eCoustics.com - Everything Hi-Fi Online
The unbiased resource Home | Reviews | Forum | Shop | What's New?  
   for consumer electronics product
       reviews, buying guides, and more...

Search:
Go!


Report: Florida data suggests e-voting problems

Analysis by U.C. Berkeley researchers contends there was link between e-voting machines and a pro-Bush skew in Florida.
By Robert Lemos
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: November 18, 2004, 8:45 PM PST

Story Tools

TalkBackE-mailPrint del.icio.us Digg this

Researchers at the University of California at Berkeley published on Friday a statistical analysis of irregularities in Florida voter behavior that contends that the voting patterns favored President Bush to the tune of 130,000 to 260,000 votes.

The report, by four U.C. Berkeley researchers, analyzed the statistical relationships between Florida's Nov. 2 results of the election and a variety of factors, including historical trends in Florida, racial factors and county size. According to the analysis, people using electronic voting machines tended to favor President Bush in proportion to the number of registered Democrats in each county.

The group stressed that the results were not proof of any errors in counting the vote, but merely suggested that some link existed between the type of machine used to tally votes and the margin by which President Bush won.

"Without a paper trail, statistical comparisons of jurisdictions that used e-voting are the only tool available to diagnose problems with the new technology," the researchers stated in the report.

The paper was authored by Michael Hout, a professor of sociology at U.C. Berkeley, and three other researchers. The analysis found a statistical relationship between electronic voting machines and votes for President Bush, which seems to have accounted for anywhere from 130,000 votes to 260,000 votes. Hout was not immediately available for comment.

While some problems with election machines have surfaced after Nov. 2, none has been deemed a major issue that could affect the outcome of the election. According to the Web site of Florida's secretary of state, President Bush won that state by 380,000 votes.

That has not stopped liberal groups from taking issues with the results. Strange statistical anomalies in Florida's election results, for example, were initially highlighted by USTogether.org. That group's analysis of the Florida vote stated that optical-scan voting machines were used in polling places where Republicans tended to gain a much larger portion of the vote than expected from party registrations.

However, political science professors at Harvard University, Stanford University and Cornell University discounted the theories by pointing out that optical-scan systems are used mainly in rural counties of Florida and that those counties have had registered Democrats that have voted Republican in the past four presidential elections.

"We conclude that allegation is baseless," wrote Walter Mebane, professor of political science at Cornell University.

However, Samuel Wang, an assistant professor of molecular biology at Princeton University who published extensive analysis of election data running up to the November primary, said he believed the latest analysis, unlike previous ones, does a credible job of explaining the statistically odd behavior of Florida voters.

"I am not prone to conspiracy theories," he said in an e-mail to CNET News.com. "For instance, I think allegations about Ohio are false, and theories based on exit polls are highly misguided. But the Berkeley group's evidence is more convincing to me."

The Berkeley analysis uses voting patterns by county from 2000 and 1996, income by county, total population, and Hispanic population to try to explain voting patterns in 2004, all factors used in an attempt to explain Florida voters' propensity to vote Republican far more frequently than voter registration records might otherwise indicate.

"Their analysis indicates that even when all these variables are accounted for, a significant difference remains between counties that used electronic voting and counties that used optical scanning or paper ballots," he said.

Wang's own analysis, using different methods, estimated that e-voting machines inexplicitly favored Bush by 270,000 votes, he said.

Neither analysis tries to explain what may account for the statistical departure from the expected results of the election. However, they do list several possibilities.

"Mechanisms that would produce this outcome include having votes electronically registered in the machine prior to any voters using the machine or after the last voter users it--through software errors or hacking--and other flaws that interfere with counting after some limit is reached," the report stated.

More from News.com on this story's topics

 33 comments
Post a comment

TalkBack

yeah, the results were ********

mrstrauss 
Feb 11, 2005, 9:44 AM PST

Who's next, Jeb Bush For Prez? Eeeewww

bugtest 
Nov 21, 2004, 6:48 AM PST

one more thing

D B 
Nov 20, 2004, 4:58 PM PST

end to all this

D B 
Nov 20, 2004, 4:53 PM PST

how come nobody is questioning

null 
Nov 19, 2004, 2:34 PM PST

Maybe the PAST was WRONG

Paco Clavo 
Nov 19, 2004, 9:12 AM PST

How so? I see no sensationalism here.

Paul L 
Nov 19, 2004, 8:52 AM PST

CNET is part of the problem...

Evan Sveum 
Nov 19, 2004, 8:22 AM PST

It's Over. You lost! Move on & try again.

Cb Phillips 
Nov 19, 2004, 8:08 AM PST

The answer is quite simple

Po Oky 
Nov 19, 2004, 7:19 AM PST

Dems screw up again

swwg69 
Nov 19, 2004, 6:53 AM PST

Answer is simple

Earl Benser 
Nov 19, 2004, 5:23 AM PST

Liberals...Give it up, Bush won!

No_good_deed Goes_unpunished 
Nov 19, 2004, 4:29 AM PST

another stolen election

Just Me 
Nov 18, 2004, 10:10 PM PST

advertisement
Images: Adobe Photoshop Express finally arrives Featured gallery

Images: Adobe Photoshop Express finally arrives

New Web-based application for editing, organizing, and sharing images is free, and an account includes 2GB of storage.
View this gallery.

Resource center from News.com sponsors
You Need The Speed of Norton 2009
Introducing Norton Internet Security™2009

Click Here!
With one-click, one-minute install, under 8MB of memory usage and fewer, shorter scans, it's the fastest security suite anywhere. Norton. Smart Security, Engineered for Speed. Get a FREE trial today!

Click Here!
The Fastest Security Suite Anywhere

Experience the revolutionary Norton Internet Security™ 2009. With Norton™ Insight, a new feature, you get precision security that targets only at risk files for fewer, faster, shorter scans

Win a Trip to Space!*

Enter the Blast Off with Norton Sweepstakes for your shot at a trip to space. You could experience being fast and weightless, just like the new Norton 2009. *No purchase necessary; click for full details.

FREE Trial!

Act now to get your FREE trial of Norton Internet Security 2009. Try it for the protection. Love it for the speed

Norton Safe Web NEW!

A community-based system that rates web site safety

Norton Labs NEW!

Users can download new security technologies and share input directly with developers. Help us shape our future products!

Markets

Market news, charts, SEC filings, and more

Related quotes

DJIA 9,955.50 -369.88 (-3.58%)
S&P 500 1,056.89 -42.34 (-3.85%)
NASDAQ 1,862.96 -84.43 (-4.34%)
CNET TECH 1,276.67 -54.29 (-4.08%)
  Symbol Lookup
Click Here

advertisement
Popular on CBS sites: Fantasy Football | Miley Cyrus | MLB | Wii | GPS | Recipes | Mock Draft


© 2008 CNET Networks, Inc., a CBS Company. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use