[EL] Recounts, Virginia and for want of a nail... Re: ELB News and Commentary 11/11/11

Sun Nov 13 13:51:31 PST 2011

Relating to this exchange about the Virginia state senate race that
ultimately didn't get a recount, the bottomline reality is that recounts
rarely change outcomes by much at all. They have a somewhat greater chance
in a race without that many votes, as it's possible to find some missing
bag of votes or some such things,but data just doesn't show the chance to
overcome the percentage deficit in this Virginia senate race. As a
reminder, check out our comprehensive report on statewide recounts that
took place from 2000 to 2009.
http://www.fairvote.org/recounts

Key findings included:

* Statewide recounts are rare: Out of the 2,884 statewide general elections
in the 2000 to 2009 decade, there were 18 statewide recounts, 11 of which
were deemed "consequential"(with an original victory margin no more than
0.15 percent). In other words, there was one recount for every 160
statewide elections and one consequential recount for every 262 statewide
elections. This pattern was true of most subcategories of statewide
elections as well, including only two consequential recounts out of the 422
elections in this period for the offices of governor, lieutenant governor,
secretary of state, attorney general and treasurer.

* Outcome reversals are even rarer: Over the 2000-2009 decade, recounts
resulted in three reversals out of 11 consequential recounts, or one out of
every 961 statewide elections.

* Margin shifts in recounts are small: Statewide recounts resulted in an
average margin swing of 296 votes between the frontrunners, representing
0.027% of the statewide vote in those elections. The median average shift
was 229 votes, with 15 of the 18 recounts changing the victory margin by
fewer than 500 votes.

* Margin shifts are smaller and recounts rarer in larger electorates:
Recounts in elections with more voters altered the vote margin by lower
percentages than recounts in elections with fewer voters. In the five cases
in which the total votes cast were above two million, the margin shift was
on average 0.016% of the vote (less than one for every 6,400 votes cast).
In the eight cases in which the total votes cast were fewer than one
million, the margin shift was on average 0.039% (less than one for every
2,500 votes cast). No recount took place in our three largest states.

Also, on the "want of a nail" theme, this race underscores for me the
perverse nature of our current Electoral College rules. This state senate
race was extremely close. If the Democrats had won it, they would have
maintained control of the senate, and it's quite unlikely that any
legislation that weakens voting rights would have passed into law. Now, if
Virginia follows the pattern of presidential swing states like FL, OH and
WI, it's at least possible such legislation will move (although I hasten to
say too early to say).

Virginia is one of the 7 or 8 true presidential swing states -- e.g, a
state that will be very close if the election is nationally very close. A
change in voting laws could tilt the outcome in Virginia, even fi the
number of affected votes was just a few thousand. And that change of
outcome in Virginia would swing the entire 2012 presidential election.

This is what the presidential election has become under the current rules.
This recent quote from a USA Today news article says it well

<"A really, really, really narrow sliver of people in a really small group
of states are going to decide who's the next president of the United
States," says Steve McMahon, a Democratic strategist whose bipartisan
consulting firm sponsors its own Purple Poll of swing states.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2011-11-03/swing-states-poll-obama/51062622/1
>>

Of course, as you might guess, I have a suggestion for making it better...
joined by more than 2,000 state legislators, among others! See the latest
on the National Popular Vote plan here: www.nationalpopularvote.com

- Rob Richie

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:55 PM, David Mason <dmason12 at gmail.com> wrote:

> The history of recounts in Virginia, as opposed to some other states, has
> been very orderly.  When they have occurred vote totals have tended not to
> move much after the canvass.  George Allen made a similar decision 5 years
> ago (not to request a recount, even though he was legally entitled to one).
>
> Contra Rick, I am not sure there is more to the story: just a combination
> of generally competent election administration and a political culture that
> discourages bitter-end tactics.
>
> Dave
>
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joehall at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hoping other listers will correct me if I'm off...
>>
>> The Houck campaign in Virginia probably made the decision not to request
>> a recount because of the interplay between Virginia election law and the
>> extensive use of direct recording electronic (DRE) voting systems in
>> Virginia. Most Virginia jurisdictions use DREs and Virginia law only allows
>> the totals tapes to be "re-read" by election administrators, which means
>> the results for DRE votes are unlikely to change much.
>>
>> That is, Virginia Code S. 24.2-802 (D)(2) (
>> http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+24.2-802 ) says:
>>
>> "For direct recording electronic machines (DREs), the recount officials
>> shall open the envelopes with the printouts and read the results from the
>> printouts. If the printout is not clear, or on the request of the court,
>> the recount officials shall rerun the printout from the machine or examine
>> the counters as appropriate."
>>
>> So, if the campaign thinks they can't make up the difference through
>> absentee/optical scan ballots (where humans interpret voter-made marks),
>> then it might not make much sense to request a recount.  Virginia is not a
>> "no-excuse" absentee voting state, so many would be using DREs in the
>> counties for that district*.
>>
>> * Counties for the Houck district are: Culpeper County (All);
>> Fredericksburg City (Part); Louisa County (All); Madison County (All);
>> Orange County (All); Spotsylvania County (Part).  You can use the VVF
>> Verifier to look at the variety of DREs used in those areas (only
>> Fredericksburg City uses optical scanners as its standard polling place
>> equipment:
>> https://www.verifiedvoting.org/verifier/map.php?state=Virginia&county=Fredericksburg%20%28city%29&ec=allall&year=2008).
>>
>> best, Joe
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> wrote
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  No Overtime in Va, as Democrat Concedes<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25295>
>>> Posted on November 11, 2011 9:13 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25295>
>>> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>>
>>> *WaPo*<http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/democrat-edd-houck-concedes-virginia-senate-race-republicans-lock-up-hold-on-power/2011/11/10/gIQAzCOv9M_story.html>:
>>> “Because the vote was so close, Houck could have requested a recount.
>>> Friends and supporters had encouraged him to do so, but Houck said he did
>>> not think he could overcome Reeves’s lead once it grew beyond 200.”
>>>
>>> There must be more to the story here, because 200 is a pretty small
>>> margin.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Joseph Lorenzo Hall
>> Postdoctoral Research Fellow
>> Media, Culture and Communication
>> New York University
>> https://josephhall.org/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Respect for Every Vote and Every Voice"

Rob Richie
Executive Director

FairVote
6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 610
Takoma Park, MD 20912
www.fairvote.org  <http://www.fairvote.org> rr at fairvote.org
(301) 270-4616

Please support FairVote through action and tax-deductible donations -- see
http://fairvote.org/donate. For federal employees, please consider  a gift
to us through the Combined Federal Campaign (FairVote's  CFC number is
10132.) Thank you!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111113/50acd186/attachment.html>