Funny you guys should mention it. But out of this whole discussion I've come
to wonder if the answer might be in a more efficient way of punching the
cards. Ink-a-dot problems are obvious; Paper backup for electronic voting
brings added costs for printers and maintenance; black and white marbles
seem out of date. The problems with punch cards are with the chads. So, why
not build a better punch card?
Larry Levine
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel P. Tokaji" <tokaji.1@osu.edu>
To: "Scarberry, Mark" <Mark.Scarberry@pepperdine.edu>; "'election-law '"
<election-law@majordomo.lls.edu>
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 10:29 AM
Subject: RE: Is it Possible Kerry Lost Ohio Because of Punch Cards?
The alternative type of punch card machine you describe is called the
Datavote. The data I've seen suggest that, in terms of residual votes,
the
Datavote generally does better than the pre-scored punch card (the
Votomatic). That's probably because it doesn't generate hanging chad and
because it's easier for voters to verify their choices. But the Datavote
is not used very widely. According to Election Data Services, about 0.77%
of counties and 1.33% of voters used it this year. Because the names of
candidates and measures are printed on the cards, multiple cards are
needed
where there's a longer ballot. This makes it a non-very-attractive option
for most counties.
Of Ohio's 88 counties, the Datavote is used only by one small county
(Tuscarawes). It is somewhat more widely used in California (21 counties
in 2000, though I suspect it's fewer now). The Datavote is not subject to
the consent decree that was entered in the Common Cause v. Jones case,
which required that California get rid of Votomatic-style punch cards by
March 2004.
Dan
Daniel P. Tokaji
Assistant Professor of Law
The Ohio State University
Moritz College of Law
55 W. 12th Ave.
Columbus, OH 43210
voice: 614-292-6566
fax: 614-688-8422
tokaji.1@osu.edu
http://equalvote.blogspot.com/
At 12:26 AM 11/5/2004, Scarberry, Mark wrote:
In Ventura County, California (northwest of Los Angeles) we use punch
cards,
but they are not the Votomatics that were used in Florida. Ballot cards
containing no more than perhaps six races on each side fit into a small
machine that has a punching mechanism that slides up and down to position
the punch next to the names. The punch is a very solid positive
mechanism,
like a hole punch, but it punches out a small rectangular hole; I don't
think hanging chads are common at all. It doesn't seem to me that there
is
any need for us to change. Perhaps others have data on the failure rate
of
such punch systems, but I'd be surprised if it was higher than an optical
or
electronic system. And these punch machines have to be a lot cheaper than
optical or electronic machines.
Mark S. Scarberry
Pepperdine Univ. School of Law
-----Original Message-----
From: DANIEL TOKAJI
To: election-law
Sent: 11/4/2004 7:12 PM
Subject: Re: Is it Possible Kerry Lost Ohio Because of Punch Cards?
The answer to the question posed in the subject line is a definite "no,"
and I say this as one of the lawyers in the ACLU of Ohio's case
challenging punch cards. There were approximately 76,000 residual votes
(combined overvotes and undervotes) cast with punch cards in Ohio this
year, according to press reports. Punch cards reportedly had about a
1.9% residual vote rate. The lowest you can hope for with better
technologies is probably around 0.3%-0.7%, since some voters in every
election intentionally undervote -- they deliberately choose not to cast
a vote for President. That means that around 48,000 - 64,000 Ohio votes
were lost that would likely have been counted with better technology.
It is probably true that Kerry lost more votes due to the use of punch
cards than Bush. In 2000, about two-thirds of the precincts with the
worst residual vote rates (i.e., those in the top 10%) went for Bush.
But even assuming that Kerry lost two votes for every vote lost by Bush,
that amounts to a net gain of no more than about 21,000 votes on the
most optimistic (from Kerry's perspective) assumptions -- far less than
the 135,000 by which Kerry was behind last time I checked. Henry Brady
or other empirical researchers can probably come up with a more precise
estimate, but I think that this back-of-the envelope calculation is
probably in the ballpark.
Punch cards probably did spell the difference between defeat and victory
in Florida 2000. They did not in Ohio 2004. I do think it's imperative
that Ohio and other states still using punch cards get rid of them, and
replace them with either precinct-count optical scan or electronic
machines. That doesn't necessarily mean, however, that states must go
to a uniform system, since both of these technologies perform well in
terms of lowering the number of residual votes.
Dan
Daniel P. Tokaji
Assistant Professor of Law
Ohio State University
Moritz College of Law
55 W. 12th Avenue
Columbus, OH 43210
voice 614.292.6566
fax 614.688.8422
email tokaji.1@osu.edu
http://equalvote.blogspot.com
<<Re: Is it Possible Kerry Lost Ohio Because of Punch Cards?>>