Deep-red Arizona county rejects proposal to hand-count ballots in 2024 elections

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: AP

Updated 7:16 PM EDT, August 2, 2023

PHOENIX (AP) — A northwestern Arizona county has rejected a proposal to hand-count ballots in the 2024 election cycle after the local elections director warned that it would cost more than $1.1 million and involve hiring hundreds of new workers. The Mohave County Board of Supervisors voted 3-2 on Tuesday against adopting a hand count, with supervisors Ron Gould and Hildy Angius voting in favor. Board Chair Travis Lingenfelter said during the meeting that he couldn’t justify the steep costs of a hand count because of Mohave County’s projected budget deficit.

“You can’t talk about any other spending when you have 18 to 20 million dollars deficit,” he said. “I mean, that’s irresponsible.” Prior to the vote, Mohave County Elections Director Allen Tempert told the board that hand counting ballots for upcoming elections would require hiring more than 245 new workers and cost about $1.1 million. Tempert also said workers made errors during a test hand count of 850 ballots conducted in June by his department.

“This job would just be astronomical to try to put together all these people,” he said. Deputy County Attorney Ryan Esplin also expressed concerns about the legality of a hand count. Mohave County is among other counties across the U.S. that have explored tabulating ballots by hand. Prior to the 2022 general election, rural Cochise County in southeast Arizona pursued a hand count before it was stopped by a judge. A similar effort in Nye County, Nevada, was also subject to litigation last year.

While there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election, the prospect of hand counting ballots is popular among some elected officials, activists, and voters who distrust U.S. elections and spread conspiracies about election equipment. Former President Donald Trump and his allies frequently attack voting equipment with unsupported claims. Republican lawmakers in some states have also promoted legislation mandating that ballots be counted by hand instead of by electronic tabulators.

Read more: https://apnews.com/article/mohave-county-handcounting-ballots-ffd222858aa48eeee39fc85a7845bfe9

---

And a brain cell suddenly fired...

[Lonestarblue]

1. Wait! How can a Republican county have a budget deficit? They're against deficits (not)!

We need a law that requires every county to have voting equipment that includes a paper backup. Machine tabulation, assuming the programming has been tampered with by Republicans, is far more accurate than hand counting.

[Delarage]

2. Has not been

I think you meant.

[BumRushDaShow]

3. There already is a law that has been in effect for over 20 years

that requires this.

H.R.3295 - Help America Vote Act of 2002

[107th Congress Public Law 252]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]


[DOCID: f:publ252.107]

[[Page 1665]]

HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT OF 2002

[[Page 116 STAT. 1666]]

Public Law 107-252
107th Congress

An Act



To establish a program to provide funds to States to replace punch card
voting systems, to establish the Election Assistance Commission to
assist in the administration of Federal elections and to otherwise
provide assistance with the administration of certain Federal election
laws and programs, to establish minimum election administration
standards for States and units of local government with responsibility
for the administration of Federal elections, and for other
purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited
as the ``Help America Vote Act of 2002''.

(snip)


TITLE III--UNIFORM AND NONDISCRIMINATORY ELECTION TECHNOLOGY AND
ADMINISTRATION REQUIREMENTS

Subtitle A--Requirements

SEC. 301. VOTING SYSTEMS STANDARDS.

(a) Requirements.--Each voting system used in an election for
Federal office shall meet the following requirements:
(1) In general.--
(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the
voting system (including any lever voting system,
optical scanning voting system, or direct recording
electronic system) shall--
(i) permit the voter to verify (in a private
and independent manner) the votes selected by the
voter on the ballot before the ballot is cast and
counted;
(ii) provide the voter with the opportunity
(in a private and independent manner) to change
the ballot or correct any error before the ballot
is cast and counted (including the opportunity to
correct the error through the issuance of a
replacement ballot if the voter was otherwise
unable to change the ballot or correct any error);
and
(iii) if the voter selects votes for more than
one candidate for a single office--
(I) notify the voter that the voter
has selected more than one candidate for
a single office on the ballot;
(II) notify the voter before the
ballot is cast and counted of the effect
of casting multiple votes for the
office; and
(III) provide the voter with the
opportunity to correct the ballot before
the ballot is cast and counted.
(B) A State or jurisdiction that uses a paper ballot
voting system, a punch card voting system, or a central
count voting system (including mail-in absentee ballots
and mail-in ballots), may meet the requirements of
subparagraph (A)(iii) by--

[[Page 116 STAT. 1705]]

(i) establishing a voter education program
specific to that voting system that notifies each
voter of the effect of casting multiple votes for
an office; and
(ii) providing the voter with instructions on
how to correct the ballot before it is cast and
counted (including instructions on how to correct
the error through the issuance of a replacement
ballot if the voter was otherwise unable to change
the ballot or correct any error).
(C) The voting system shall ensure that any
notification required under this paragraph preserves the
privacy of the voter and the confidentiality of the
ballot.
(2) Audit capacity.--
(A) In general.--The voting system shall produce a
record with an audit capacity for such system.
(B) Manual audit capacity.--
(i) The voting system shall produce a
permanent paper record with a manual audit
capacity for such system.
(ii) The voting system shall provide the voter
with an opportunity to change the ballot or
correct any error before the permanent paper
record is produced.
(iii) The paper record produced under
subparagraph (A) shall be available as an official
record for any recount conducted with respect to
any election in which the system is used.
(3) Accessibility for individuals with disabilities.--The
voting system shall--
(A) be accessible for individuals with disabilities,
including nonvisual accessibility for the blind and
visually impaired, in a manner that provides the same
opportunity for access and participation (including
privacy and independence) as for other voters;
(B) satisfy the requirement of subparagraph (A)
through the use of at least one direct recording
electronic voting system or other voting system equipped
for individuals with disabilities at each polling place;
and
(C) if purchased with funds made available under
title II on or after January 1, 2007, meet the voting
system standards for disability access (as outlined in
this paragraph).
(4) Alternative language accessibility.--The voting system
shall provide alternative language accessibility pursuant to the
requirements of section 203 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (42
U.S.C. 1973aa-1a).
(5) Error rates.--The error rate of the voting system in
counting ballots (determined by taking into account only those
errors which are attributable to the voting system and not
attributable to an act of the voter) shall comply with the error
rate standards established under section 3.2.1 of the voting
systems standards issued by the Federal Election Commission
which are in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(6) Uniform definition of what constitutes a vote.--Each
State shall adopt uniform and nondiscriminatory standards that
define what constitutes a vote and what will be

[[Page 116 STAT. 1706]]

counted as a vote for each category of voting system used in the
State.

(b) Voting System Defined.--In this section, the term ``voting
system'' means--
(1) the total combination of mechanical, electromechanical,
or electronic equipment (including the software, firmware, and
documentation required to program, control, and support the
equipment) that is used--
(A) to define ballots;
(B) to cast and count votes;
(C) to report or display election results; and
(D) to maintain and produce any audit trail
information; and
(2) the practices and associated documentation used--
(A) to identify system components and versions of
such components;
(B) to test the system during its development and
maintenance;
(C) to maintain records of system errors and
defects;
(D) to determine specific system changes to be made
to a system after the initial qualification of the
system; and
(E) to make available any materials to the voter
(such as notices, instructions, forms, or paper
ballots).

(c) Construction.--
(1) In general.--Nothing in this section shall be construed
to prohibit a State or jurisdiction which used a particular type
of voting system in the elections for Federal office held in
November 2000 from using the same type of system after the
effective date of this section, so long as the system meets or
is modified to meet the requirements of this section.
(2) Protection of paper ballot voting systems.--For purposes
of subsection (a)(1)(A)(i), the term ``verify'' may not be
defined in a manner that makes it impossible for a paper ballot
voting system to meet the requirements of such subsection or to
be modified to meet such requirements.

(d) Effective Date.--Each State and jurisdiction shall be required
to comply with the requirements of this section on and after January 1,
2006.

(snip)

Much more (including provisional ballots, etc) - https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-bill/3295/text

[Think. Again.]

4. The Federal Election Commission...

...should doing everything they can to enforce H.R. 3295.

Although I do not believe election tampering affected the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, I do believe that effective auditing of all digital voting must be done to assure that our vote tally's are true and accurate.

There are many possible and undetectable ways of manipulating digital vote counts and these possibilities must be counter-balanced to protect each one of our votes from foul play by any party, country, or individual who attempts to do so.

[BumRushDaShow]

6. We just went through that nightmare in 2020

The problem is that (as I post over and over and over) states "run elections" and the extent at which the federal government can get involved is restricted to general criteria (e.g., VRA violations, accessibility, general security features that need to be available on voting equipment, etc.) but nothing that directs specific manufacturers and how/when to "audit".

Right now in multiple states including AZ, CO, GA, and even here in PA, there are state investigations regarding machine tampering in certain counties - most if not all directed to Dominion Voting Systems machines.

The law requires some kind of "paper trail" but doesn't specify explicit details of what that "paper trail" should look like. And the point of the OP was the irony of the fact that when one wants to do a "hand recount", that it actually costs money to do one, something that the GOP, with their few functional brain cells, finally realized.

[Think. Again.]

9. Perhaps...

...audits of all federal elections could be a federal program, thus assuring the VRA mandated auditability of state's election systems and sidestepping the involvement of local and state election officials altogether?

[BumRushDaShow]

11. Congress (thanks to GOP lunacy) would probably balk at funding that effort

So it probably wouldn't get done to the degree that it should.

[mopinko]

8. afaik, most jurisdictions do some kind of post election audits.

but they dont talk about them.
they are open to poll watchers, but you have to know they are happening. i was a watcher in dupage county in 06 primary. a lot of ppl thought things were hinky there. dem takeover in the co got the organizer of that watch elected clerk. it took someone determined to get us in.

i chatted up cook co clerk about that around that time and he was ‘sure, yeah, we do that every time. no, we dont talk about it.’ he’s the most pro-democracy guy you could find. but this.

i dont get it. maybe it’s changed. these were from ‘yesteryear’ b4 we all went mad.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

5. I'm sure enough volunteers could be found among the electorate.

With many eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.

[BumRushDaShow]

7. Most municipalities can't even find enough poll workers to work the polls

even when they ARE paid. THAT is the reality. Doubtful you'll get any significant enough number of "volunteers".

[republianmushroom]

10. Some are thinking with their head, now.

$1.1 million can do a lot in a county.

[maxsolomon]

12. FAFO,

ding dongs

[onetexan]

13. yea that's not going to go well w Gov Hobbs, SS Adrian Fontes, & AG Kris Mayes - all DEMS

They'll get their red asses handed to them

[MissMillie]

14. They gotta know that it's not just about the money

Given how poll workers are treated, they'd have a nightmare on their hands trying to get people to work the polls.