top
East Bay
East Bay
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

UC Berkeley Research team: Florida E-Voting Machines Mistallied 130,000+ Votes to Bush

by UC Berkeley
Today, the University of California's Berkeley Quantitative Methods Research Team released a statistical study - the sole method available to monitor the accuracy of e- voting - reporting irregularities associated with electronic voting machines may have awarded 130,000-260,000 or more excess votes to President George W. Bush in Florida in the 2004 presidential election
Today the University of California's Berkeley Quantitative Methods Research Team released a statistical study - the sole method available to monitor the accuracy of e- voting - reporting irregularities associated with electronic voting machines may have awarded 130,000-260,000 or more excess votes to President George W. Bush in Florida in the 2004 presidential election. The study shows an unexplained discrepancy between votes for President Bush in counties where electronic voting machines were used versus counties using traditional voting methods - what the team says can be deemed a "smoke alarm." Discrepancies this large or larger rarely arise by chance - the probability is less than 0.1 percent. The research team formally disclosed results of the study at a press conference today at the UC Berkeley Survey Research Center, where they called on Florida voting officials to investigate.

The three counties where the voting anomalies were most prevalent were also the most heavily Democratic: Broward, Palm Beach and Miami-Dade, respectively. Statistical patterns in counties that did not have e-touch voting machines predict a 28,000 vote decrease in President Bush's support in Broward County; machines tallied an increase of 51,000 votes - a net gain of 81,000 for the incumbent. President Bush should have lost 8,900 votes in Palm Beach County, but instead gained 41,000 - a difference of 49,900. He should have gained only 18,400 votes in Miami-Dade County but saw a gain of 37,000 - a difference of 19,300 votes.

"For the sake of all future elections involving electronic voting - someone must investigate and explain the statistical anomalies in Florida," says Professor Michael Hout. "We're calling on voting officials in Florida to take action."

The research team is comprised of doctoral students and faculty in the UC Berkeley sociology department, and led by Sociology Professor Michael Hout, a nationally-known expert on statistical methods and a member of the National Academy of Sciences and the UC Berkeley Survey Research Center.

For its research, the team used multiple-regression analysis, a statistical method widely used in the social and physical sciences to distinguish the individual effects of many variables on quantitative outcomes like vote totals. This multiple-regression analysis takes into account of the following variables by county:

* number of voters
* median income
* Hispanic/Latino population
* change in voter turnout between 2000 and 2004
* support for Senator Dole in the 1996 election
* support for President Bush in the 2000 election.
* use of electronic voting or paper ballots


"No matter how many factors and variables we took into consideration, the significant correlation in the votes for President Bush and electronic voting cannot be explained," said Hout. "The study shows, that a county's use of electronic voting resulted in a disproportionate increase in votes for President Bush. There is just a trivial probability of evidence like this appearing in a population where the true difference is zero - less than once in a thousand chances."

The data used in this study came from public sources including CNN.com, the 2000 US Census, and the Verified Voting Foundation. For a copy of the working paper, raw data and other information used in the study can be found at: http://ucdata.berkeley.edu/.

Add Your Comments

Comments (Hide Comments)
by rogue @ccess <.>
What I find most interesting in this study is their choice of vote for Dole in 96. Dole lost FL in '96 due in part to Perot's presence in the race.

When I looked at the four counties in Thom Hartmann's piece which he cited as being the weirdest in terms of registered Democrats voting Republican at the top of the ticket, I saw that those counties had gone majority Republican in 88 and 2000 - by big margins. They had each had very small Nader turnouts in 96 and in 2000, but substantial Perot turnouts in 92 and 96. (10-20% of the votes cast, more in the first election.)

My take on it is that for that part of the country, it's fair to consider "republican" support in 2000 and 2004 to be broadly similar to Bush plus Perot or Dole plus Perot in the 92 and 96 elections. Under this assumption, for instance, Florida as a whole would have gone for Dole had Perot been absent in '96, and it would have been a margin of about 180.000 votes. Likewise, FL as whole would have gone for Bush in 92 - by about 900.000 votes. (However, it might well have been much closer in '92 if Perot hadn't been running; I think many that year saw Bush as a dead issue before they voted, and could safely vote for the tiny insane billionaire in protest knowing that in a two-way race Clinton would have won the state. I don't know what the preelection FL polls looked like.)

I'm not sure how much the Dole-only weighting affects the outcome of the study in hand here, and - despite their giving the raw data for analysis - I'm not enough of a stats person to redo the numbers with the Perot turnout included.

My largest interest now is in the Ohio recount and the comparison between that and the county tabulation system. FL is suspicious, but statistics won't be able to persuade folks that the margin was much wider than it should be, sadly.

I hope that the OH recount can be compared to the Black Box Voting FOIA request on the logs of the systems, and I'm fascinated to see how little coverage the recount is getting in the mainstream press.

Tavis Smiley on NPR has run coverage of it but as far as I know, that's about as close as it's really gotten to national interest in the large media.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$110.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network