Parallel elections...

[IndyOp]

At this point, in regards to Election 2006, we most likely aren't going to change the method of voting in our particular necks of the woods...

I am thinking now about setting up parallel elections. Could you please post to this thread any/all resources you have about how to and why to and results of...

I'll start:

Parallel Elections: How To Do Them
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-908272446689751591&pl=true

Parallel Election Los Angeles Nov 2005 - Google Video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1462613271794363662&pl=true

Plan B: Parallel Elections & Signed Ballots (by Lynn Landes)
http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1108

San Diego Parallel Election Results
http://markcrispinmiller.blogspot.com/2005/08/san-diego-parallel-election.html

Citizens Request a Recount in San Diego Mayoral Race
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Citizens_Request_Recount_IN_SAN_DIEGO_MAYO_0818.html

First “Grass Roots” Parallel Election Project By Ellen H. Brodsky
Coconut Creek, FL, March 8, 2005
http://www.ecotalk.org/FirstParallelElection.htm

[Gregorian]

1. A very bright idea!

And let's just say it's paper. The price to pay for paper is nil. And volunteers do the counting. In a process as critically important to a country as voting, there must be absolutely no doubt.

Now, the question is- Assume the election is contested, who is going to validate the parallel count? I see a problem there. We're dealing with crooks, and that may be the real problem, not neccisarily the vote count. Ugh.

I like this.

[IndyOp]

3. If the election is contested, I think you have to run it over...

Parallel elections may get only 50% of the people who cast their ballots that day so that can't be the 'official' result, I don't think.

If the parallel election results and official election results are way off - the 'official results' for that day are bogus, too.

So - Re-Vote!

:kick:

[IndyOp]

2. Excuse me while I respond to myself with notes I took while watching

Judy Alter on "Parallel Elections: How to Do Them" - link in OP...

Goals of parallel elections:

Inhibit election fraud: DU Poster Rayoflight has indicated that they were able to hold a parallel election in one precinct in Ohio in the Paul Hackett / Jean Schmidt race and that the precinct they audited was the one in which Hackett had the highest percentage of votes.

Reveal election fraud: San Diego activists were able to detect a 4% point difference in votes cast for the Democratic candidate for Mayor -- Candidate Frye received 4% higher counts in all parallel election sites as compared to the 'official results'.

Educate voters about secret-vote counting software and election justice issues People who participate in the parallel elections already have some concerns, providing them with a flier with sources of further information is $ and energy invested well. Also - publicize what you will be doing and why - to get newspaper and other media outlet coverage.

Important Points

Parallel Elections Are Not Exit Polls
> Everyone is invited to participate in a parallel election, whereas exit polsters sample people based on sex and race (and are more likely to have a biased sample).
> In a parallel election ballots can be secret, meaning that you don't have to say out loud who you voted for to a polster.

In a parallel election you can ask voters to sign the back of their ballot or your can ask them to sign a poll book, checking each box when counted to be sure that the number of poll book signatures match the number of ballots. If they sign a poll book then their ballot is still secret. Other suggestions: Print ballots on legal size paper and fold and gluestick the bottom flap with voter's name so that the name is not revealed unless legal action is to be taken. My idea: Create an ID number and put the same ID number on the top of the ballot and in the poll book. So if the poll book is numbered 1-300, then number the ballots the same way. Voter ballots & names will only be matched up if there is a legal challenge.

The best sites to audit are larger precincts (because, based on analysis of 2004 Presidential Election results, the larger the precinct the more likely bias in voting machine software will kick in).

Talk with elections officials about your plans well in advance of election day to be sure that you have their co-operation. This can help prevent 'nasty surprises' on election day, such as poll workers or voters who call the police to have you removed. Follow all local/state election rules to a T - even though this is non-partisan action, be sure to stay a little more than 100 feet from polling place. On election day, someone has to go in and tell the election officials what you are doing.

Positioning yourself & talking with voters...
> Keep your conversation with voters as they enter the poll at a minimum: "Stop by and see us after you vote." Don't give too much information before they vote, because it could be construed as interference.
> Emphasize that this is a non-partisan action.
> Emphasize that you are double-checking the *machines* not election officials.

Keep a separate manila envelope to document complaints such as machine malfunctions, racial profiling, so forth...

You need three people at each precinct to fill 3 roles: 'greeter', 'secretary' who makes sure materials are ready at all times, 'monitor' the person who watches as voters sign the signature book and deposit their ballots.

IMPORTANT: Citizens Audit Ballot must look VERY different from real ballot to make it clear that there is 0 intent to commit fraud.

COSTS: $12 per site excluding cost of ballots

COUNTING BALLOTS: Lots of rules about sealing the ballot boxes and poll books and extra ballots together at the end of the day. Counting must be conducted at a public place and must invite EVERYONE to attend. Counting teams are in 3's a read, a tallier, and an observor who alternatley observes the work of both reader and tallier.

[GuvWurld]

4. StudyCaliforniaBallots.org

IndyOp - thanks for bringing this up, and for pointing people to Judy. A few things I would add are her actual home page: www.studycaliforniaballots.org and some other ways that the parallel data can be useful and revealing. First, in Coconut Grove, FL parallel polling revealed that many voters had voted on official ballots that were missing a contest. Also, and I forget where this occurred, parallel results can reveal that more people voted for someone or something than official results purport. This then spurs a community canvass asking for affidavit signatures. When more people have affirmed voting for the person or thing than the official results acknowledge, there may be grounds for a legal challenge.

Finally, more current PE protocols do not observe the 100 foot electioneering buffer zone. PE workers are not doing partisan work and must only observe a 25 foot distance from the polling place. It is suggested that PE coordinators clear this in advance with the elections department and do so by asserting your intention to exercise your rights. To that end, also be sure to establish some kind of relationship with the actual precinct poll workers. In particular, be sure they will give you access to monitor the poll closing procedures and that they will post the poll tape outside the polling place.

[robinlynne]

7. I did PE with Judy in LA and

we actually already ask each person to sign an afidavit before voting on the PE ballot, swearing that they will fill out our ballot in the same way.
And someone mentioned 50%. We got more like 80-90% participation.

[sean in iowa]

5. PEs are a good tool, but BE CAREFUL

Posted this on a thread sometime last week...

Parallel elections can become very high visibility events, if a disecrepancy is shown. This happened in the San Diego mayor's race last year. They used Diebold optical scanners and the parallel came out with a 4% different from the official count. The result was a partial recount that matched the Diebold count nearly perfectly. Incredibly, no one seemed very alert to how the ballots were stored when they demanded a recount. I am not denigrating the work of the activists involved, and if I have the facts wrong, someone correct me.

The rule is, don't use these parallel elections to trumpet alleged irregularities unless you become an expert on the paper ballot chain of custody. If you are willing to posit computer tabulation fraud, you should give equal weight to simple paper fraud.

After all, the vendors do quite a lot of plain old ballot printing for op-scan counties; see two examples.

1) Diebold

See the full article; it's a must read. But here is a sample:

The Dean's ballot printing company was acquired by Diebold in the Global Election Systems acquisition.

2) ES&S

Again, the full article is a must-read, but here is a quote that nails the issue:

Meanwhile early voting began in Indiana and Nebraska. 69 of the 93 counties in Nebraska have no paper ballots from their vendor, ES&S, and no ballot programming for their voting machines. 11 counties in Indiana have the same problems and they are threatening lawsuits. Prebel County Ohio reported they had not gotten their paper ballots. On March 29 the Texas Secretary of State sent an urgent memorandum to all county clerks, elections administrators and county chairs noting that many officials had not received electronic programming or paper ballots for primary runoff elections to be held on April 11.

Be ready for the recount. Know the chain of paper custody, and be ready to cry foul on its weaknesses-or you are setting yourself up to undermine, possibly FATALLY, the cause of election reform. One or two more paper recounts that don't turn up any significant discrepancies will hurt us badly.

[IndyOp]

6. All very good points - thanks...

Have you heard the latest from Richard Hayes Phillips? Evidence that ballots in Ohio 2004 were moved from precinct to precinct so that votes for Kerry were instead counted for Bush? Also - ballot stuffing - pics of ballots with only one hole punched...for Bush...

here: <http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/3/2006/1355>

This supports your concern about using PEPs to challenge election fraud if the thieves have ability/time to stuff or shift ballots.

In the case of my home county - there aren't any ballots - the MicroVote machines can print a tape showing 'the votes cast in consecutive order' - but the tape is, of course, as bogus as any memory card.

[sean in iowa]

11. Robinlynne, please see my comment #5

if you haven't already.

Not to be a pest, but bulldogging of paper ballot security HAS to go hand in hand with any parallel election effort.

Are you in contact with Judy Alter? Can you alert her to this concern (she may have become all too aware of it on her own:-])? If you can give me contact info, that would be wonderful. Having the leader of the PE movement get obsessed about ballot storage/security would be a great step forward.

I like these PEs, but what happened in San Diego worries the hell out of me. They can get us rolled, unless we are careful.

[robinlynne]

14. You can contact Judy care of her website, which is

studycaliforniaballots.org.
What you say is important. I can tell you right off the bat she doesn't have a second to breathe. We can abrely get enough people together to do parallels. there is not a minute available to look at any other aspect of the election. What we need are more volunteers. making a suggetsion of something to do will not help, unless you can back it up with manpower, and do it. blackboxvoting.org and california election protection are 2 websites you might look at. Are you here in california?

[robinlynne]

15. Sean, i see you are in iowa.

Just so you know there were a grand total of 4 people working at the last san diego election. I don't know if we're a "movement."

[sean in iowa]

17. Then you pulled off something truly amazing.

The parallel was, by all accounts, taken quite seriously by people who study elections. That you did it with four people-that speaks for itself.

[robinlynne]

18. We had many more in los angeles.

I meant the special election in san diego for duke cunningham's replacement. (2 weeks ago.) Judy is quite serious. Everything has been studied by a lawyer and it is all done carefully, so the results can be valid and menaingful and hold up in court.

[robinlynne]

19. Thank-you

is what I should have said.

[robinlynne]

8. Indy Op, I'm sure Judy Alter would love to speak with you about this.

It would be great if this were a citizen's movement cross the country. In reality, it has been extremely difficult to find people to volunteer.
She would help anyone wnating to set up a parallel election.

[IndyOp]

9. Thanks robinlynne -

I am bookmarking this thread and will keep it for reference. I am in the process of writing an article & getting ready to make a presentation to City Council on election justice and PEP will be part of it, but the majority will be convincing them that no computer system is safe and how HUGE a problem voter disenfranchisemet has become. I will mention PEP as a temporary solution and will advocate it for the November election, for sure, as I am suspicious that our current R congressman had some 'help' defeating the D incumbent in the last "election".

[sean in iowa]

12. Sorry, meant to post #11 as reply here:-[

[sean in iowa]

13. Sorry, meant to post #11 as reply here:-[

[In Truth We Trust]

10. bookmarked and too late to k&r but will stay tuned.

[liam_laddie]

16. definitions

There's been some discussion on the J30 and HERH yahoo groups about this.
Due to a computer crash, plans for parallel work in some parts of Ohio were
cancelled for May 2. Some places may still hold them. There is also a discussion
about the term used. Would something like "citizen-sponsored" or "non-partisan"
"exit poll" be a less-loaded term than "parallel election?" I know it's a bit late to define
terms, but maybe it'd be better to not use "election" as a definer term, for the average
voter. Any comments? If you strongly disagree, mild flaming wouldn't be painful...
:shrug:

[IndyOp]

20. I kind of like 'Citizens Audit' -- it emphasizes the

fact that we are double-checking the accuracy.

What groups on Yahoo discuss parallel elections? Links?

Thanks! :hi:

[pat_k]

21. Believe or not, there's a lesson we can learn from Tom Delay. . .

We don't need to hold parallel elections to enforce our right to believable elections.

As reprehensible as it was, we can draw a lesson from the riot Delay orchestrated to stop the Dade recount. We don't need to model his thuggery, but we do need to "get" the fact that a small group of determined citizens can exert powerful influence on local election officials.

To this end, we're calling on people put their local election officials on notice that "We will not accept the results of an election that is incapable of giving us confidence in the results and we will do everything in our power to hold you personally responsible if you implement (or have implemented) such a system."

See http://january6th.org/stop_stolen_elections_now.html

[autorank]

22. perpendicular news threads

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=426886&mesg_id=426886