[E-voting] Report on the 1% Manual Recount for Special Election Nov. 2005 Los Angeles County

[Michael McMahon]

Catherine Ansbro wrote:
> This is an amazing short paper. The small table at the end displays 
> properly if you go to the link. The implications are enormous--it 
> shows the weakness of relying on properly carried out audits, since 
> the results can be ignored, as happened here.
>
> It's also interesting to note just how inaccurate the computer counts 
> were.
The paper seems to be talking about optical scan counting in particular. 
Also, since mechanical
counting with a 1% audit/recount has been used in California for many 
years, I'd say that the
criticism mainly applies to the particular technology they are using in 
LA county, rather than to
computer counting in general.

But I would agree that 1% is too small a sample, and also that 
well-defined procedures
need to be grounded in law, to deal with audit discrepancies.

- Michael