{news} Fw: Post-Election Audit Observation Report

[David Bedell]

There's still a lot of room for improvement in CT's election procedures.

David Bedell

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Update@ CTElectionAudit.org>
To: <dbedellgreen@ hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 1:49 PM
Subject: Post-Election Audit Observation Report


Dear Coalition Observer,

Today we released the fourth Coalition Observation Report.  This one
covering the November 2008 post-election audits, based on your observations
and the official reports submitted by election officials.

The text of the press release follows.
The press release, full report, and excerpts are available at
http://www.ctelectionaudit.org/?p=40

Without your time and commitment to democracy, nobody but a few election
officials in each town would know how the audits were conducted.

Thank you,

Luther Weeks
Luther@ CTVotersCount.org
860-918-2115


****************************************
Press Release
****************************************
Connecticut Citizen Election Audit Coalition

Connecticut's November 2008 Post-Election Audits Report
Large Differences From Optical Scanner Totals

Coalition Calls On Legislature To Act

Hartford, Connecticut -Today, the Connecticut Citizen Election Audit
Coalition released its report on the November 2008 post-election audits.

The Coalition noted large differences between reported results by electronic
voting equipment and the hand count of ballots by election officials across
Connecticut.  In some cases as many as twenty-four (24) fewer ballots were
counted by hand than recorded by optical scanners. For individual candidate
races, vote counts between hand counts and scanner tapes varied by as much
as three-hundred-sixty-six (366) votes in one race or as much as 46% in
another.  Most officials attributed the widespread differences to the
inability to count votes accurately by hand.

Coalition spokesperson Luther Weeks noted, "Given the variation in the
counting procedures used, there is no way to distinguish when officials or
machines counted accurately or inaccurately.  When differences are dismissed
as human counting errors, it is unlikely that an audit would identify an
election error or fraud should that occur."

>From the report:
We conclude, based on our observations and analysis of audit reports
submitted to the Secretary of the State that the November post-election
audits still do not inspire confidence.Among our greatest concerns are the
discrepancies between machine counts and hand-counts reported to the
Secretary of the State by several municipalities. In many cases, these
discrepancies are not thoroughly and reasonably explained. We believe that
the ad-hoc counting procedures used by many municipalities were not
sufficient to count ballots accurately and efficiently.

Cheryl Dunson, League of Women Voters of Connecticut's Vice President of
Public Issues, stated, "We have reorganized our recommendations to the
Secretary of the State and the Legislature. Along with improvements to laws,
and audit procedures, we recommend that an Independent Audit Board be
established."

Cheri Quickmire, Executive Director, Connecticut Common Cause said, "Gaps in
ballot chain-of-custody, election accounting, and the post-election audits
must be addressed to assure integrity and provide confidence to the voters
of Connecticut"

Tom Swan, Executive Director, Connecticut Citizen Action Group, said "This
is our fourth report showing similar weaknesses in the post-election audits.
After these reports and five public hearings around the state, it is time
for the Legislature to act."

Observers came from the membership ranks of the coalition partners -- The
League of Women Voters of Connecticut, The Connecticut Citizen Action Group,
Common Cause Connecticut, and Connecticut Voters Count. The coalition's
reports are available online at: http://www.CTElectionAudit.org

*****