Posted on 01/05/2005 4:16:42 AM PST by Timeout
An unknown number of provisional voters, some of whom may not even have been registered to vote, improperly put their ballots directly into vote-counting machines at polling places, King County's elections superintendent said yesterday.
Once those ballots went into the machines, there was no way to separate them from legitimate ballots.
Provisional ballots are given on Election Day to voters who show up at the wrong precinct or whose registration is in question. The ballots are supposed to be put inside two envelopes, with the voter's name, address and signature on the outside, and counted only after the voter's status is verified.
Officials may never know exactly how many provisional ballots were improperly fed into voting machines, but a current review of polling-place records will give some indication of how widespread the problem was, county Elections Superintendent Bill Huennekens said.
[snip]
...in some cases, Huennekens said, poll workers mistakenly instructed provisional voters to put ballots directly into machines. In other cases, voters disregarded instructions and put their ballots into machines while workers were busy.
"I can't completely fault our poll workers 100 percent in this matter, especially when you're dealing with over 300,000 voters at the polls. People come in all kinds of varieties and shapes and sizes," Huennekens said.
(Excerpt) Read more at seattletimes.nwsource.com ...
Why not?! What are they there for...to keep the chairs warm?!
Accountability: a lost art.
Of course the Democrats are permitted to steal an election. Safeguards? What safeguards? We won!
ping
Darn, I meant to reference "WA Gov Race" in the title.
Admin Moderator, can you help?
If the elected Republicans in Washington State has even the slightest evidence of testicles, they would call absolutely refuse to acknowledge that democrat female shyster-snake as governor.
As an election official, I am just amazed to hear this. We (in northern VA) have a ballot box specifically for provisional ballots, completely removed from the normal voting booths. Provisional voters never advance past the check-in tables.
Sounds like that election should be voided!!
There's no way they can "accidentally" put provisional votes into a voting machine. The procedure described above seems to have been the same as that used in provisional voting in my county in Florida, where the votes had to go into separate, sealed envelopes for verification and counting later. They wouldn't even fit into the machines, much less be readable, that way.
In other words, the "election workers" just handed out the provisional ballots, whether maliciously or out of sheer stupidity, knowing full well that they were going to be deposited along with the other, valid ballots.
You seem to be talking about integrity and the maintainence of same, a concept totally unknown in some circles.
I say, take the time and trouble (it really isn't much) to get properly registered to vote where you live. If there is any doubt, check (all it takes is a lousy phone call). Then show up at your designated polling place and cast your ballot, like everyone else does.
If you can't be there because of military service, or illness, or work-related travel, or family emergency, then fine, vote absentee. But this "provisional ballot" crap has to go.
Quite the opposite. I'm speaking of an established process which does not allow for integrity (or lack thereof) to interfere with the lawful casting of votes.
Agreed.
Anyone in that position who would make such an absurd statement is part of the problem and should be replaced.
Best argument I've heard yet for a run-off election.
I personally could do without it, but it's the law in many places. It just sounds like some locales have their acts together, and some do not - which leads to your point about being ripe for fraud.
"Election scrutiny reveals provisional-vote flaws"
Same thing happens in Ohio and the same paper writes this headline:
"Massive Vote Fraud Uncovered in Ohio"
That said there is no excuse for what happened some Washington counties.
I'm in PA and my county uses old lever type machines. Provisional ballots are paper so there is no chance to add them to a machine count.
I don't understand why Washington would use a provisional which could be substituted for a regular ballot so easily. Ours are a green color so there is no mistaking them for anything but a provisional ballot even in counties with paper ballots.
But even if the provisionals were the same type ballot, people voting that way should never have been allowed near the regular voting area. We set up a little table and chair and the county provided us with a small plastic screen for the table to ensure privacy for the voter.
Nov 2 got a little crazy even in my little small town precinct and I'm sure we made a few mistakes but I'm confident our vote count was 100% correct.
BTW, a few Freepers have been critical of provisional balloting. It is something that has to be monitored because people too lazy to register or too dumb to find out where to vote will try to use a provisional ballot. Election workers try to direct them to their correct polling place if only to save on paper work. But there are cases of legitimate voters being left out of the polling book by mistake. Provisional ballots are for such people and it's only fair they be allowed to vote. Otherwise unscrupulous county election workers could "accidentally" drop voters from the rolls with no recourse for a legitimate voter.
I've worked as a poll watcher here in Alabama. As I wrote on a previous thread, our system provides an airtight comparison of votes cast vs. ballots counted as soon as the polls close. Any later change in the total would be highly scrutinized. I'm also an accountant, so I'm big on "audit trails" and "incremental" controls (integrity of small batches provides for integrity of the combined total of batches).
Here's how it should work, in my opinion. Ballots should be collected in "batches" at each location where votes are received or "cast":
1) Batch 1---Votes cast at polling place. There should be a tally of ballots cast AS WELL AS a numerically sequenced book signed by each voter at each polling place. At day's end they must match before being combined with other precincts' batches. (Each precinct's batches should still be kept intact at all times.) Total of all batches should equal total of all signature books.
2) Batch 2---Absentee votes. These should be stamped with a sequential numbering stamp (also dated) AS THEY ARE RECEIVED by the elections office. A record should be filed each day showing the total received and the related sequence of numbers. They should then be filed in the same sequence. At counting time, the number of absentee ballots should equal the sequential number of ballots received.
3) Batch 3---Provisional ballots. Same as absentee, but with far more security and scrutiny. Poll workers should be told there is NO excuse for sloppy handling of these "controversial" ballots.
4) Batch 3---Military/overseas ballots. Seems to me they would be handled the same as absentees. If not, they should have their own "batching" system, recording them in sequential order as they arrive.
5) Domestic violence or other "secret" ballots. Small enough number that these should be closely supervised by a higher up official. Still no reason not to "batch" them so they can be audited.
In the end, a tally of BATCHES should equal the total of all ballots counted. Any discrepancies can then be traced to a batch...much easier to scrutinize. All "batches" should be maintained in their original order at all times (even during recounts).
Gaps in sequential numbering can be a significant tool in an "audit"---or recount. (If a worker spoils a stamp number, a form should be filled out, signed by a supervisor, and that form should be filed where one would expect to find that numbered ballot.)
Sequential batching sounds like a lot of trouble, but it's not. It actually saves a lot of time and is common control in private business. It actually PROTECTS the workers who are responsible for the system by giving them an auditable database with dual controls (ballots vs. voter count).
Curiouser and curiouser ping.
King County bites the big one!!!!...should be renamed Dung County......
I came late to this story. What have the editorial pages been saying about all this?
Provisional voters never advance past the check-in tables.
VVVVVV
Same in Maryland
How does a person who is not on the rolls get their hands on a ballot? It has to be handed to them by an election judge. We had one judge specifically to aid the voter with ALL the paperwork involved in casting a provisional ballot.
This article looks like Dem spin to me, a feeble, lying attempt to explain the huge number of unaccounted-for ballots.
The Dem election supervisors had previously said they would explain the discrepancies by Friday. Sounds to me like they're setting up to say they CAN'T explain them.
A revote is looking more likely. I'd love to be there when Gregoire is told she has to run again.
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.