http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/7301446p-7213196c.html
LONG GONE ELECTION: Tabulation method, reliability of
machines are doubted.
By LISA DEMER
Anchorage Daily News
December 20, 2005
The official vote results from the 2004 general election are
riddled with mistakes and discrepancies, are impossible for the public to make
sense of, and should be corrected as soon as possible, the Alaska Democratic
Party says.
To most Alaskans, the election may seem like a long-done
deal, something that concerns only political junkies, candidates and analysts.
But questions have been swirling ever since the polls closed about how the
results were tabulated and the reliability of the electronic voting machines,
said Kay Brown, spokeswoman for the Democratic Party.
For instance, when district-by-district vote counts are
totaled, President Bush received 292,267 votes, according to an analysis by the
Democrats. But his official total was 190,889, a difference of more than
100,000 votes, according to the state Web site.
Everyone agrees you cannot figure out how many votes a
statewide candidate got in a particular district with the present system.
"The numbers just do not add up, and we'd like to get
to the bottom of why," Brown said.
The Democratic Party on Monday filed a request with the
state Division of Elections for the electronic data file of voting results, the
record of who voted in the 2004 general election, and paper results from
machines used in early voting.
Elections officials dispute that the vote results published
on the state's Web site have mistakes. But the data are collected and reported
in ways that the average person cannot make sense of without help, officials
acknowledged.
By the 2006 elections, the state should have a better vote
reporting system in place, said Whitney Brewster, who took over as state
Elections Division director on Nov. 1.
"The information is accurate. It is just not being
reported in the form the Democratic Party would prefer," Brewster said.
The Democrats are raising questions just as Diebold Election
Systems Inc., the controversial company that provides the state's electronic
voting machines, comes under new fire, according to published reports. Two
groups of investors have sued the parent company, Diebold Inc., accusing it of
trying to conceal problems with its voting machines.
In Florida, Gov. Jeb Bush said the state should rethink how
it tests the machines after a county elections official said they could be
hacked into. Diebold's chief executive, Wally O'Dell, quit last week. He
earlier was criticized for inviting people in 2003 to a fundraiser for
President Bush with a letter stating he planned to help "Ohio deliver its
electoral votes to the president."
Efforts to speak with a Diebold company representative late
Monday were unsuccessful.
Alaska has confidence in the Diebold AccuVote machines
because recounts and hand counts have always verified the electronic results,
said Shelly Growden, elections supervisor in the Fairbanks regional office.
Voters fill out paper ballots that can then be compared to
the electronic vote totals, she said.
The state Elections Division publishes voting results on the
Web in two ways. An "official results" summary gives vote totals by
candidate. A "statement of votes cast" breaks down the data in more
detail by House district. It's also considered an official result.
The district-by-district report appears to be full of
quirks, Brown said. The Democrats added all of the votes cast for Bush or
Democrat John Kerry by district and came up with thousands more votes than in
the official summary. Some local races were off too. In a Fairbanks Senate
race, Democrat Rita Allee earned 5,366 votes, according to the
district-by-district report, but just 4,854 in the summary report, Brown said.
In addition, more than 200 percent of the registered voters
in some districts cast ballots, which should be impossible.
There are explanations for the kooky numbers, Brewster and
Growden said.
First, the Municipality of Anchorage had a special election
at the same time as the state general election. If a voter cast ballots in both
elections, the electronic ballot scanners counted each as if from a separate
voter.
"There is no way to trick the tabulation system into
counting that as anything but two votes cast," Brewster said.
Plus, the state pushed early voting, when voters can go to
certain spots before Election Day to vote.
The catch is that those ballots were totaled in each of the
state's four election regions, not reported by House district. The regional
total shows up on the state reporting form in every district.
For instance, in Anchorage's House District 13, the state
reported that 5,865 ballots were cast in early voting for the U.S. Senate race,
the same as in District 14, 15 and every one of the 20 districts in the
Southcentral region. The Southcentral region includes districts 13 through 32,
so the early voting number was repeated 19 extra times.
Therefore, if someone adds up all the vote totals, including
early voting totals, in many races, the number will be inflated.
"If you don't have a degree in mathematics or
engineering, it will always be confusing," said Randy Ruedrich, chairman
of the Alaska Republican Party, who said he's asked the state to change its
format next time around.
Brown said it shouldn't be so complicated or confusing.
"You have to add things together and back things out to
get to the statewide summary and make it all match," Brown said.
The division essentially says "trust us." That is
why the Democrats are asking for data so they can check it all themselves, she
said.
The Democrats are not asserting that anyone hacked into the
computers or that anyone who lost a race really should have won, Brown said.
"We are trying to determine how many votes each
candidate got in each district, and we can't tell that from the public
data," she said.
Daily News reporter Lisa Demer can be reached at
ldemer@adn.com and 257-4390.
© Copyright 2005, The Anchorage Daily News, a subsidiary of
The McClatchy Company
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.