The 2014 US Elections Manipulated?

[Stevepol]

Last edited Tue Apr 21, 2015, 05:50 PM - Edit history (1)

Kathy Dopp has completed a statistical analysis of the 2014 mid-term elections and these are some of her findings:

"The probability that disparities between predicted and reported 2014 election gubernatorial and senatorial vote margins were caused by random sampling error is virtually zero. Larger than average magnitude disparities are exhibited primarily in states conducting no or low-quality post-election audits. An analysis of Maryland's election data by ballot type statistically confirms vote miscount as an explanation for its unexpected outcome."

The states that showed a disparity between the predicted results and the actual results for both gubernatorial and senatorial contests which were sufficient to alter election outcomes were: MD, IL, FL, & KS. These four states all used "inauditable voting systems or failed to conduct post-election audits." In NV, TN, NY, OH, and SD, the post-election disparities were "large but smaller than winning margins."

Living in KS, I can attest to the fact that many people here were very surprised at the final voting results.

Dopp's study (a pdf) can perhaps be accessed through the following, although I'm not quite sure how this is done:

SSRN-id2596336.pdf (There is also a longer version at: http://sssrn.com/abstract=2524093)

Earlier I posted Kathy's email and a responder suggested I might want to delete her email address because it could lead to spam sent her way. I have deleted it, and I hope she didn't receive any unwanted attention from the well-funded spammers who oppose free and fair elections, meaning "VERIFIABLE" and preferably always "audited" elections, when opti-scans are used and there's paper to use to cross check.

I speak for myself when I say I hope people do not give up on the dream of having verifiable elections once again in the US, but I suspect that Kathy agrees with me as do many at the DU.

[DetlefK]

1. Because pen&paper is sooo inconvenient.

[CrispyQ]

25. There's also an instant gratification component to our culture.

We have come to expect the election results before we go to bed at night. Add to that, the media's desire to be the first network to declare a winner. Our electoral process is a fucked up and corrupted mess from top to bottom. It needs a complete overhaul.

[DetlefK]

36. Just an example: voting in Germany

When you move to a city, you have to register there. Among others, the administration automatically adds you to the local voter roll and has you deleted from your old voter roll.

2-4 weeks before the election you get a personalized notification sent to your address when and where you will get to vote. The notification is also your ID that you are eligible to vote.

Voting in Germany is ALWAYS on Sundays. Always.

The polls are open 9AM to 7PM. I prefer a nice Sunday-afternoon stroll with my vote.

The polling-volunteers receive your notification, cross-check it with their voter-roll and hand you the paper-ballot.

You get into a polling-booth and mark your choice with an ink-pen.

The votes are counted by hand. And anybody is free to stay and watch the volunteers actually count the votes.

The first exit-polls are available for the newscast at 7PM.

The results get updated live on TV every few minutes as the precincts report in. (Alternated with interviews, political commentary...)

The final results are available for the newscast at 8PM.

[yeoman6987]

58. One word 80 million to 320 million

We are to big. It would be an administrative nightmare.

[ahlnord]

67. Not so.

Not true that it would be too cumbersome; it is the way we always used to do. The size of each precinct is what matters. That is where the count takes place. It is as do-able as counting the results of a larger high school election.

[FourScore]

70. exactly. n/t

[RoccoR5955]

77. That is the excuse that they always use

for EVERYTHING. The US is too big for that.
I call BS. Where there's a will, there's a way.

[billhicks76]

65. Holy Crap

Ban electronic voting machines and do it exactly this way.

[elehhhhna]

62. no precinct inthe US with more than 1800 voters

Totally manually countable,.especially with 40% turnouts, tops.

[merrily]

32. Boston used pencil and paper in 2004, but machines counted.

Later, you could use a machine, but the ballot was still paper. I continue to opt for the pencil.

[PotatoChip]

34. We don't use pens- Number 2 pencils are what is provided in my town.

Also, the ballots are hand counted, even though they've been making us fill in those little ovals (like a standardized school test) instead of check marks -since 2010.

[libtodeath]

2. This is how Democratic candidates get millions more votes then repukes

but they end up in the majority.

[hootinholler]

3. Md is finally getting rid of the machines

Hogan's winning the election was a surprise to me, but then again Brown ran a lackluster campaign and the koch bros were beating the rain tax drum for Hogan.

[elleng]

51. Are we getting rid of the machines?

Sure hope so, hoot.

[hootinholler]

55. We are!

:greenbouncythingOjoy:

Here ya go!

[elleng]

57. GREAT, hoot!

'In an era that increasingly relies on paperless technology, Maryland is about to revert to using old-fashioned pen and paper to elect its leaders..

The Board of Public Works is expected to approve a $28 million contract Wednesday to replace Maryland's touch-screen voting system with machines that scan paper ballots, which voters will mark with a pen or pencil.

The contract comes more than seven years after the legislature decided the state should replace tens of thousands of touch screens deemed unreliable and susceptible to fraud.

Since then, arguments and tough budget times have repeatedly delayed efforts to replace the machines with a system that has a verifiable paper record.

"We, for a generation of elections, have had no paper trail," said Del. Jon Cardin, a Baltimore County Democrat and a leading proponent of scrapping the touch-screen system.

The new system is expected to be in place for the 2016 presidential election.

Maryland was among the first states to abandon paper balloting after the 2000 presidential election, when butterfly ballots and "hanging chads" in Florida threw the results of the contest into doubt for weeks.'

[deutsey]

79. I'm glad to hear that we're getting rid of those damn things

Never trusted them because there is no transparency or ability to independently validate the results. I've always thought that if we had to use these machines there should at least be a separate paper trail.

After you press the touchscreen and cast your ballot, you get a receipt indicating how you voted and it gets slipped into a separate box. If there was the need for a recount or a discrepancy in the outcome, count the receipts.

[newfie11]

4. We know this is happening

Now how do we stop it? The re pugs will fight change tooth and nail.

[bbgrunt]

6. and the Dems won't fight at all.

[Autumn]

28. In fact they and their backers will deny it ever happened.

[certainot]

37. the notion that the machines were going to save money and

end the totally made up "hanging chad" problem, and reduce the chance dems counting votes in those back rooms were cheating, was a regular rw radio meme over many years.

and for the last decade ALEC has used the immigration issue, with RW radio constantly demonizing all brown people and especially the 'illegals' streaming across the border, to sell voter suppression/ID legislation successfully.

the problem is the ability of republicans to dominate the portion of radio airwaves used for talk.

you're right, they will fight any reform tooth and nail and the left needs to attack their best tool for doing that, the one that does the groundwork for everything they do - talk radio. they will scream FREE SPEECH! and "dems are cheating" from 1000 very loud coordinated radio stations at any hint of election reform, every time- it always works. and we're going the other way.

the left needs to attack to make up for the advantages they have with money and election fraud.

not only is talk radio their most important weapon it is very vulnerable. stop rush has pushed them way into debt (20 bil for clear channel i think), so they're having to subsidize it big time. and they'll keep doing that at least till 2016 and win a lot of elections because of it. it used to be practically free, paid for with advertising.

the left could completely destroy their talk radio advantage by pushing some of the 90 universities that broadcast sports on 270 limbaugh stations (many of the loudest in the country) to start honoring their mission statements and start looking for apolitical alternatives. advertisers would drop like flies just at the mention of it. if a few unis did that, others would be shamed into following. the publicity of student protests at those universities relative to all the issues those radio stations sell and have sold for 25 years will inhibit media and politicians from repeating the rw memes and talking points they sell.

without that monster radio advantage the left routinely ignores, they will lose big time across the board in 2016.

[Phil1934]

5. the original study

It's fascinating how the larger Wisconsin districts had more flipping where it would not be as noticed and the counties with paper machines showed no trend on their exit polls. http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1210/S00105/rigged-elections-for-romney-michael-collins.htm and we suspect it's been happening since this 2004 "accident" one day before having to testify to Congress http://www.rawstory.com/news/2008/Killed_GOP_pilot_suspected_plane_had_1222.html

[malaise]

9. Amazing how that has never been investigated

One day Rove will pay

[Enthusiast]

7. Republicans cheat. It is one of the qualities of one without ethics.

They have been cheating for decades.

[titaniumsalute]

8. For whatever reason

It seems the whole world focuses and cares during Presidential elections. There will be poll watchers, thousands of attorneys lined up to make sure is kosher, etc. But the midterms just seem to happen while people go on with their daily lives.

[-none]

10. I was surprised when Brownback "won".

But with the conflict of interest of the Secretary of State also being the Republican Party Chair in Kansas, and being on the record of doing everything to make sure Republicans won, what can you expect? The guy should be in prison for election fraud.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

60. It seems mystifying to me

That Secretarys of State can also serve as party chair. No conflict of interest, really?


Don't forget that Katherine Harris was Bush's campaign chair AND SOS in 2000.

[-none]

82. It is obvious that laws are for the other person.

Republicans can do whatever it takes to win... and they often do. Kansas uses electronic voting machines.
Just before the election, polling indicated Davis was the favorite, yet Brownback won by a comfortable margin.

[kracer20]

11. Email Link

I don't have enough posts to PM you, but you should remove her email from the posting. Great way to send lots of spam her way...

Thanks for the OP though!

[brooklynite]

12. Name a political person who believes the machines were hacked...

None of the candidates, political officials or campaign managers I know thinks it happened.

I find the post-mortems I'VE heard (bland campaign messaging, a Senate that decided not to push critical legislation) to be far more convincing. Saying "we were robbed" is an easy out, because it removes any responsibility from us.

[HelenWheels]

24. Howard Dean

always knew there was cheating with the machines. He even had a demonstration on how to do it.

[brooklynite]

45. Name an election Dean was in that was affected by vote hacking...

He came in third in the Iowa caucus, which didn't use voting machines, and crashed an burned the next week in New Hampshire.

My point is that no political person WITH A STAKE IN THE OUTCOME has claimed that their race was affected by hacking.

[Ford_Prefect]

49. Their reason is the same as those Pols who will not question the events leading to 9/11.

Many of them are afraid that to ask such questions implies the system is broken, perhaps as broken as those who fear it truly is have been saying. They cannot entertain the idea of some meaningful level of interference in voting processes. It is not in their political DNA to allow doubt of the system on such a scale.

They are not stupid as such but they have significant blind spots. That is according to my good friend who has testified in committee hearings on internet security and encryption. He said that there are some very intelligent people who cannot somehow see problems in front of their own noses...even when those problems are laid out clearly on a level the average TV audience could not ignore. He said it was a stunning and sobering revelation to realize that they simply could not acknowledge the degree of the problems or the potential impact. This was outside of any comment by those representatives who had a contrary agenda.

He said it was almost as if they were blinded by some religious level of belief that made it impossible for them to hear the simple truth...as if it had not been spoken out loud.

I have seen the same kind of thing during testimony that shaped the law we have regulating electronic voting in North Carolina. Intelligent responsible people who could not grasp the real possibilities of interference: eg. How simple and easy it is to do on some systems, and how to hide it. The strategies of misdirection, the levels of intervention that are possible, How few people it takes to do it, etc.

During WWII many people did not believe stories that thousands upon thousands of Jews, Gypsies and many others were being systematically murdered by the SS. The often repeated remark was that it simply could not be true. No civilized nation would allow it nor pursue large scale genocide as political policy. Post-war many continued their disbelief even after the Nazi's own films of these events were shown. The idea that civil law could be perverted on such a scale was one of their reasons to argue that it could not be true.

I know how some of the systems can be adjusted. I have seen the evidence and talked to the system engineers about back doors to the servers and to the internet itself. It is possible, and most likely has happened more often than we could ever prove...simply because it really is just that easy to do it if you have the skills, the access, and most importantly the political will to do it. Have no doubt that those who can distort the election system to suit their purposes will do so. They have never avoided the opportunity before.

It has been said elsewhere regarding other topics: If it walks like a duck and it talks like a duck, you'd better start re-counting your chickens.

[brooklynite]

80. So you're saying that NOT ONE SINGLE ELECTED OFFICIAL OR CANDIDATE is courageous enough?

Convenient.....

[deutsey]

81. +1

[Jackpine Radical]

31. Yes, I was quite impressed with that Bayesian analysis

the Dems published refuting the findings of Michael Charnin et al. (Remember our dear old TIA?).

In other words, what the fuck do they know about it?

[tritsofme]

47. I'm 99.999778% sure I remember him

I just couldn't say for certain.

That guy was so wacked out, IIRC, that he insisted the 1988 election was "stolen".

The sort of nonsense in this OP is right on par. Maybe he wrote it?

[merrily]

35. For once, we semi-agree. See my reply 27, posted before I started reading the thread.

[mariawr]

13. Republicans make the voting machines. So you should expect this. nt

[Takket]

14. bibi learned from the GOP

I was following Israeli polls leading up to their election and with the exception of a small bump in the days after Bibi spoke to congress, NONE of the polls showed bibi's party winning the majority. All the polls showed them down by a seat or two, and they wound up winning by I think 4... and the world just goes "oh, its crazy, I guess EVERY poll was wrong" and nobody asks how that can be possible..........

GOP is no different.

[RufusTFirefly]

15. Off-year elections and down-ticket races

This is where much of the manipulation is happening. Most people aren't paying attention to manipulations that have major bottom-up consequences, such as increased leverage in gerrymandering.

[kairos12]

16. This is exactly how the rethugs will try to take the Presidency in 2016. Otherwise, they don't have

the numbers. This was a trial run.

[Hannahcares]

17. Unusual voting patterns in larger districts

For the 2012 election, much work was undertaken on historic patterns of vote "shifts" in larger districts in Republican primaries. Francois Chocette and others compiled excellent studies on these trends in the primaries. Jonathon Simon has also done work in this area. Will try to find the links. DU can be helpful here if we do our homework and keep this issue alive.

[Botany]

18. My spidey sense already told me 2014 was a very dirty election

Scott Walker's "win" in his recall election never passed the smell test too.

In very red counties in N.W. Wisconsin more people signed recall petition then
voted for him in the 2010 election but still he won the recall election?

[GoneFishin]

38. I don't believe Walker won either.

[Botany]

83. In the recall election the voting in both Madison and Milwuakee was so heavy ...

..... that the quick call of the outcome really shocked me.

[Bluenorthwest]

19. Basic issue with the verbiage here. The 'US' does not hold elections, the States do. Some States

have lovely, verifiable systems in place, big old turn out, ever increasing voter rolls and other States don't. The time between the elections is the perfect time to be seeking improvements in your State's voting systems. It's not the stuff of dreams but the product of work and organization.

[DallasNE]

20. Inauditable Voting Systems

This seems to be a selling point for these systems. How can they even be legal? And why would anyone attempt to develop such a system. As a retired IT guy I can tell you that every online system has a log file that keeps tabs on all online activity - no exceptions. And what kind of redundancy do these systems have in case of a crash. Do you think an ATM is inauditable? Why would a vote not be treated with the same respect as cash? There can only be one purpose for such a design and that would be to allow for the manipulation of an election.

[Jerry442]

59. Exactly. Nobody would tolerate ATMs that move $$$ around mysteriously...

...so they don't. Why, oh, why do we tolerate voting systems that don't have the same safeguards that ATMs have? Is it because we want unreliable voting?

[davidpdx]

21. Here is a direct link to the study via Google Scholar

http://electionmathematics.org/em-audits/US/2014/USElections2014.pdf

[Cryptoad]

22. AS OLe Comrade Stalin use to say,,,,,

it aint who votes ,,, its who counts the votes!

[ieoeja]

26. Illinois? The senatorial and gubernatorial races went exactly as predicted and polled.

Quinn (D) was easily defeated because, while an extremely competent governor, he is a hopelessly incompetent candidate. Raised Illinois income tax for the first time in decades without once bothering to point out that Illinois had the drop dead lowest income tax of the 42 states with an income tax.

How do you not bring up that fact?

Durbin (D) was easily re-elected.

I don't know about the other states. But it makes absolutely no sense for Illinois to be on this. There was no disparity between the predicted results and the actual results.

[HereSince1628]

39. I saw that too. WI was a place her re-examination showed strange things + isn't mentioned at all

She actually undertook this effort to confirm outcomes of strangeness reported by other investigators for WI voting for Walker.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

41. Agreed.

[merrily]

27. Rec for visibility. Democrats in Congress had a real chance to do something about elections between

January 2007 and January 2011. At the very least, they could have made Republicans go on record as voting against clean elections.'

They did not do either, though Waxman did hold a hearing on how easy it would be to rig voting machines. This after yelping about two stolen Presidential elections in a row.

If that doesn't speak volumes, maybe someone would rather not be spoken to. JMO

Guess it's easier for Democrats to go on and on about the big bad Republicans stealing elections than it is for Democrats to ask Democratic politicians, whose jobs frickin' depend on elections, why they choose to do nothing.

[Ford_Prefect]

63. Some of them cannot openly discuss it because to do so would invite further scrutiny of a broken

system.

How do you run for election in a suspect voting system? Would it mean politicians who are elected or re-elected must be getting inside help? Would it mean some of those same politicians would have to give up the lucrative "sponsorships" and endorsements they currently enjoy?

The voters might not vote if they believed the system won't count the votes correctly. Worse yet they may insist the whole thing is changed. Imagine that?

See also # 49, (above).

[merrily]

68. Yes, I know the classic excuse is that Democrats don't want to undermine confidence in the vote.

They'd just rather claim, or hint, every election got stolen from them, hold hearings, and then do nothing about the alleged theft of elections.

Not buying it. It makes no sense.

Even if I buy it, who gave Democratic politicians the power to decide the Republicans stealing my vote is not worth doing anything about?

[Ford_Prefect]

75. Democrats AND Republicans have a very real stake in maintaining faith in the voting process.

Members on both sides need to believe in it for themselves and for their constituents, without reference to any particular election event. That seems rather obviously a cornerstone of faith in the local as well as national process.

There are whole histories of other methods for adjusting how the vote got tallied and who got counted long before the electronic option. That it happened in other eras and under other conditions argues that it works for those willing to use such methods to guarantee winning an election. Only the process has changed. Indeed we are seeing the return of many of those methods as embodied in the recent gerrymandering of voting districts under Republican legislatures and governors abetted by compromised state judiciaries. Which is not to mention the entire range of legalized dis-incentives regarding who is qualified to vote, when, where, and how.

We know it happened in Florida and Ohio previously. We suspect it has happened in other places and elections. I can understand that the math taken alone can seem not quite hard enough proof. That same math should be a warning that the system needs transparency and uniformity it currently lacks.
In no other western country is there a methodology of voting for national office so easy to manipulate.

Your contention is that it has not happened because you don't accept the evidence as sufficient. You see it as essentially circumstantial, if I understand your position.

My contention and that of others more qualified to speak is this: Show me irrefutable evidence that it cannot have happened. I would like to believe in the process as genuinely representative. A phrase from cold war days seems quite relevant to me here: Trust, but always verify.

The degree to which Republican operatives have gone to improve their chances of winning seems to make clear that IF such methods exist they would certainly be used to advantage.

[merrily]

84. I never contended that messing with the vote has not happened.

You misread my post.

[turbinetree]

29. I think

we should demand a pencil and paper ballot and to have it counted right then and there in the precinct along with a black board showing the tally in live format, or use the model that will be used in Oregon---mail in ballot.

This will eliminate the Diebold computers being used presently----corruption, especially when it comes to voting-----Hey, MD why is Andy Harris winning?

[Martin Eden]

30. The United States is NOT the shining example of DEMOCRACY for the world

NOT while casting ballots are prone to error in recording voter intent
NOT while voting results can be manupulated to alter outcomes
NOT while gerrymandering distorts the will of the people
NOT while voter suppression exists
NOT while elections and politicians are purchased by billionaires

We have the technology to accurately record voter intent and prevent results from being manipulated.

Why is this not being done?

[Punx]

33. Machines can't be audited.

Here’s the thing, if the machines can’t be audited, then any claim has as much merit as the results the machines produce. I’d say polls just before, and exit polls the day of might be better indicators. If I say there’s a 10% red shift to the results based on polling you can dismiss me, but you can’t prove my claim is wrong that the machines miscounted because there is no paper trail.

Also there’s this:

http://cjonline.com/news/2015-04-01/wichita-state-mathematician-sues-kris-kobach-sedgwick-county-elections-commisioner


I’m constantly thankful that I live in Oregon. Yes the machines could be programmed to miscount the ballots, but as a former Auditor, I can tell you that a simple recount of a portion of the paper ballots would expose a miscount pretty readily.

[sketchy]

40. Yes, that mathematician is Beth Clarkson

She has her own website bethclarkson.com where she talks about her lawsuit.

http://bethclarkson.com/


She's being ignored by national media, and not enough attention here yet either.

[Punx]

43. Thank you for the link

Will bookmark it and follow her efforts in the future. Very convenient that the tapes aren't available for audit.

To quote Thom Hartmann, "Voting is the beating heart of democracy." And we know the Republicans don't believe in Democracy."

[sketchy]

44. You're welcome

and welcome to DU!

[eridani]

46. WA State has paper ballots and scanning machines. The apaer ballots are audited, but--

--I don't like the fact that King County audits only county-wide issues and candidates. This is because they don't separate ballot batches by LD and city jurisdictions--all are mixed up together.

[reddread]

42. Fresno County had a reputable elections supervisor, but then..

http://abclocal.go.com/story?section=news/politics&id=8497135

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2013/03/17/there-was-a-recount-on-the-prop-37-vote-and-it-was-stopped-cold/

a million ways to skin a cat.

[Kip Humphrey]

48. Thank You, Kathy, for your good work and for keeping the candle lit and burning bright.

Before all else we must restore integrity to our voting. Hand Counted Paper Ballots will be America's one and only salvation.

[Dont call me Shirley]

50. Paper ballots, open view of counting.

[blkmusclmachine]

52. "We work for the 1%. Trust us."

[blkmusclmachine]

53. URL: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/09/24/us/replvoting600.jpg

Comments are my own.

[cantbeserious]

72. The Oligarchs, Corporations And Banks Own And Control The Politicians And Media That Own And Control Us

eom

[niyad]

54. ya think????

[blkmusclmachine]

56. 14 Defining Characteristics of Fascism

14.
Fraudulent Elections
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html

[Beartracks]

61. Some would have you believe election prediction is like weather forecasting.

And these are the same people who hope you're not smart enough to realize that weather forecasting isn't just guesswork.

They would like you to think that election predictions can be way off. Just like they hope you assume your local weatherman is always wrong. And they ESPECIALLY hope you're okay with that the notion that election prediction is not a science, but is only "guessing." That way, when an election produces a "surprise" you will just shrug and say okay, back to the Kardashians.

======================

[Indydem]

74. Yes, totally a science.

President Dewey may have something to say about that.

[kimbutgar]

64. Not a good link dead domain

[LongTomH]

66. Has Ms. Dopp published her study in a peer-reviewed journal?

If her colleagues could check her work and possibly validate her conclusions, it would lend weight to the argument that elections in the US are being manipulated.

[czarjak]

69. Proof positive.....

American elections are rigged.

[cliffjames991]

71. NNNN

[captainarizona]

73. How to find out if votes are being flipped.

I have written this before. It is simple ;but not easy. Take a precinct and mail a letter to every democrat and independent who voted. That is public recorded information and tell them your vote may have been flipped to the republicans. If you get back more people saying they voted democrat then votes cast then you know what hits the fan. They will make excuses but the publicity will be devastating as you can hold rallys and demonstrations if local democrats are not afraid. Call on congress to investigate ect. This will work if you want to put forth the effort and will scare vote stealing republican who knows what happens when their caught.

[brooklynite]

78. And if you don't get anything back because the average voter doesn't buy into a conspiracy theory?

...and hasn't got a clue what the votes in their individual precinct "should" have been?

[ellennelle]

76. HANDS ON VOTING!!!

hands on the ballots, hands on the counting.

simple as that.

pass it on.

[sketchy]

85. Kris Kobach on Sedgwick County election lawsuit: Time is past, votes are sealed

This is Kris Kobach responding to Beth Clarkson's lawsuit. This article is from April 5, but I just saw it, and thought more exposure for it might be a good idea.


From the article by Bryan Lowry, Eagle Topeka bureau:

Secretary of State Kris Kobach said a researcher wanting to check the accuracy of voting machines from the November election missed her opportunity to do so before the votes were sealed.

For the first time, Kobach commented Friday on a lawsuit, in which he is a defendant, involving election results in Sedgwick County.

Kobach was added as a defendant Wednesday to a lawsuit brought in the Sedgwick County District Court by Beth Clarkson, the chief statistician for the National Institute for Aviation Research, who is seeking to study the accuracy of reported vote tallies in Sedgwick County. She emphasized that this activity is independent from her duties at the institute.

Clarkson, who is representing herself, wants to study the paper records from Sedgwick County’s electronic voting machines. She is suing Kobach and Sedgwick County Election Commissioner Tabitha Lehman for access to those records.


Read more here:
http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article17477357.html#storylink=cpy