The image “http://www.votetrustusa.org/images/votetrust-small2.jpg” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

 

The nation's clearinghouse for election audit information!
State and Local Election Integrity Organizations
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Maryland
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Montana
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
Ohio
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Vermont
Virginia
Wisconsin
VoteTrustUSA does not speak on behalf of any of the listed organizations.
: mosShowVIMenu( $params ); break; } ?>

   
Around the States

Comparing Florida Elections to USDA Beef PDF  | Print |  Email
By Susan Pynchon, Florida Fair Elections Coalition   
July 04, 2008
It's important that Americans have confidence in their food supply.  But is false confidence the same thing?  What if all beef inspectors in the U.S. decided to stop inspecting beef because they might find problems?  After all, if they found problems, that might hurt consumer confidence.  Sounds absurd, doesn't it?  And yet, this is the exact approach that the Florida Department of State and Florida Division of Elections continue to advocate regarding the state's elections.

Election audits are supposed to ensure that electronic voting machines have accurately counted paper ballots.  These audits -- in this case referring to a hand count of paper ballots following the election to confirm machine counts -- are a vital check on the accuracy of Florida's optical scan voting systems.  But a new emergency rule filed July 1 by the Florida Division of Elections has been carefully molded to say it is checking the accuracy of election results, but is actually accomplishing the opposite.  It is a non-check that won't hurt voter confidence by discovering any problems before the election is certified. 

The audit law passed in 2007 by the Florida Legislature was incredibly weak -- requiring the hand count of just one race per election and only 2% of the precincts in that one race.  But the emergency rule weakens this law even further.  The new rule prohibits any audit from occurring until after the election is certified -- in other words, until it is too late to make any corrections to election results.  It allows days to pass between the random selection of the race and precincts to be audited and the actual start of the audit -- meaning there is plenty of time for an elections office to check those ballots in advance and make sure the audit will match election night results.  As Elaine Ginnold, Registrar of Voters in Marin County, California has stated, "the audit must start immediately, as soon as the precincts are selected, to prevent anyone from messing with the ballots." 

The Florida Department of State' has followed the same twisted logic in its legal battle against the more stringent audit provisions passed by voters in Sarasota County, Florida.  The state's legal fight against Sarasota's audit has gone to the Florida Supreme Court, which is expected to issue its ruling any day.  When a Florida Supreme Court Justice asked a state attorney why Sarasota's more stringent audit shouldn't be allowed -- why voters shouldn't be able to check election results to make sure they're accurate -- the state attorney responded:
 
 "...because it will happen, as night follows day, that there will be inconsistent results and those inconsistent results will be known and manifest before certifications."

And this is the state's reason for NOT conducting meaningful audits?

Governor Charlie Crist has stated that he doesn't want Florida to be embarrassed by any more election debacles.  Making sure that no problems will be found -- even if problems exist -- is one way to prevent embarrassment.  Or is it?  Just imagine what will happen if Florida has a close Presidential election in November -- a likely scenario -- and incorrect election results are found AFTER certification of the election, when it is too late to correct those results.  Now that would be embarrasing.  It would also be another Florida election travesty.

Floridians do have one thing to be thankful for, however:  The Florida Division of Elections is not responsible for inspecting their beef.
Comment on This Article
You must login to leave comments...
Other Visitors Comments
You must login to see comments...
< Prev   Next >
State Resources
Election Law @ Moritz
Electionline
National Conference of State Legislatures
Verified Voting
Model Legislation
: mosShowVIMenu( $params ); break; } ?>
State Pages
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Jersey
New Hampshire
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Guam
Puerto Rico
: mosShowVIMenu( $params ); break; } ?>