machines do the full recount.

[pgh_dem]

15. agreeing

Think the agreeing is whether the 3% counted roughly lines up with the overall totals and distribution of votes for that county.
For example, if some more chads get shaken loose in the process of recounting by machine and/or the 'new' votes tend to favor one candidate over the other, the results will be judged to not agree.
Then they gotta hand count them.

[bemis12]

18. Almost....

The agreeing means they hand count 3% of the ballots, and run them through to see if the machine gets the same number. It may or may not be representative of the precint/county as a whole.

It's a test of the machine's ability to count accurately.

[righteous1]

7. I called the OHIO SOS office and got his, not from a websight

[Wordie]

21. There doesn't appear to be anything in the law about hand vs machine

recount rules. At least not that I can see. I suppose that may be some sort of interpretation of the law that doesn't appear in the original legislation.

Here is the link to the actual law about recounts in OH:
http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/procedures_recount_os.html

[electropop]

61. Laws shmaws

Who needs laws when you control the vote counting?

[pgh_dem]

3. accuracy of 'general' statement

Probably would be more accurate to say that they 'generally' break for the candidates about the same way they did in the precinct they were cast, rather than the general election as a whole.
Unless you have some documentation to back up the idea that spoiled/under/overvotes in a precinct going 78% for Kerry would break 51/49 for B*sh?

[righteous1]

8. Being that this is a county by county recount

The statement is accurate. They break about as the general did on a county by county basis. Didn't feel there was a need to "parse this terminolgy"

[roseBudd]

58. If it IS true that Butler, Warren & Clermont counties in OH switched

Kerry votes to Bush in the tabulation then these counties should have some serious problems IF a new tabulation machine is brought in to tabulate the votes. If these counties did cheat in the tabulation phase then the punch cards would be a big problem for the cheaters. To successfully avoid being caught the cheaters would have to somehow isolate the correct number of switched Kerry vote punch cards and make them disappear and they would have to come up with an equal number of unvoted punch cards which would then have to be each voted in a punch card machine one at a time using a stylus. And the cheater would have to obtain unvoted punch cards that are unaccounted for that no one knows they have.

[AndrewClarke]

4. Are you sure about the 3%?

That's the method in New Hampshire, but the Ohio Revised Code says nothing about it.

Also, chads detached at two or more corners will be counted:

Ohio Revised Code § 3515.04. Procedure for recount; stopping recount.

At the time and place fixed for making a recount, the board of elections, in the presence of all witnesses who may be in attendance, shall open the sealed containers containing the ballots to be recounted, and shall recount them. If a county used punch card ballots and if a chad is attached to a punch card ballot by three or four corners, the voter shall be deemed by the board not to have recorded a candidate, question, or issue choice at the particular position on the ballot, and a vote shall not be counted at that particular position on the ballot in the recount. Ballots shall be handled only by the members of the board or by the director or other employees of the board. . . .


By the way, did you ever find that link for the recount totals in New Hampshire?

[righteous1]

10. Assuming that the SOS is not lying to me, I posted

here exactly as i was informed by their office

[righteous1]

11. I stand corrected on the chads

This woman I talked to put it in a different way than stated in the Ohio law exerpt

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Karenca]

20. because blackwell set it up like that

duh!

[HeeBGBz]

19. The Recount of AntiChristo

What a clusterfork. The fight for democracy wrapped in red Christmas tape. Rage against the machines!

[Matariki]

22. 3% hand recount?

as in, stack the 3% to match the vote, then hack the machines to match the vote?

god, i hope not.

[righteous1]

24. The 2 Dem BOE personel would have to be

complicite in the conspiracy for that to happen

[lthuedk]

62. The recount could present an opportunity to examine the machines.

Particularly in the most suspicious counties. Should the same machines be used in the recound, the "late hour adjustment" will be in play. The auditing process should be absolutely scrupulous from scanner through the central tabulator.

I think the "adjustment" will reappear and we'll nail 'em.

[Liberty Belle]

23. Who chooses which 3% to recount?

If it's Blackwell, wouldn't he just choose ballots that weren't tampered with to "prove" no fraud? While the remaining 97% could be dirty, for all we know.

[righteous1]

25. This is all done at the county level

not the state level, Blackwell has very little power over what the counties do as long as they follow Ohio law

[wiggs]

26. Good question. nt

[kk897]

27. three percent

I have known about this three percent thing for a long time. It was from instructive material distributed by Blackwell to the BoEs. At Ohio Vigilance, we've tried hard to find out where the three percent thing came from. I've combed through all the applicable laws from Ohio Revised Code and Administrative Code, and House and Senate Bills and have come up empty handed (I'm not a lawyer or law clerk or anything, but I can look for the phrase "three percent" as well as anyone).

The only thing I found in the Code was that the SoS is supposed to instruct the BoEs how to conduct the recount. The specific instructions are not in the Code, though.

One of the OV people contacted the office directly, and was told that it was in the Code and to look it up online.

None of the lawyers on the OV list could find it either. I don't know if anyone has gone any further with it than that.

[kk897]

29. I can try to put the pdf on my husband's .mac site for public file sharing

if anyone's interested in seeing these instructions.

[AndrewClarke]

31. Please try to do that n/t

[kk897]

35. OK, I think I got it.

If you go here:

http://tinyurl.com/5svwe

and click on "recount.pdf" I think you'll get it.

[AndrewClarke]

36. Thanks n/t

[yodermon]

63. Pertinent passage

From your link:

2. Punch Cards

Test the Program
a) Prepare a new test deck of ballot cards that are punched and then
manually count them. This deck must not be the same test deck used for
the official count.
b) Process the test deck through the computer to verify that the computer
count matches the hand count.
c) If the hand count and the computer count do not match, but the hand
count is accurate, all ballots must be manually counted.


Still nothing about 3%.

[trudyco]

28. will the 3% represent each precinct?

SInce each precinct has a different order for candidates, will each machine/precinct be represented in the handcount?

Are the provisional/absentee ballots intermingled with election day ballots?

trudyco

[ClintCooper2003]

30. Excellent! The 93,000 undervotes will be hand-counted=

large increase in votes for Kerry. As Martha would say, "It's a good thing!"

[righteous1]

33. Good indeed, but don't get giddy yet

In FL. 2000 ~7% of the undervotes were found to have a discernable presidential vote. If you figure a high end of 10% in Ohio thats 9300 votes. If JK gets 70% Bush 30% that a net p/u for JK of 3720 votes. Not going to help him an awful lot

[ClintCooper2003]

57. Oh.

[pointsoflight]

32. This will be challenged...not in the state code.

[glugglug]

34. The reason for 3%.....

Does Cuyahoga get the 32767 bug like Broward when ALL the ballots are run through?

[keepthemhonest]

37. i would say if that is true then the cards are

stacked against us. They are probably setting aside a perfect 3% pile as we speak, no we need the whole thing recounted ,If i have to take an emergency leave of absense from work and go count them mysel. Do you sometimes wish that you could do everything you want?

[righteous1]

38. There is no reason to believe that

The counting sites will have bi-partisan (2R 2D) monitoring the counting. These are county by county recounts. The SOS has no authority here as long as Ohio law is adhered to. If any chicanery were to happen the Democrats would have to be complicite in the fraud

[keepthemhonest]

40. who is watching the ballots right now, that is what I mean.

these orginized criminals are very good and they are probably setting aside the 3% just in case it is agreed upon by the Dems

[righteous1]

41. Surely the Dem BOE in each county will assure

that the three % is random. Cmon the Dems are not stupid, give them some credit for being able to do there job

[pgh_dem]

55. Dems doing their job

Hooeee they did a bang-up job on the distribution of voting machines. Why is it a Dem anyway, and not 2 Rep 1 Green 1 Lib? Since the Dems aren't officially in on this recount....
Just suggesting that with Teresa LaPore-type Dems like Cuyahoga had, maybe need some people with their heads outside their rear ends.

[righteous1]

59. I know several Dem BOE officials and they are both

committed and professional. It is easy to throw accusatory grenades from a distance especially when uninformed. The huge turnout caught many states flatfooted it's just Ohio that is getting hammered on it because of the hyper-attention the state is receiving. Go ahead and shoot spitballs if you must, personally i will put my faith in the officials that have been appointed by their peers and have earned the right to be there. A person gets .026% of the vote and should get 25% represenation; that suggestion on it's face is ridiculous.

[truehawk]

42. The party asking for the recount specifies what is recounted

§ 3515.01 Persons eligible to apply for recount

Any person for whom votes were cast in a primary election for nomination as a candidate for election to an office who was not declared nominated may file with the board of elections of a county a written application for a recount of the votes cast at such primary election in

any precinct in such county for all persons for whom votes were cast in such precinct for such nomination.

Any person who was a candidate at a general, special, or primary election for election to an office or position who was not declared elected may file with the board of a county a written application for a recount of the votes cast at such election in any precinct in such county for all candidates for election to such office or position.

Okay:
If all the precincts are specified, statewide, they are all recounted.

If a partial count was specified by the person asking for a recount and the result is different from the first count so that the election would be overturned, then the former winner MAY file to have the rest of the electing district (state in our case)_ recounted.


Then we have the infamous 3% of the precincts to be recounted randomly chosen by the board of electors and counted by hand and machine.

Looks like it will be a wrestleing match to stearing this initial 3% sample .

If the machine count comes up different from the hand count, then everything must be counted by hand.

[ahyums]

54. that's what I've been saying for some time now,

The only way for there to be a truly trustworthy transparent and reliable count is to have a full hand count.

[truehawk]

39. My bad but where in the Ohio law does it say 3%

Am I missing something??

[AndrewClarke]

46. Outline of Ohio Recount Procedures

The Ohio Revised Code (§ 3515.04) simply says: "At the time and place fixed for making a recount, the board of elections, in the presence of all witnesses who may be in attendance, shall open the sealed containers containing the ballots to be recounted, and shall recount them. . . ." It doesn't detail a procedure for counting, but §111.15 of the RC gives the Secretary of State the authority to adopt rules following the procedures outlined in § 119.03.

That said, here are the procedures kk897 referred to earlier:

OUTLINE OF OHIO RECOUNT PROCEDURES
(R.C. 3515)
A. ELIGIBILITY
1. Automatic Recount
a) In a statewide election, a recount is required if the margin of votes is
one-fourth of one percent or less.
2. Requested Recount
a) Any candidate who was not declared elected may request, in writing, a
recount of the votes cast in any precinct for all candidates for the
particular office.
B. APPLICATION
1. Written Application for a Requested Recount
a) A written application for a requested statewide recount must be filed
within 5 days after the certification of the official count with the
secretary of state.
2. Deposit
a) The applicant must file a deposit equal to ten dollars ($10) for each
precinct to be recounted.
C. BEFORE THE RECOUNT
1. Establish Time of the Recount
a) No recount may be held prior to the official canvass and certification.
The board of elections must fix the time, method and place of the
recount. A recount must be held within 10 days after the declaration of
official results or 10 days after an application is filed.
2. Notice To Candidates
a) Boards of elections must notify all candidates in the race of the time and
place by certified mail not later than five days before an automatic or
requested recount is held.
3. Witnesses
a) Each candidate in the race is entitled to one witness for each counting
team or tabulating unit.
b) A witness may observe, but not interfere with the recount nor touch the
ballots.
c) Appointments of witnesses must be in writing, signed by the candidate.
D. STOPPING A RECOUNT
1. At any time after a recount is ordered, but before the recount is held, the declared
losing candidate or issue chairperson may file a written request to stop the
recount. If more than one losing candidate is entitled to the recount, each of the
candidates must file such written request. The board must grant the request.
2. At any time during a recount, the declared losing candidate or candidates or issue
chairperson may file a written request to stop the recount. If the board finds that
results of the recount at that point will not change the official results, the recount
is stopped. If the board finds otherwise, the request to stop recounting must be
denied and the recount continued until all ballots from the precincts involved have
been counted.
E. RECOUNT PROCEDURES
1. All Voting Systems
a) The recount must be conducted by teams having equal numbers of
Democrats and Republicans.
b) Total votes cast must be compared to the number of voters listed in the
pollbook, poll list, or signature pollbook records. In the presence of at
least two election officials of different political parties, the records must
be available for visual inspection by witnesses. The witnesses shall not
be permitted to handle the records.
c) Absentee ballot envelopes returned after the polls closed may be viewed
by the witnesses. The observer may not see the actual ballots, only the
ballot envelopes, which must still be sealed.
d) Disputed ballots may be settled as they arise by the board or by a
majority of the employees designated as teams, if so delegated by the
board.
e) Ballots must be handled only by members of the board, director, deputy
director or other designated employees of the board.
f) Votes cast for write-in candidates must be checked to determine if the
candidate is a qualified write-in candidate and for an overvoted ballot.
g) Witnesses may observe the inspection of the ballots.
2. Punch Cards
Test the Program
a) Prepare a new test deck of ballot cards that are punched and then
manually count them. This deck must not be the same test deck used for
the official count.
b) Process the test deck through the computer to verify that the computer
count matches the hand count.
c) If the hand count and the computer count do not match, but the hand
count is accurate, all ballots must be manually counted.
The Recount
a) Ballot cards must be inspected for hanging chad attached by one or two
corners, mutilations, and other invalidities. If a chad is attached by three
or four corners, a vote shall not be counted for that particular candidate,
question or issue.
b) Over-votes and blank ballots may be separated from the stack at this
time and placed at the top of the stack after the header cards.
c) Ballot page assemblies and rotation header cards must be checked for
each precinct for candidate positions to verify that each candidate,
question, or issue has been properly identified.
d) The board must randomly select whole precincts whose total equals at
least 3% of the total vote. These precincts’ ballots must be manually
counted.
e) Run the manually counted precincts through the computer.
f) If the computer count does not match the hand count, and after
rechecking the manual count, the results are still not equal, all ballots
must be hand counted. If the results of the computer count and the handcounted
ballots are equal, the remainder of the ballots may be processed
through the computer and results tabulated electronically.
g) At the conclusion of the recount, the program must be retested using the
pre-audited test deck.
3. Optical Scan
Test the Program
a) Prepare a test stack of ballots that are pre-marked and then manually
count them.
b) Process the test stack through the tabulator to verify that the tabulator
total matches the hand count.
The Recount
a) If the hand count and the computer count do not match, but the hand
count is accurate, all the ballots must be manually counted.
b) Ballots must be inspected for mutilations and other invalidities.
c) Ballots must be checked for proper candidate position and to verify each
candidate, question, or issue has been properly identified.
d) The board must randomly select whole precincts whose total equals at
least 3% of the total vote and must manually count those precincts’
ballots.
e) Run the manually counted precincts through the tabulator.
f) If the tabulator count does not match the hand count, and after
rechecking the manual count, the results are still not equal, all ballots
must be hand counted. If the results of the tabulator count and the handcounted
ballots are equal, the remainder of the ballots may be processed
through the tabulator.
g) At the conclusion of the recount, the program must be retested using
the pre-audited test stack of ballots.
6. Direct Record Electronics (DRE)
Test the Program
a) Prepare a test cartridge.
b) Process the cartridge through the computer.
c) Verify that the cartridge results match the pre-determined votes cast for
candidates, issues and questions.
d) If the totals do not match, check programming and rerun the test
program until the totals match.
The Recount
a) Check the public counters and protective counters to verify that the
numbers on those counters correspond to verify that the numbers on
those counters correspond with the pollbook, poll list, or signature
pollbook records.
b) Check the rotation on those machines to verify that they match the
proper candidates, questions, or issues.
c) Process cartridges through the tabulator. If the totals are different than
the totals of the official count, compare cartridge totals against paper
audit trail report.
d) At the conclusion of the recount, the program must be retested using the
pre-audited cartridge.
The procedures described in this outline are the basic requirements for conducting a recount. If the
board of elections feels the results warrant further investigation at any period during the conduct of
the recount, it may institute more rigorous recounting procedures, such as hand counting a larger
percentage of precincts, using programming options that total over-votes and/or under-votes, hand
counting all precincts, etc.

[mapman2]

53. If they randomly choose just 3% of precincts

then it is likely problem precincts will be missed

[bj2110]

65. If this is true, we need to start identifying the precints WE want counted

we need to identify those precincts now. And make sure that they are included. 3% is nothing. That's very dissapointing.

[johan helge]

43. Madness to handcount only 3 %

Perhaps the machines count wrong only when the numbers get big.

In all descent democracies, ALL ballots are ALWAYS being handcounted, and not only when someone wants a recount.

[witchhazl]

44. Wouldn't each precinct be counted separately?

From the election law link cited above:
"Each application for recount shall separately list each precinct as to which a recount of the votes therein is requested,"

If they are requested & paid for by precinct, would not the count take place by precinct?

I hope the 3% rule is bogus. With "vote-shifting" being a major suspicion, no chances should be taken. And if the decision whether to continue on to a manual recount splits 2/2 by party, guess who will get to cast the deciding vote? (I'm assuming, anyway.)

[truehawk]

45. One thing I have learned about the law

It is not necessarily what is written, but who yells longest and loudest and does not back down under fire.

Bush v Gore being only the most blatent example. That is why we need our own support team outside every courthouse to exert a Democratic influence lest the Congressional Aid mob shows up.

[righteous1]

47. This is a guess but an educated one

The ballots would most likely be accumulated at or near each county seat. They certainly wouldn't hold recounts at 2500+ precincts

[read the law first]

49. recounts almost certainly will be at the county's tabulation center

It seems like in most states (I have to admit that I don't know about Ohio) the recounts are conducted at the county tabulation center where the count took place on election night and most often using the same equipment (which is why we keep saying "what's the value in simply downloading the same corrupted data a second time?").

Strangely, there is almost always movement of a few votes one way or the other ( a candidate will lose a vote or two or gain a vote or two) and nobody has ever been able to figure out why.

It usually moves faster than election night because you don't have to recreate the travel from the precinct to the tabulation center (of course, the hand counts will take longer because hand counting most likely was not done on election night). I doubt that they will duplicate the examination of the provisionals though and will probably just feed the ones accepted through the machines.

[righteous1]

50. The Dems have requested some additional observers be

present and that request has been granted although the terms are unclear

[read the law first]

51. Most states say the counting has to be open to the public but limit...

the actual participants for the candidates in a recount to one or two per candidate (unless you get into a massive number of hand counts like Florida).

It's usually a little tough to read but almost all states say the voting has to be open to the public. In some places this means open where you can actually talk to the election officials doing the counting and sometimes open means behind glass windows. This even differs within states sometimes.

It also depends GREATLY whether the observers are respectful and quiet or a circus (notable exception in Palm Beach (?) where the puke rioters cowed the local election board). Usually in my experience standing quietly by, melting into the wallpaper and smiling a lot without saying anything gets you the closest to the action. We never forget that almost every state gives the election officials the plenary power to remove people being disruptive.

So, I guess in application, there's observers who don't need credentials (meaning the public) and official observers who do need credentials(who are participants).

[tinfoil_beret]

48. Will they prohibit observers

in Warren County again? :tinfoilhat:

[read the law first]

52. good point n/t

[dmac]

56. I doubt it - I am sure whatever they were trying to hide or

accomplish that night has aleady been accomplished, and buried/hidden. I thought three questions were posed to Blackwell about that anyway - has anyone heard his answers? Or if he has answered? (something like, did he know about it, was there any validity to the claim, and if there wasn't, what was the reason for it then?)

[righteous1]

60. Anyone heard definitively when the recount is to begin? n/t

[mdb]

64. If the 3% does match the machine count (and are then machine counted), ...

it still don't mean it will match the county level total if the vote tally was changed at the county level in Gems or Access. Under this case you would have no idea unless every precinct was counted.