Last month, I posted the results of our retab and hand count, and noted that there was an unexplained glitch. We didn’t drop the issue and now I’m prepared to give some details on what we found out.
First, I want to thank ES&S who came in to our office to do a thorough examination of the ballots in question and proceed to determine what went wrong. They found the problem.
What stood out on the problem ballots was the rather bold and big initials by the election judge. At the same time, those same initials were on hundreds of other ballots in the precinct without causing any problem.
ES&S used a “Graphic Dump” on the M100 to show exactly what was being read in each oval on the ballot. What that graphic dump showed was that for the ballots in question, when placed in the machine top first, the M100 read not the area within the oval, but rather the area to the left. That area to the left corresponds to the place on the top of the ballot where the judge’s initials go within the area that contains the column timing bars.
Essentially what appears to have happened is that when the judge’s initials cross into the timing area within a very limited range and at a very limited angle (that is, very horizontal), that extra line is being read as one of the column timing bars. No one at ES&S had seen this before, and it is odd enough that it is unlikely that its cropped up many times before. At the same time, I’d be surprised if we were the first people to witness this.
Taking this information, we decided to have some fun and see if we could design some ballots that would misread but still count votes. The problem on election day and in the retab did not result in votes being cast incorrectly, but rather in either an unreadable ballot or overvote.
You can see a ballot that we designed as well as the results tape. We then put the line at the top in the timing area to replicate the error. If you look at the results tape, you can see that while we filled in the oval for Ed Ott both times on race 4, the machine read those votes as votes for Blankenship because instead of picking up the filled in oval, it picked up instead the words in the candidate name in the column to the left.
As I said, this is a very unique set of circumstances. Nevertheless, we’ll be changing instructions to judges about the initials crossing into the timing area to prevent it from happening again.