Oregon Mail-in Ballots & Hand-Recount System vs. New York Lever System: 2000-2008 (TIA)

TruthIsAll     source: richardcharnin.com/OregonVsNYVoting.htm

March 29, 2010

Oregon defied the many battleground and heavily Democratic states in which Bush increased recorded vote share from 2000. Oregon's 13.6% exit poll discrepancy in 1992 and 10.2% uncounted vote rate in 1996 may have had something to do with the 1998 decision to switch to mail-in ballots. Oregon’s recorded vote-count shares closely approximated the National True Vote in 2000, 2004 and 2008. Was it because the voting-and-recounts were done exclusively by mail-and-hand and not by machine?

 

 

 

As a battleground state, it is to be expected that Oregon closely matches the national electorate. Since it votes 100% by mail, and paper ballot precincts had the lowest (2%) exit poll discrepancies from the recorded vote-counts, we can hypothesize that Oregon closely approximates the True Vote.  This is confirmed by the following facts:

• According to the 2000 Census, there were 5.4 million net uncounted votes. The majority (70-80%) of uncounted votes are Democratic. If Gore had 75% (4.0 million) of the uncounted votes, his national True Vote margin (based on total votes cast) was 49.6–46.8% (55.0–51.9 million) — a virtual match to his 49.4–46.9% aggregate state exit poll margin.
  
  
• According to the 'un-forced' (see above) 2004 PRELIM National Exit Poll, Kerry won returning Nader/Other voters by 65%-13%-... over Bush et al. Allocating the uncounted-adjusted national True Vote (49.6–46.8%) 'Other' share (3.6%), the 2000 national True Vote projects to 51.9–47.3%.
  Allocating the state exit poll aggregate (49.4–46.9%) 'Other' share (3.7%), the 2000 aggregate of State Exit Polls projects to 51.8–47.4%.
  Allocating (likewise) the Oregon 'Nader/Other' share (6.5%), the 2000 Oregon Vote-Count share (47.0–46.5%) projects to 51.2–47.4%.
  The projections match near-exactly and approach – share and margin – Kerry’s unadjusted state exit poll aggregate, 52–47%.
  
  Is it fair to assume that Oregon reflects the national electorate?

  2)  In 2004, Kerry exceeded Gore’s margin in Oregon by 3.7%. His 51.4–47.2% vote tally closely matched his 'national' 52–47% aggregate of unadjusted State Exit Polls.
  3)  Kerry won the pollster’s phone survey of Oregon voters by 52.3–46.3%, a slight 1.7% discrepancy with the Oregon vote margin.
  4)  Kerry's 'national' win of the aggregate of unadjusted State Exit Polls by 52–47% was merely 1% margin-discrepant with the Oregon phone survey.
  5)  In 14 other battleground states, the average exitpoll/votecount WPD was a whopping 7.5%. In Oregon, the telephone survey equivalent was just 1.7%.

• Do you believe the True 2004 national vote is reflected in:
  
  a) 
  the 2004 Oregon vote ( Kerry 51.4–Bush 47.2% ) and aggregate of 2004 unadjusted State Exit Polls ( Kerry 52–Bush 47% ), or
  
  
  b) 
  the national recorded vote-count ( Bush 50.7–Kerry 48.3%, basis for the impossible Final NEP )?
  
  
  In other words, do you believe that fraud cost Kerry the election?

• Do you believe:
  
  a) 
  the 2008 Oregon vote ( 56.7% ) reflected Obama’s True national share ( 58.0% ),  or
  
  
  b) 
  the national recorded vote-count share ( 52.9% ) for Obama?
  
  
  Did fraud cut Obama’s margin by 13.0 million (from 22.5 to 9.5 million)?

To summarize, Oregon matched the 2000 national recorded vote-count share and was within 2% of the 2000 aggregate state exit poll. It closely matched the 2004 Prelim National Exit Poll but was far from the 2004 national recorded vote-count share. In 2008, Oregon vote-count closely matched both the state and national True Vote models, but the 2008 unadjusted state exit polls have not been released by the MSM.

Now consider New York.

In 2000, Gore won the state by 25% (60.2–35.2%). In 2004, Kerry’s recorded vote-count margin declined to 18.3% (58.4–40.1%). But Kerry won the unadjusted exit poll by 64.5–34.0%, a 12.2% WPD. Why the sharp reversal of fortune?

Consider the largest counties in Oregon and New York, Multnomah (OR) and Kings (NY):



It’s an Urban Legend: Bush recorded vote share increased sharply from 2000 to 2004 in heavily Democratic urban areas but declined in rural locations. Except for Oregon — the ONLY 100% mail-in paper ballot and hand-recount state.

Consider that …
  1)  Oregon votes by mail and NY by lever machines
  2)  In the last three elections, the late NY Democratic (paper ballot) vote shares were 7% higher than the Election Day lever share
  3)  In 2004, the average paper ballot precinct WPD was 2% and 12% for levers
  4)  Kerry’s margin was 3.7% higher than Gore’s in Oregon (a battleground state), but 6.7% lower in New York (a strong Democratic state)
  5)  Kerry exceeded Gore’s margin by 8.9% in Oregon’s largest urban county (Multnomah) but Gore exceeded Kerry by 8.3% in New York’s largest (Kings)

  6)  Oregon had a 1.7% discrepancy in an exit pollster telephone survey compared to the 7.5% average WPD for the other 14 battleground states
  7)  Oregon closely matched the 2004 aggregate exit poll after allocating returning Nader voters to Kerry and Bush

  9)  Gore won NY by 60.2–35.2%. Allocating the 4.6% Nader/other vote, Kerry wins by 63-36% – assuming equal Gore/Bush defection



11)  Gore did slightly better than his 60.2% NY recorded share after allocating 180,000 net uncounted votes
12)  In the two elections in which Clinton was the incumbent, the New York exit polls had an average 0.6 WPD.
13)  In the three elections in which a Bush was the incumbent, the NewYork exit polls had an average 8.0 WPD.



If one ignores all of the above, there is every reason for New Yorkers to “love those levers” – except for this: Even if everyone who came to the polls voted and all the lever machines performed perfectly, the fact remains that votes are counted by proprietary computer software, not open source, which can easily be programmed to switch votes that may or may not have been entered accurately. Ay, there’s the rub.

In 2004, the exit pollsters reported that lever voting machine precincts had a 12% error (WPD) rate. Optical scanners and touch screens were 7%. Paper ballot precincts had the lowest (2%). Is the fog lifting? What happened in 2004 should be very clear by now.

In the 2008 NY primary, zero votes were originally reported for Obama in nearly eighty minority precincts. Many New Yorkers love the levers. They have been led to believe that because levers are not computers, they are not subject to vote-switching and therefore essentially fraud-free. But lever precinct totals are tabulated on central computers which can be programmed to switch votes. And there are no paper ballots to verify the count – except for late provisional and absentee ballots which comprise about 7% of votes cast. It is interesting to note that since 2000, the Democrats have done 7% better in late (paper) voting than on Election Day (levers). Uncounted votes declined from 700,000 in 1988 to fewer than 200,000 in 2000 — but the trend reversed to over 300,000 in 2004.

In Oregon, the ballots are separated from the return envelope before they are inspected. This process ensures confidentiality. The votes are counted on Election Day. A record is kept showing each voter whose ballot has been returned. No expensive voting machines, no corrupted election officials, no long lines, no machine breakdowns. In 1996, over 10% of votes cast were uncounted, but the rate has declined sharply since the switch to mail in 1998.

Oregon mail-in ballots are counted electronically, but there is a paper trail if a hand recount is necessary. In New York, computers also do the counting based on reported Lever totals– but there are no paper ballots to check the count. Levers are used to cast, but not count votes. Lever advocates don’t want to talk about that.

No wonder Oregonians are happy with their voting system. Why don't the other 49 states follow suit? They should HAVA look at how Oregon saves a ton of money and how real democracy works.

Changes apply to:
"Oregon vs New York" table, last row, two right-most columns    "40.4" should be "31.8"    "27" should be "35.6"
"New York" Footnote (1) figure: 2008 Unadjusted Exit Poll, column "Rep"   "40.4" should be "31.8"

 

...
Being an all vote-by-mail state, Oregon has many differences from Colorado in our vote tally process.
Colorado uses vote centers and precincts in a distributed vote and tally process.
Oregon utilizes a centralized vote tally process with all votes received and tallied at County Elections Offices.

I must reiterate here an important fact. No recount conducted in Oregon has ever turned up evidence that a tally machine failed to correctly count votes. A full recount is the ultimate test and with each election we always have at least one or two.

John Lindback, Director
Elections Division
Oregon Secretary of State's Office

source: http://www.oregonvrc.org/2008/02/192007_johns_reply_oregons_election_systems_decertified_colorado

 

areas of New York, responsible for estimated hundreds of thousands of lever undervotes in mostly minority precincts. Only Brennan Center lawsuits in 2003 forced the Board of Elections to comply and reactivate the sensor latches before the 2004 primary (one after the BoE tried to reverse its own original decision to comply).

The original deactivation of sensor latches was by deliberate policy of the "bispartisan" NYC Board of Elections.

Also, it's not just about the levers. It's a voting system that involves levers, transfers of information, and computers that tabulate reported 7000+ lever meter totals. Don't let discussions that focus soley on levers distract from the overall system picture in New York. Anything computerized can be defrauded, but "election reformers" don't talk about the computer side of the system in NY.

"If one ignores all of the above, there is every reason for New Yorkers to “love those levers” – except for this: Even if everyone who came to the polls voted and all the lever machines performed perfectly, the fact remains that votes are counted by proprietary computer software, not open source, which can easily be programmed to switch votes that may or may not have been entered accurately"

The fraud of the New York vote-count in 2004 is apparent, with the exit poll of NY voters in 2004 showing an exitpoll/vote-count discrepancy (12.2%) favoring the Republican that's one of the highest in the US, exceeded by just 5 states (also all favoring the Republican), including the second-most-discrepant, Connecticut (16%), which happens also to be a lever-SYSTEM state.

We'd know more about Obama's true margin of victory, both in America and New York in 2008, if the contractors of the exit pollster -- right-wing controlled Fox News, CNN, AP, NBC News, ABC News, CBS News -- weren't continuing to suppress the pollster's evaluation report with the data-results of the 2008 state exit polls. For the 2004 election, that report was released in January 2005. It's now 17 months after the '08 election, and the pollster's report is still unreleased (i.e. suppressed).

Election reformers should study how Oregon election law and its 'divide-and-conquer' *system* of...

1) Mail-in Paper Ballots,
2) Centralized Voter Registration that's completely independent of the
2) County electronic system tallies (36)
3) Overseen and checked by mandated partial and/or full HAND RECOUNTS

..."tames" the electronic devil.

New York's vote *system* (i.e. more than just levers and not unlike the great majority of American states' vote systems) is a joke on democracy compared to Oregon's low-cost, transparent *system*.

(Serious, too, is the political undermining of 80,000 New York resident signatories for an initiative on the NY ballot calling for an independent investigation of 9/11.)