Chelan County Auditor Evelyn Arnold is on the stand. Her department uses the same DIMS system as King County. She explains that her department credits voters to help prevent repeat voting. They also reconcile their various numbers. My favorite quote:
"We want to make sure that all of our numbers match"The only remarkable thing about that statement is that King County officials have so lowered our expectations of what an election official would do, that we now think that it's remarkable for an election official to adhere to some sort of common sense standards.
UPDATE: also said that by reconciling the numbers, was able to identify that one ballot was missing. So they went to look for it, found it and counted it. Would have been nice if King County had done the same thing, wouldn't it.
UPDATE 2: Democrat lawyer Jenny Durkan scored an own goal a moment ago when she asked Arnold to explain why more absentee voters can sometimes be credited than ballots counted. Arnold explained correctly that voters who return their ballots late are credited without getting their ballots counted as are voters who return an empty envelope. The only thing this proves is that if the process is managed corrected, the Number of Voters Credited MUST NECESSARILY be GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO the Number of Ballots Counted. It only heightens concerns about a situation where the Number of Voters Credited is LESS THAN the Number of Ballots Counted. Thanks, Jenny!
UPDATE 3: In response to question from Jeff Even: How does Chelan County report number of ballots returned? Hand count envelopes and also credit every envelope. Those numbers must match. Accumulates those numbers daily. Imagine that.
UPDATE 4: Foreman: Have you ever had more votes cast than voters? Would that be a problem? What would it mean if you did?
Arnold: No. Yes. "It's easy to accidentally run through ballots twice... It happens. that's why we do the reconciliation... If you don't have the number you're shooting for, you could make a big mistake"
[indeed, I'm more inclined to believe that that's what happened at King County MBOS as opposed to outright stuffing]
That's a good argument to split the county!
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on May 24, 2005 10:01 AMEqually shocking that the oppositte happened in Gregore precincts in King County and no where else in the state.
It's all just human error.
Posted by: Andy on May 24, 2005 10:30 AMStrange defense!
Posted by: MrBeach on May 24, 2005 10:34 AMNext argument.
Posted by: pbj on May 24, 2005 10:34 AMI think I heard that the DIMS system in King County was an upgraded version of the one in Chelan...
Posted by: VaCSProf on May 24, 2005 10:42 AM"The court does not believe there is a fraud causation element to this case, for whatever that's worth," Bridges said "I am not saying that the evidence is not admissible."
Posted by: Fred on May 24, 2005 10:56 AMRecently there was a story of a guy getting sent to yakima from KC jail because he had been accused of domestic violence. No proof, no conviction, just an accusation.
Some of you recall my rant with danw on the cost of fraudulent DV accusations???? Well here it is unfolding. Remember that tax on divorce decrees and marriage licenses- here's our just desserts for laying down and giving more money to a busted program.
Some TABS (Taking Action Against Bias in the System) members have been digging into KC jail records to see how many of the inmates are there because of DV. I'm awaiting tally, but the number is large.
Granted many are legit, but DV accusation is the trump all on crying wolf and totally fleecing a defendant of his constitutional rights while awarding tons of tax payer reimbursed privelidges to those who cry wolf- with absolutely no repercussions for fraud. I guess the fraud has spilled over to the elections department.
Posted by: Andy on May 24, 2005 11:00 AMCrediting is not important. LOL. Numbers don't always match. LOL. Who needs to know the total. LOL. Wasn't fraud when Way, Fell and Hunnekens chose not to disclose. LOL. Bridges won't allow Republican's new points based on Way, Fell and Huennekens depositions. LOL.
Posted by: Jeff B. on May 24, 2005 11:14 AMThe size of the descrepancy is likely bigger than is showing.
Posted by: Steve U on May 24, 2005 12:13 PMWhy were almost all of the precincts with more ballots than voters within a 5 mile radius of Lenins' statue?
Posted by: Dogbert on May 24, 2005 12:34 PMHer point was indeed that fewer absentee votes should have been returned out of the whole issue. She asked him to canvass to see how many people did not return the ballots for some reason.
I was left hanging, for I honestly think she was confusing numbers. I have not seen or heard a situation where someone claimed that more ballots were returned than printed and sent. What I have heard is that there were more ballots returned than voters credited with voting absentee.
I suppose in a functioning and integrity based election organization, a quick check of the sworn and submitted reconciliation final report would answer the first question. Actually, it would answer the second as well.
Intriguing thought on her part, but I think she's confusing some of the numbers along the way.
Posted by: Patches Pal on May 24, 2005 12:49 PMI don't really know much about the reconciliation process, but I requested and got 3 absentee ballots on behalf of my adult children who are out of state. I sent them out to them and all three were sent in, but only two were counted (according to the database linked on SoundPolitics.com). The one from out of the country (it was mailed from Mexico) was not counted. I don't know if it didn't make it or if it was late, or what. But, if it didn't make it back for some reason, or if in someone else's case, an absentee ballot that was requested but never filled in and returned, then if they keep track of how many ballets were requested, they would likely see fewer than that returned.
I don't know if that means much or not.
Steve
Posted by: Steve U on May 24, 2005 01:10 PMEven when that happens, though, I would hope that there would be a count of such ballots, so as to allow everything to balance precisely. Otherwise every such ballot envelope received would represent an opportunity for a phony ballot to be generated at any time without being detected. If a precinct is known to have received an empty ballot envelope and yet the number of ballots still equals the number of envelopes received, something would seem fishy.
Posted by: supercat on May 24, 2005 04:37 PM