Election Audits

THE NEW MEXICO 2006 POST ELECTION AUDIT REPORT

Author(s): 
Lonna Rae Atkenson, University of New Mexico
R. Michael Alvarez, Caltech
Thad E. Hall, University of Utah
Journal: 
Collaboration with The University of New Mexico, Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project, University of Utah
Date Published: 
01/01/2009

During the 2007 legislative session, the New Mexico Legislature passed a bill and Governor
Richardson signed it into law, which provides for random voting system audits after every
statewide general election (see §1-14-13.1, NMSA). Specifically, the law provides that county
clerks are to compare the total votes tallied in the general election for the office of president or
governor from a random selection of 2% of the voting systems used during the election
throughout the state to a hand count of the ballots cast on that system. A voting system is

The New Mexico Election Administration Report: The 2006 November General Election

Date Published: 
01/01/2009
Author(s): 
R. Michael Alvarez
Lonna Rae Atkeson
Thad E. Hall

The New Mexico Election Administration Report on the 2006 November General Election is the product of three independent research projects focused on New Mexico’s election administration efforts in the 2006 election. New Mexico has recently implemented a number of significant election reforms intended to create fair, accurate and voter-verifiable election administration systems.

Assessing the impact of voting technologies on multi-party electoral outcomes

Working Paper No.: 
64
Date Published: 
01/01/2009
Author(s): 
Gabriel Katz
R. Michael Alvarez
Ernesto Calvo
Marcelo Escolar
Julia Pomares

This paper presents the first study on the impact of different voting technologies on election outcomes in multi-party elections, analyzing data from a large-scale voting experiment conducted in the 2005 congressional election in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Combining different regression models and matching methods, we estimate the effect of alternative voting technologies on the probability of support for the competing parties in the elections for congress and state legislature.

Russian Elections: An Oxymoron of Democracy

Working Paper No.: 
63
Date Published: 
01/01/2009
Author(s): 
Peter Ordeshook
Misha Myagkov

Considerable controversy swirls around the extent to which Russia’s elections have been falsified. We argue here on the basis of an assessment of aberrant distributions of turnout in official election returns for each or Russia’s national elections beginning in 1995, that falsifications in the form of stuffed ballot boxes and artificially augmented election counts, whose significance was first apparent in its ethnic republics, has now spread to and metastasized within both rural and urban oblast districts.

Ukraine’s 2007 Parliamentary Elections: Free and Fair or Fraud Once Again and the Argument for Election Observers

Working Paper No.: 
62
Date Published: 
01/01/2009
Author(s): 
Peter Ordeshook
Mikhail Myagkov

No abstract available.

On Auditing Elections When Precincts Have Different Sizes

Working Paper No.: 
55
Date Published: 
01/01/2009
Author(s): 
Ronald L. Rivest

We address the problem of auditing an election when precincts may have different sizes, and suggest methods for picking a sample of precincts to audit that takes precinct size into account. one method yields optimal auditing strategies together with an exact measure of its effectiveness (probability of detecting corruption of a given size).

On Estimating the Size and Confidence of a Statistical Audit

Working Paper No.: 
54
Date Published: 
01/01/2009
Author(s): 
Ronald L. Rivest
Javed A. Aslam

We consider the problem of statistical sampling for auditing elections, and we develop a remarkably simple and easily-calculated upper bound for the sample size necessary for determining with probability at least c whether a given set of n objects contains b or more “bad” objects. While the size of the optimal sample drawn without replacement can be determined with a computer program, our goal is to derive a highly accurate and simple formula that can be used by election officials equipped with only a simple calculator.

Qualitative Evaluation: "VotoElectronico: Prueba Piloto 2005, Ciudad De Buenos Aires"

Working Paper No.: 
43
Date Published: 
01/01/2009
Author(s): 
R. Michael Alvarez

The Buenos Aires “VotoElectronico” pilot project took place on October 23, 2005, in the City of Buenos Aires. It involved a pilot test of four different electronic voting systems, in at least 43 voting stations located throughout the City. The purpose of this report is to provide initial qualitative assessments of the pilot project. Quantitative analysis will hopefully be presented at a later date, once detailed data from the pilot project are available for examination.

Auditing Technology for Electronic Voting Machines

Date Published: 
01/01/2009
Author(s): 
Sharon Cohen

Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machine security has been a significant topic of contention ever since Diebold voting machine code turned up on a public internet site in 2003 and computer scientists at Johns Hopkins University declared the machine “unsuitable for use in a general election.” Since then, many people from computer scientists to politicians have begun to insist that DREs be equipped with a paper trail. A paper trail provides a paper printout for the voter to approve at the end of each voting session.

Measuring the Improvement (Or Lack of Improvement) In Voting Since 2000 in the U.S.

Working Paper No.: 
36
Date Published: 
01/01/2009
Author(s): 
Charles Stewart III

This paper summarizes what systematic evidence exists about the performance of the American voting process in 2004 and proposes a comprehensive system of performance measures that would allow citizens and officials to assess the quality of the voting system in the U.S.

Syndicate content