How are "spoiled ballots" handled?

[Wilms]

Are they destroyed right away? Put in a lock-box? Made available for ballot box stuffing if the WH calls and orders a few more votes?

Is it possible for someone other than the voter to see what they had marked on the ballot they rejected? (This one I'm really interested in, ie: the disabled.)

Do ballots have serial numbers as a matter of law?


Thanks in advanced for answers to these questions and any reasonably funny snarks.

[kiwi_expat]

1. They are surely saved and available for citizens' "inspection"/counting

The newspaper consortium counted the Florida "spoiled ballots" in 2001, months after the 2000 election.

I assumed that "spoiled ballots" would be included in any county's full manual recount in Ohio. I thought that was one of the main reasons for the Greens-Libertarian attempted recount.

[Wilms]

2. Oh. "Those" spoiled ballots.

I was actually looking for info on what happens to ballots that the voter had mis-voted on and turned in for a replacement.

I found this from Maine law

§693. Spoiled ballots

If a voter spoils a ballot, the voter may obtain a replacement, not more than twice, by returning the spoiled ballot to the election clerk in charge of issuing ballots. The warden, ward clerk or deputy warden shall write "Spoiled by voter" on the spoiled ballot and sign it. If a replacement ballot is issued to the voter, the warden, ward clerk or deputy warden shall also mark "Replacement ballot issued" on the spoiled ballot. The election official shall then segregate the spoiled ballot with any other spoiled ballots in an envelope labeled "Spoiled ballots" and shall package and return the envelope of segregated ballots in accordance with section 698. The Secretary of State shall provide the clerk of each municipality with either a label and instructions on proper handling of spoiled ballots or a special envelope printed with this label and instructions. <2003, c. 298, §1 (amd).>

[anaxarchos]

3. Varies by electoral jurisdiction and voting technology.... n/t

[Wilms]

4. Thanks

And a simple search within HAVA for the word "spoiled" or "rejected" yielded little.

[anaxarchos]

5. Try "residual votes".... n/t

[kiwi_expat]

6. "residual votes" means the same as "spoiled ballots": over/under votes.

Under/over votes can be counted in a manual recount (assuming there is a paper trail).

Instead, what you want is "voided ballot"

....or "ruined ballot", "really messed-up ballot" :-)

[Wilms]

8. Thanks!

:7

You'll see what I'm really getting at in post #7

[Wilms]

7. Not much there, either.

I'm wondering if the voter gets to put the messed up ballot in an envelope so that there is the same "privacy" as is expected to be maintained with the actual vote cast.

My interest is relative to mobility-limited voters and coming up with a way to provide a means for them to vote, with paper, and with privacy.

I'm trying to figure out if any laws call for privacy of the uncast vote-if you will-because that would be a design factor for a polling station accessible to a mobility-limited voter.

[roseBudd]

9. I asked my mom that question after inspecting poll books in Warren County

OH. My mom worked the polls in Hamilton County/Cincinnati for years. Spoiled punch cards went into a special envelope. The poll worker then indicates a spoiled ballot on the roster and at the end of the day:

number of voter signatures + total number of ballots used must equal the number of votes minus the total number of spolied ballots.

See Doug Jones's Univ of Iowa chad and punch card web pages for info on auditing an election.

[Wilms]

10. Funny you should mention this guy.

Just came across his work a few days back. It's like Election College (not electoral college). Perhaps deserve's a thread of it's own.

http://www.cs.uiowa.edu/~jones/voting

Thanks

[roseBudd]

13. He is the academic that filed an affidavit for Arnebeck regarding

Greene, Hocking and a couple other counties where Triad reps were meddling.

[kiwi_expat]

11. Wilms is concerned about voter-voided ballots, not "spoiled ballots".

The "Spoiled ballots"(i.e., over-votes plus under-votes) total should indeed equal the voter signatures minus the recorded votes.

Wilms wants to know about ballots that have been voter-voided, because the voter knows he has screwed up the ballot and wants a new ballot. One disabled voter could conceivably void several ballots before getting it right.

[Wilms]

12. Thank you.

You raise an additional point that there could be more than one ballot in need of voiding by a particular voter.

Also, would someone be able to see the markings on that voided ballot?? Would that deprive the voter of privacy??

That some mobility-limited voters can't physically handle paper has become a rallying cry for the Pro-DRE camp. I'm trying to figure out a way to resolve the problem, using a paper ballot mechanically shuttled through the process and into a lock-box, and tossing the DRE out to the curb.

I'm told by a (leading) DRE advocate, that in fact, a paper ballot mechanically shuttled through the process and into a lock-box WOULD satisfy the mobility-limited voter and relieve us of the need for DRE's. But I wanted to check all the bases and inquire about how voided ballots might fit in this scheme.

[roseBudd]

14. in Warren County the voter voided ballots were marked as spoiled

in the poll books we were checking. The poll worker wrote the persons name and street address and the ballot number on a line. If the voter asked for another ballot, the poll worker then wrote spoiled and the new ballot stub number next to the original ballot number. The new ballot stub number would be several numbers later in the ballot book, because other voters would have received ballots in the meantime. The poll books had numbered lines and the line nember and ballot number corresponded until a spoiled ballot threw the numbers out of whack.

[Wilms]

15. Cool.

While the poll worker handles the spoiled ballot, can they see the ballot marks that may have been made by the voter?

In LA, the ballot comes in an envelope that leaves the top portion exposed, but the ballot marks hidden. That's done, I figure for privacy.

[roseBudd]

16. These were punch cards so it is difficult to say whether "seeing"

a punch card constitutes an invasion of privacy. Since I did not work a polling place I don't know who put the spoiled ballots in an envelope, it may have been the voter. One thing you could tell by the poll books was handwriting, for the most part predominantly all one type of handwriting and then it would switch briefly, presumably when the first person went on break.

Now Andy had the roster books which were the books the voters signed, those were much more interesting. Sigs that did not match or were misssing all together.

[ISUGRADIA]

19. In Iowa law voter voided ballots are known as spoiled ballots

[kiwi_expat]

26. "number of voter signatures ....

+ total number of ballots used must equal the number of votes minus the total number of spoiled ballots."

I take it that:
Number of voter signatures must = number of "votes".
Number of ballots-used must = number of "votes" + number of "spoiled ballots".


The other kind of spoiled ballots (over/under votes) is obviously separated out later and noted elsewhere.

[ISUGRADIA]

17. In Iowa, at least for absentees, if a ballot is rejected for

let's say no signature on the affidavit envelope or challenged successfully by one of the two political parties monitoring the count, the ballot is never taken out of the envelope so you could conceivably open it and see how the person voted. Otherwise if an affidavit is in order the ballots are taken out of the envelope, they are in a "secrecy folder" so the bellot is not immediately visible, then put in a pile before counting. There is no serial number on the ballot and no way to id a ballot once accepted for counting.

Now on election day, a person has three chances to vote, if they spoil two ballots the third one is counted no matter what. The spoiled ballots are put in a spoiled ballot envelope and sealed at the end of the night. An accountin of ballots is done like this:

Ballots Delivered- 1000

Ballots Used:

Voted 800

Unvoted 190Spoiled 10

TOTAL AT END OF NIGHT 1000

[ISUGRADIA]

18. In Iowa, at least for absentees, if a ballot is rejected for

let's say no signature on the affidavit envelope or challenged successfully by one of the two political parties monitoring the count, the ballot is never taken out of the envelope so you could conceivably open it and see how the person voted. Otherwise if an affidavit is in order the ballots are taken out of the envelope, they are in a "secrecy folder" so the bellot is not immediately visible, then put in a pile before counting. There is no serial number on the ballot and no way to id a ballot once accepted for counting.

Now on election day, a person has three chances to vote, if they spoil two ballots the third one is counted no matter what. The spoiled ballots are put in a spoiled ballot envelope and sealed at the end of the night. An accountin of ballots is done like this:

Ballots Delivered- 1000

Ballots Used:

Voted 800

Unvoted 190Spoiled 10

TOTAL AT END OF NIGHT 1000

[Wilms]

20. Thanks for that. n/t

[kiwi_expat]

21. So the rejected (over/under) votes are counted as "voted" ....

not lumped in with the voter-voided ballots as "spoiled"?

If the rejected and voter-voided were lumped together, the number of signatures could not be matched to the totals in any way. ("Voted" plus "spoiled" would exceed the number of signatures.)

[ISUGRADIA]

22. Ballots are not rejected for over/under at the polls

So if a voter has filled in two candidates for president the ballot is not take by the tabulatore. It is not pulled into the ballot holder. The election official will see a message on the readout saying "overvoted for race #x." That ballot is spoiled and put into the spoiled ballot envelope. Then the voter can cast a second ballot to correct the overvote. Undervotes: A ballot will be rejected by a tabulator only if no races are marked (all undervoted). A voter could vote for senate only and not president or any other offices and the ballot would still go through.

Now with absentees, if a ballot had an overvote the tabulator has an override mechanism that an election official can push so that the ballot will be accepted. Votes will count for all races except the overvoted ones.

At the polls voted ballots should always equal the number of affidavit slips signed by the voter and number on the tabulator readout. So 800 affidavit slips with signatures= 800 voted ballots = tabulator readout of 800 at end of night. I hope this answered your question. If not please reply. I think IA at least has a very open system for scrutiny.

[kiwi_expat]

23. Iowa does, indeed, have a very impressive system.

If Florida had had Iowa's system in 2000, the overvotes would have been caught in time for the voters to correct their votes, and Gore would have become President!

[ISUGRADIA]

24. Punch cards had been outlawed for a long time in Iowa

before the 2000 votes which i always thought was great. Florida never learned from 1988, that year Buddy McKay was basically robbed of a US Senate Seat because of the overvote/undervote problem with punch cards.

Iowa is pretty good but I am getting scared because with federal money there is talk of putting new machines in many counties including TOUCHSCREENS (damn). I am hoping the Dem Sec of State wises up.

[Wilms]

25. I'm afraid of them pushing DRE's on Iowa, too.

Link here to a story about "super-precincts". Whatever else is wrong with such an arrangement I think some counties are pushing this idea so as to use the money saved for buying electronics.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x345149#345585