Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
The hand-recount system creates a significant risk of fraud.
By Robert Alt, adjunct fellow, John M. Ashbrook Center for Public Affairs
The hand-recount system creates a significant risk of fraud — a complaint that cannot seriously be made about the current count.
The Bush team filed a lawsuit seeking an emergency injunction to prevent hand counting of ballots in several disputed Florida Counties. While the legal process should be cautiously applied to the election dispute, the question raised by Bush — fraud — is more substantial than the allegations of unintentional voter confusion raised by lawsuits supporting Gore. Given the significant risk of fraud, the county canvassing boards should not wait for the courts, but should exercise their authority to require that recounts be limited to machine rather than hand counts.
The risk of fraud associated with a hand recounts is substantial. Leaving aside simple human error in counting, the hand-recount system is less science and more art. In a hand recount, officials attempt not simply to perform an actual count of the ballots, but rather to recreate voter intent where ballots are unclear — a standard nebulous enough to allow for a heavy dose of subjective interpretation. While there are checks built into the system by state law — the counting teams are supposed to consist of counters from both parties — mischief takes but a second, and with stakes this high the mischievous hand moves even more quickly. By contrast, the machine counters are not perfect — no system is — but they are not ideological and they have no discretion, both of which are virtues. In the end, reasonable people must concede that the hand-recount system creates a significant risk of fraud — a complaint that cannot seriously be made about the current count.
Another serious issue concerning the selective use of hand counts is the sampling error-an error that already prevails in the current preoccupation with Palm Beach County. The problem with using a process that discerns the "true intent" of ballots marked for two candidates (or no candidate at all) in Palm Beach is that it applies a different standard there than in all other counties in Florida, or across the nation for that matter. But the alleged irregularities in Palm Beach are not unique: Ballots were tossed out for double marking all over the country, including in Dade County, where 2.7 percent of the ballots were double marked. Similarly, butterfly ballots were used in numerous polling places, including in Cook County where I voted. Once you acknowledge that similar unintentional voting errors occur elsewhere — errors which are presumably greater than the narrow margin of victory — two options remain: hand count everywhere or hand count nowhere. Florida is only determinative because Gore won a number of states by slim margins, so anyone who applies the "it's too important not to hand count" criteria quickly finds that they must recount a healthy portion of the country in order to be consistent. The better response is to stand by the original count where it is undisputed, and use mechanical recounts where necessary unless there is evidence of actual fraud — which there is not in Palm Beach.
This said, the question of whether to enjoin hand counts need not go to
trial. Florida law gives county election boards discretion as to whether
to grant manual recounts. Given the substantial risks involved, the boards
should use this discretion to assure that any necessary recounts are done
by machine, and thereby prevent fraud from having a hand in this election.
Sending a Daley to oversee an election is like sending a pedophile to do a 3rd grade clean underwear check. There can be little doubt what will happen in either case.
Sending a Daley to oversee an election is like sending a pedophile to do a 3rd grade clean underwear check.
Just to let you know, I intend to steal this line.
As I posted on another NR article thread, good points all in this article, but you will never hear or see any of this on/in MSNBC, CNN, NYT or WP. The media controls the flow of information to the majority of the public, so the clueless will remain clueless.
This said, the question of whether to enjoin hand counts need not go to trial. Florida law gives county election boards discretion as to whether to grant manual recounts. Given the substantial risks involved, the boards should use this discretion to assure that any necessary recounts are done by machine, and thereby prevent fraud from having a hand in this election
Nice sentiment, but it's too late.
And lets consider this not so mute point if we may. If the populace of PBC are not intellegent enough to punch a butterfly ballot properly, what makes us think their elistist superiors are intellegent enough to add the ballots properly.
"This said, the question of whether to enjoin hand counts need not go to trial. Florida law gives county election boards discretion as to whether to grant manual recounts."
Yeah, but they already gave the go-ahead...so the courts are the only arbiter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
[
Top
|
Latest Posts
|
Latest Articles
|
Self Search
|
Add Bookmark
|
Post
|
Abuse
|
Help!
]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC |