Statewide IRV Court of Appeals Fiasco Update: no Tallying Procedures & Legal Questions
Submitted by NCVoter on Wed, 09/15/2010 - 9:32pm
We may have a voter guide, and we may have an IRV task force, but sorry, no cigar! We still do not have IRV tallying procedures as of Sept 15, 2010. And the voting vendor seems more concerned about obeying the law than anyone else.
I contacted a member of the task force set up to devise procedures, he advise me on Sept 13 that
"there are still several options on the table and I do not know at this point what method we will end up with. I think we need to spend some time testing and evaluating the options before a decision is made. Might as well do it right the first time."
The vendor worries about the legality of using our voting machines for this process. Here's excerpt from Print Elect & ES&S letter to the NC State Board of Elections dated Aug 31 2010:
"IRV is not an approved function at the federal or state level of current ES&S software, firmware or hardware. Subsequently, we will work at the direction of the SBE and counties to assist but cannot be held responsible for issues as a result of IRV....
...
IRV Tabulation
*Printelect and ES&S will only take responsibility for and support tabulating the IRV contests individually.
Methods for deciding a runoff winner by others will not be supported by Printelect or ES&S. This risk will be the sole responsibility of NCSBOE and the counties.*IRV voting tabulation methods are not an EAC or state certified portion of our voting system and have not undergone the testing that would normally be required to receive these certifications."
Why does the voting vendor worry? Because they are held to high standards set in 2005 to prevent repeats of headlines like this: "A Florida-style nightmare has unfolded in North Carolina in the days since Election Day, with thousands of votes missing and the outcome of two statewide races still up in the air."AP Newswire, Nov 13
Here are the standards:
§ 163-165.7. Voting systems: powers and duties of State Board of Elections.
(a) Only voting systems that have been certified by the State Board of Elections in accordance with the procedures and subject to the standards set forth in this section and that have not been subsequently decertified shall be permitted for use in elections in this State.
...The State Board may certify additional voting systems only if they meet the requirements of the request for proposal process set forth in this section...
(1) That the vendor post a bond or letter of credit to cover damages resulting from defects in the voting system. Damages shall include, among other items, any costs of conducting a new election attributable to those defects.
(2) That the voting system comply with all federal requirements for voting systems.
§ 163-165.9A. Voting systems: requirements for voting systems vendors; penalties.
In your opinion
...can the first column be properly counted as things stand now?
If so, is it then possible to have a problem free vote if the first vote candidate gets over 50%?
I realize this seems unlikely, but is it possible?
The first column can be counted....
...and at the precinct polling places as required by state law. You can also detect overvotes (votes for more than one candidate within the first column, but you can't detect those overvotes within the 2nd or 3rd columns or between the 1st & 2nd, 1st & 3rd, 2nd & 3rd, or 1st & 2nd & 3rd.
Why does that matter? Because overvotes don't count. If you vote for more than one candidate in a single column, no votes count. If you overvote in between columns, your subsequent votes don't count.
And the reason why we require votes to be counted at the place the votes were cast BEFORE the ballots are moved (except for in-person early voting - those machines are moved to the County BOE HQ after Early Voting stops, but not counted until after 7:30 PM on Election Night) is so that we can make sure nothing happens to those ballots between the time they are cast and the time they are counted. They won't be taken out of the machine and moved. But because we have a machine total for the 1st column and the ballots, we can see if there is a difference. Not so with the 2nd and 3rd column results.
So those ballots are moved and then we know what the first column totals are. Knowing who the top-two are means that you are looking for 2nd and 3rd column votes for those candidates. If you had access to as yet uncounted votes on the 2nd and 3rd columns, you could simply find votes for one of the top two and mark an overvote in either the 2nd or 3rd column - nulling out that vote.
With 13 candidates, it's highly unlikely that one candidate will get 50% plus one vote. With 8 candidates in the 2004 NC Supreme Court race, the winner only got 23% of the vote. In the 2010 Dem Senate primary with 6 candidates, Elaine got 37% of the vote. In the 4-way 2008 Dem Labor Commissioner primary, the top vote getter got less than 40%.
So yes - the 1st column can be counted correctly as things stand now. But you also have to factor voter confusion with the new method at the end of a long ballot - that will surely also depress the vote in that race.
Al
Chris Telesca
Wake County Verified Voting
http://noirvnc.blogspot.com
http://statewideirvnc.blogspot.com
Thursday Sept 16 and STILL no tallying procedures
I made my regular call to the NC SBoE and no answer.
Whats the big secret? Is there a fear that knowing how the votes will be tallied ahead of time will make it easier for one of the 13 lawyers to prepare a suit in advance?