Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Question About Ohio Election Law

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 02:17 PM
Original message
Question About Ohio Election Law
Edited on Wed Jan-19-05 02:18 PM by Bill Bored
Not that the law actually matters in Ohio (or Florida for that matter), but what are the auditing requirements in the Buckeye state?

We know the recount was illegally tainted by not selecting 3% of the precincts for the hand count at random. This is an audit. Now, unfortunately, no one cares about this recount except us, because Kerry didn't ask for it.

But what laws were broken that affected the original official vote count? Is there anything on the books requiring random audits that was not adhered to? If so, why isn't this being prosecuted? I have not seen anything about it in Arnebeck's election contest or anywhere else, except in regards to the recount, but even Blackwell has mentioned something about "auditing procedures" while they were working on their official count.

Any lawyers out there know the facts on this?

It's one thing to have broken the law in a recount requested by third party candidates who had no chance of winning the election. But in the case of Kerry, who had a chance, there should be vigorous enforcement of all election law. The fact that he didn't contest the election is no excuse allowing violations of the law, is it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
emcguffie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. Thank you. Amen! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poppyseedman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 02:35 PM
Response to Original message
2. Kerry had a chance of what?
I certainly agree that election laws should be vigorous enforced, but don't you think Kerry didn't contest the election because there were not any specific laws broken?

The votes were not there to overturn the election.

That's why the Kerry campaign, the DNC, the Ohio state democratic party passed and rolled over. Jesse Jackson was a token spokesman sent out to appease the base.

I am constantly amazed at the level of denial and fantasy based reality posted on this board.

Bush is in office, Kerry passed, the DNC was silent.

The party needs to pull it's collective head out of the sand and start figuring out how to win.

Re-fighting Ohio isn't going to win us anything. It will only be used against us, to paint us as sore losers




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merwin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Yes, Hitler is already in power. Move on to another battle!
It's now a proven fact. If left unchecked, this SAME thing is going to happen in yet another state in 2006/2008. The point of this digging is to find out the methods that were used against us, to have a better offence/defence in the next round.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
troubleinwinter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. This discussion is not about "refighting Ohio"
it is about investigating and prosectuting VIOLATIONS of LAW.

Maybe if some people get PROSECUTED for their crimes, people may think twice about voter disenfranchisement, caging, and machine and pollbook tampering.

Read Conyers' letter requesting a special investigation into violations of state, federal and constitutional requirements.

Why on earth would we care how the other side "paints us"? Crimes must be brought to light, investigated and prosecuted. Period.

Conyers' letter: http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/dojelectionspconltr11405.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poppyseedman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 10:26 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. You asked?
Why on earth would we care how the other side "paints us"?

Of course it matters how the other side paints us.

Just ask John Kerry if the Swift Boat people painted him. He was painted so well, the American people hardly got to see what was underneath.

They cost him the election

For Conyers letter to carry any weight, for "crimes must be brought to light, investigated and prosecuted," there needs to be a lot better evidence presented of said crimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KerryOn Donating Member (899 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. But if we don't re-fight Ohio now...
... then Blackwell will just steel the election again in 2008, with a new Republican like Bush by using voter suppression, voter disenfranchisement, purging voter registration rolls, running punch card ballets through the wrong tabulators, tearing up registrations that are not on 80 pound paper, giving Democratic areas half as many voting machines, giving Democratic areas faulty voting machines, and any other DIRTY little tricks he can think of.

Have you forgotten already?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
12. Don't be silly.
How would Kerry have known exactly which laws were or were not broken without a full investigation? Margins don't mean anything if the vote was hacked. This is such an old, tired and specious argument.

We need to know the truth and the recount wasn't done in a way that would reveal it beyond reasonable doubt. The behavior of those conducting it was suspicious. Laws appear to have been broken.

Laws were broken in FL too. Is that where you're from? (I recognize that little map thingy.) See Congressman Wexler's suit against LePore. You're supposed to be able to do manual recounts there and you can't. Doesn't that bother you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FogerRox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #2
17. Kerry letter of 12-16 talks of 347k votes enuf to turn results
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
troubleinwinter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
4. Have you read Conyers' letter to Attny General
requesting an independent special councel to investigate (Ohio) "misconduct" and "numerous possible violations of state, federal and constitutional requirements", "several specific apparent violations of federal law", including voter intimidation and misinformation, improper purging, caging of minority voters, misuse of federal funds, voting machine tampering, purjury, and misuse of the federal seal by Blackheart?

The letter is here: http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/dojelectionspconltr11405.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 10:40 PM
Response to Original message
7. I don't think OH requires
any audits. As for laws, I'm sure they have vote tampering and the like on the books. Shouldn't be hard to find the text of the laws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KerryOn Donating Member (899 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 11:00 PM
Response to Original message
9. Here are the Ohio voting laws:
http://onlinedocs.andersonpublishing.com/oh/lpExt.dll?f=templates&fn=main-h.htm&cp=PORC

Select Title XXXV from the list, then select:

CHAPTER 3515
RECOUNT; CONTEST OF ELECTIONS
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. I've read the recount laws already.
But I'll see what else is in there. Thanks.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KerryOn Donating Member (899 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. I just skimed it and ...
Edited on Wed Jan-19-05 11:18 PM by KerryOn
... didn't see much. Not anything on the 3% hand count, but that dosen't mean it isn't there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 03:37 AM
Response to Reply #11
14. Found something
I think this is the bill from the Ohio House that, if signed into law, changed Sect. 3515 to require the 3% random hand recounts. See pg. 75:
<http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/BillText124/124_HB_566_I_Y.pdf>
Let's assume votecobb.org has this right and it's "Session Law" which is actually law but not in the reference you cited above, KerryOn. I have not found a random audit requirement so far for the original count, but I'm still searching.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 02:05 AM
Response to Original message
13. Where's the 3% random recount requirement?
Edited on Thu Jan-20-05 02:30 AM by Bill Bored
I've looked at Section 3515 of the Ohio Revised Code too, and have not been able to find the random precinct selection requirement for the recount. According to votecobb.org, Ohio Election Law is very clear on this point:

"The board must randomly select whole precincts whose total equals at least 3% of the total vote, and must conduct a manual count."

"If the tabulator count does not match the hand count, and after rechecking the manual count the results are still not equal, all ballots must be hand counted. If the results of the tabulator count and the hand counted ballots are equal, the remainder of the ballots may be processed through the tabulator (for optical scan and punchcards)."
(Section 3515 of the Ohio Revised Code)

Well, it doesn't seem to be in there. What am I missing? Where is it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 03:44 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. It's in their regulations.
Edited on Thu Jan-20-05 03:59 AM by Carolab
I posted this a few weeks back because everyone kept asking this over and over.

IT IS AN ELECTION REGULATION IN OHIO!

http://serform2.sos.state.oh.us/sos/elections/statewide/provisions_recounts.htm

Provisions for Recounts


Outline Of Recount Procedures
(R.C. 3515)
A. ELIGIBILITY

Automatic Recount
a) A recount is required in any district, county, municipal or township election if the number of votes cast for the declared winning candidate (or winning side on an issue) does not exceed the number of votes cast for the defeated candidate (or issue) by a margin of one-half of one percent or less of the total vote. The board of elections orders the recount for county, municipal, township and school district elections. The Secretary of State orders the recount for all other elections.

b) In a statewide election a recount is required if the margin of votes is one-fourth of one percent or less.



Requested Recount
a) Any candidate who was not declared elected may request, in writing, a recount of the votes cast in any precinct for all candidates for the particular office. Such request is necessary only in races in which the margin of votes was more than one-half of one percent.

b) Any group of five or more qualified electors who declare that they voted “for” an issue that was defeated, or “against” an issue that passed may request a recount. One member of the group must be designated as chairperson of the group.

DETERMINING ONE-HALF OF ONE PERCENT


One To Be Elected
Where there are two or more candidates for a single office, such as mayor, the votes for all candidates in that race are added to obtain the total vote. For example:

Candidate A 2,845 votes (declared elected)

Candidate B 2,815 votes (defeated)

Candidate C 2,795 votes (defeated)



The total vote for the office is 8,455. Of that total, ½ of 1% is 42 votes. Candidate A defeated Candidate B by 30 votes, which is less than ½ of 1%. Candidate A defeated Candidate C by 51 votes, which exceeds ½ of 1% of the total vote cast for the office of mayor. However, because one of the defeated candidates was within the margin, the entire race is automatically recounted.

Several To be Elected
The “declared winning candidate” refers to the candidate whose election is disputed, rather than to all of the candidates declared elected. Thus, if five candidates seek election as council members-at-large, with three to be elected, only the vote’s cast for Candidates 3, 4, and 5 are regarded as the total number of votes cast for the third council seat in computing the margin for an automatic recount. For example:

Candidate 1 4,200 votes (elected)

Candidate 2 4,100 votes (elected)

Candidate 3 2,300 votes (declared elected)

Candidate 4 2,275 votes (declared defeated)

Candidate 5 2,250 votes (defeated)

Do not include the votes cast for Candidates 1 and 2 in computing the “total vote” cast for the third council seat. The votes cast for Candidates 3, 4, and 5 total 6,825. Of that total, ½ of 1% is 34 votes. Candidate 3 defeated Candidate 4 by 25 votes, which is less than ½ of 1%. Candidate 3 defeated Candidate 5 by 50 votes, which exceeds ½ of 1% of the “total vote” cast for the third council seat. An automatic recount must be ordered on the basis of the margin of votes cast for Candidates 3 and 4. Only the votes for Candidates 3, 4, and 5 are recounted, not all five candidates.

APPLICATION
Written Application for a Requested Recount
A written application for a requested recount must be filed within 5 days after the certification of the official count with the county board of elections for elections within the county, with the board of elections of the most populous county in multi-county district elections, or with the Secretary of State for recount of a statewide race or issue.

Deposit
a) The applicant(s) must file a deposit equal to ten dollars ($10) for each precinct to be recounted.

b) The deposit is to cover the cost of the recount, any unused balance is refundable to the applicant if all precincts are not counted.

BEFORE THE RECOUNT
Establish Time of the Recount
No recount may be held prior to the official canvass and certification. The board must fix the time, method and place of the recount. A recount must be held within 10 days after the declaration of official results or 10 days after an application is filed.

Notice To Candidates
The director must notify all candidates or issue chairpersons in the race of the time and place by certified mail not later than five days before an automatic or requested recount is held.


Witnesses
a) Each candidate or issue chairperson in the race is entitled to one witness for each counting team or tabulating unit.

b) A witness may observe, but not interfere with the recount nor touch the ballots.

c) Appointments of witnesses must be in writing signed by the candidate or issue chairperson.

STOPPING A RECOUNT
At anytime after a recount is ordered but before the recount is held, the declared losing candidate or issue chairperson may file a written request to stop the recount. If more than one losing candidate is entitled to the recount, each of the candidates must file such written request. The board must grant the request.
At any time during a recount, the declared losing candidate or candidates or issue chairperson may file a written request to stop the recount. If the board finds that results of the recount at that point will not change the official results, the recount is stopped. If the board finds otherwise, the request to stop recounting must be denied and the recount continued until all ballots from the precincts involved have been counted.
RECOUNT PROCEDURES
All Voting Systems
a) The recount must be conducted by teams having equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans.

b) Total votes cast must be compared to the number of voters listed in the pollbook, poll list, or signature pollbook records. In the presence of at least two election officials of different political parties, the records must be available for visual inspection by witnesses. The witnesses shall not be permitted to handle the records.

c) Absentee ballot envelopes returned after the polls closed may be viewed by the witnesses. The observer may not see the actual ballots, only the ballot envelopes, which must still be sealed.

d) Disputed ballots may be settled as they arise by the board or by a majority of the employees designated as teams, if so delegated by the board.

e) Ballots must be handled only by members of the board, director, deputy director or other designated employees of the board.

f) Votes cast for write-in candidates must checked to determine
if the candidate is a qualified write-in candidate and for an overvoted ballot

g) Witnesses may observe the inspection of the ballots.

Paper Ballots
a) Count as on election night, or

b) Sort the ballots using the stack method, then count each stack. The stack method means sorting by candidate, yes or no vote, for or against vote, and overvote or no vote.

Voting Machines (including those with printer-packs)
a) Check the public and protective counters to verify that the numbers correspond with the poll book records.

b) Check the candidate counters and rotation to verify that they match the proper candidate, question or issue.

c) Record the votes cast.

Punchcards
Test the Program
a) Prepare a new test deck of ballot cards that are punched and then manually count them. This deck must not be the same test deck used for the official count.

b) Process the test deck through the computer to verify that the computer count matches the hand count.

c) If the hand count and the computer count do not match, but the hand count is accurate, all ballots must be manually counted.

The Recount

a) Ballot cards must be inspected for hanging chad attached by one or two corners, mutilations, and other invalidities. If a chad is attached by three or four corners, a vote shall not be counted for that particular candidate, question or issue.

b) Overvotes and blank ballots may be separated from the stack at this time and placed at the top of the stack after the header cards.

c) Ballot page assemblies and rotation header cards must be checked for each precinct for candidate positions to verify that each candidate, question, or issue has been properly identified.

d) The board must randomly select whole precincts whose total equals at least 3% of the total vote. These precincts’ ballots must be manually counted.

e) Run the manually counted precincts through the computer.

f) If the computer count does not match the hand count, and after rechecking the manual count the results are still not equal, all ballots must be hand counted. If the results of the computer count and the hand counted ballots are equal, the remainder of the ballots may be processed through the computer and results tabulated electronically.

g) At the conclusion of the recount, the program must be retested using the pre-audited test deck.

Optical Scan
Test the Program

a) Prepare a test stack of ballots that are pre-marked and then manually count them.

b) Process the test stack through the tabulator to verify that the tabulator total matches the hand count.

The Recount

a) If the hand count and the computer count do not match, but the hand count is accurate, all the ballots must be manually counted.

b) Ballots must be inspected for mutilations and other invalidities.

c) Ballots must be checked for proper candidate position and to verify each candidate, question, or issue has been properly identified.

d) The board must randomly select whole precincts whose total
equals at least 3% of the total vote and must manually count
those precincts’ ballots.


e) Run the manually counted precincts through the tabulator.

f) If the tabulator count does not match the hand count, and after rechecking the manual count the results are still not equal, all ballots must be hand counted. If the results of the tabulator count and the hand counted ballots are equal, the remainder of the ballots may be processed through the tabulator.

g) At the conclusion of the recount, the program must be retested using the pre-audited test stack of ballots.

6. Direct Record Electronics (DRE)

Test the Program

a) Prepare a test cartridge.

b) Process the cartridge through the computer.

c) Verify that the cartridge results match the pre-determined votes cast for candidates, issue and questions.

d) If the totals do not match, check programming and rerun the test program until the totals match.

The Recount

a) Check the public counters and protective counters to verify that the numbers on those counters correspond to verify that the numbers on those counters correspond with the pollbook, poll list, or signature pollbook records.

b) Check the rotation on those machines to verify that they match the proper candidates, questions, or issues.

c) Process cartridges through the tabulator. If the totals are different than the totals of the official count, compare cartridge totals against paper audit trail report.

d) At the conclusion of the recount, the program must be retested using the pre-audited cartridge.

The procedures described in this outline are the basic requirements for conducting a recount. If the board of elections feels the results warrant further investigation at any period during the conduct of the recount, it may institute more rigorous recounting procedures, such as hand counting a larger percentage of precincts, using programming options which total overvotes and/or undervotes, hand counting all precincts, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. thanks Carolab
Edited on Thu Jan-20-05 02:13 PM by Bill Bored
This is not actual statute, but it seems to match the bill I posted above. There's supposed to be a book called "Laws of Ohio" which the SOS maintains. Maybe I should Google his site instead of the legislature's. Anyway, while the random precinct selection clause was clearly violated during the recount, none of this addresses the original count. Let's search for the relevant laws governing that, if any.

Also, when they say to check ballot orders (see The Recount item c in your post above), can this actually be done for every ballot in a stack? One of the main arguments for fraud is that ballot orders were switched and counted on the wrong machines, which in Kerry-heavy precincts, would favor Bush (Bush would get more of Kerry's votes than the other way around).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC