Home > UC Berkeley Research Team Sounds ’Smoke Alarm’ for Florida E-Vote Count

UC Berkeley Research Team Sounds ’Smoke Alarm’ for Florida E-Vote Count

by Open-Publishing - Thursday 18 November 2004
20 comments

Elections-Elected USA

http://www.commondreams.org/news2004/1118-14.htm

UC Berkeley Research Team Sounds ’Smoke Alarm’ for Florida E-Vote Count
Statistical Analysis - the Sole Method for Tracking E-Voting - Shows Irregularities May Have Awarded 130,000 - 260,000 or More Excess Votes to Bush in Florida
Research Team Calls for Investigation

BERKELEY, CA — November 18 — 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 .

Forum posts

  • They are sooooo caught.... gee, i wonder who would benefit most from a terrorist attack about now.

    • Yeah, a nuke in DC, marshal law, then the draft. Support our troops! Don’t question the President—he didn’t lie about Iraq—and he’s just "consolidating power" by purging voices of dissent.

    • They’ll never get away with it now because everyone is on to them. Also they are a bunch of bumbling idiots so they’d probably blow it.

      Bush is going to chile and Condi will be in surgery tommorow so they might just try to pull something off.

    • They don’t have to create it, they just have to let it happen. That is interesting—with Bu$h out of the country is he safe from animpending catastrophe? I know it seems like they are bumbling idiots, but the more you dig down deep into the dirty nitty gritty of whats happening I think you find malignent neglect by Bu$h&Co. In fact, as I am sure you know, I think their idiocy is surpassed by their blind ideology and allegence to mythology. Plus, they are just liers. Straight up.

    • "There were thousands upon thousands of instances of election fraud committed by Republican operatives and the electronic vote was manipulated to favor Republicans. There is an ocean of evidence to show it."

  • No this isn’t suspicious. How fortunate that a liberal bunch of researchers from a liberal college would find an "irregularity" regarding republican president Bush in Florida based on their quantitative methods. Yeah, I really think they have credibility. Really, I do. Really.

    • Is this the extent of your "argument"?

    • Uh, there was an argument? Are you making it into one?

    • There are quite a few good arguments and tons of evidence—lets see... premesies, evidence, then conclusion! Sounds like an argument! Now lets look at what you have: inuendo, ad hominem, and sarcasm---hmmm, me thinks "no argument". No, I am not making your post into an argument, it is already not an argument. If you have something to add that counter acts or refutes these stories I would like to hear them. As it is, everyone, weather a Bush supporter or Kerry supporter, should be concerned with the amount of "irregularities" in this election—something much bigger than having your guy the winner is at stake...

    • Well if you’re so smart, what the hell are you doing wasting time on this website. As for evidence. I don’t think so. I just see one very elaborate conspiracy theory.

    • would you object to a hand recount? if so, why?

    • Well, once again I am not sure that your statement amounts to any type of debate, argument, or even engagement. Lets parse it down. If I am so smart why am I waisting time on this website? Are you implying only dumb people go to this website? And if so, by going to this site, you are waisting your time? No I am not trying to impose my uber-intelligence on you—or claim anything about myself. I am at this website reading technical papers about statistical anomolies in the previous (s)election. Perhaps, instead of merely claiming there is no evidence, you should actually look at what is being po sted—read the various web sites. As for waisting my time...perhaps I am because it seems highly improbable that there will be any engagement or dialoge created. I have "chatted" with others and find a common pattern by the disciples of heir chief: a Bushesque inability to engage in any fuitful dialoge or argument. Is this why Bush is purging the CIA of any and all that oppose his regressive and fundamentalist view of the world? As for cospiracy theories, I know the word "conspiracy" has become anathema, and any and all claims are out of hand rejected. I agree, one does have to be careful with conspiracy theories—they seem to foment a callow and simplistic view of the world. But alas, the root of "conspiracy" is "conspire"—to plan together for a common goal or objective. Are you claiming no one conspires—no one at all? Also, rejecting something out of hand because you can attach a label "conspiracy" is the worst form of reasoning. Ultimately, it is a circular form of logic: you are claiming what you are suppose to be proving. And besides, I don’t look at this as conspiracy—read the statistical studies yourself: the probability of the anomolies occuring as they did...one in two hundred and fifty million. I hope that Bush didn’t shave votes because of what it bodes for our county. It should matter to all voters, because the issue is larger than the ascendency of one particular political party. And it should matter to you too.

    • Piss on the recount, all the electronics will do in the case of touch screens is spit up the same hacked garbage, you might stand a chance if you re-count the optical scan cards - provided they haven’t been replaced with "patch updated" copies. We need a new vote, all on on paper, with 50 witnesses at every step from precinct to national tabulation, where every US citizen not currently doing time gets to vote. WOW! That means even the obnoxious arrogant Republicans would get to vote. The only thing they have to be afraid of is all the votes would be counted this time...accurately. Anyone that endorses an electronic vote that isn’t verifiable with witnesses is a traitor. Mark those words and eat them.

    • ZZZzzz, are you trying to imitate John Kerry? You know succinctness can be a virtue.

    • Reading not a Republican value?

    • Not if it’s a lot of hot air.

    • Too sleepy to think good. Take a nap little boy.

    • Well, marijuana will do that for you. Go ahead and give what’s left of your brain cells a break.

    • Useless Ineluctable Callowness

  • Ignore the trolls, disinfo agents, and cointel ops. This is nothing new.

    Screw the "who wins the election if", that is the fake liberal vs. conservative distraction campaign.

    There is no such thing. I believe in gay rights and guns...so, what am I? Oh yeah, I’m an american. Escape the chains and programming technique of the mass media. It’s a trap. Once you engage in lib vs. cons. mentality...your gone.

    Become independent, and you no longer have that debate.

    Let the deprogramming begin.