Counting Votes In New York

Saturday’s NY Times printed a story about the published results of the New York Democratic Presidential Primary having numerous errors.

While the story made it clear to anyone who read it closely that the errors would actually have no bearing on the allocation of delegates, the inevitable has happened. Numerous conspiracy theorists got to work immediately and claimed that this was another case of an election being stolen.

I was going to post something about this but late on Saturday, I received an e-mail from Doug Kellner, the Democratic Co-Chair of the New York State Board of Elections that explained how the votes are counted in New York much better than I could. Here is Kellner’s report –

Sam Roberts' report in this morning's New York Times is really old news to any experienced New York City politico. At the close of the polls, the election inspectors manually copy the numbers from the voting machines onto the "canvass report," which is prepared in triplicate. One copy goes to the borough office of the Board of Elections together with all provisional and emergency ballots. A second copy is maintained by the local police precinct. A third copy is used by a clerk at the local police precinct who types the numbers into the police department main frame computer, which is immediately available to the Election News Service, a local media consortium, who eventually receive the third hard copy of the official canvass report.

Everyone in New York knows that the election night numbers typed by the police clerks are very unreliable and filled with typographical errors. Most of the local Democratic clubs have watchers present at the close of the polls who record the numbers independently. In this particular race, most clubs had both Obama and Clinton supporters who freely shared their numbers. It has been my experience that the numbers collected by the local political organizations are much more accurate than the numbers distributed to the media through their election night consortium.

The NY Times did accurately note that in New York Clinton had the first column and Obama had the fifth column, with candidates who had dropped out in the second, third, fourth and sixth columns, who often did receive zeroes on the voting machines. Therefore, it was a relatively easy typographical error for the clerk at the Police Department to put a zero in the Obama column, which occurred in a couple of precincts. It has been my experience that almost all of the errors are police clerk typos, rather than transcription errors by the election inspectors who prepare the canvass reports.

The silver lining is that because everyone knows that these election night numbers are filled with typographical errors, no one I know (except the media!) ever relies of these numbers. New York has a mandatory, 100% recanvass, which both election officials and the political candidates generally take very seriously, even when the races are not close.

Although I don't have the exact percentages for this presidential primary, absentee ballots are typically 3.5% of the total and, in New York City, valid provisional ballots are about 2% of the total. It is extraordinarily rare to have any argument over the numbers ultimately certified because the candidates’ watchers and the board officials generally exchange their numbers a make an effort to reconcile them. The candidates’ watchers have access to the lever voting machines, which are removed to the borough voting machine facilities the day after the election, and may look at the paper ballots, during both the initial count after the election and the recount that takes place eight days after the election. Absentee ballots postmarked before election day are valid if received within seven days after the election.



Submitted by Barry Popik on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 9:36pm.
Still...80 districts with 0 Obama votes? And how did Christopher X. Brodeur beat Gifford Miller in the Bronx in 2005? NYC needs new voting machines!
Submitted by Queens Democrat (not verified) on Mon, 02/18/2008 - 12:12am.
I volunteered for the Baldeo campaign in the last State senate election in 2006. Baldeo was leading Maltese, and was projected by NY 1 as the winner. Then the operatives went to work, some institutional democrats in collusion with the republicans. The result? Maltese squeaked by!
Submitted by Queens County (not verified) on Mon, 02/18/2008 - 12:45am.

Despite Maltese's attacks, we shall make Joe Addabbo the State senator. We control the process. It's that simple. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1OX7BJnpGg

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1T_2FYYG4WY

http://joeaddabboagenda.blogspot.com/


Submitted by Jerry Skurnik on Mon, 02/18/2008 - 10:38am.
The only problem with NY's voting machines are that the company that originally made them does not make them anymore. Therefore they can not be replaced when they break down.
Submitted by Jerry Skurnik on Mon, 02/18/2008 - 10:43am.
To: 12:12 - NY1 did not project Baldeo as the winner since NY1 never projects winners. They reported the returns that at some point showed Baldeo ahead. Since elections are decided when 100% of the votes are counted, saying Baldeo's win was stolen is like saying the Mets win the pennant last year because they were first on the Wednesday before the end of the season.
Submitted by Charlie O. (not verified) on Mon, 02/18/2008 - 8:31pm.

No, Jerry, the election was stolen from Baldeo. I was with Gary Tilzer, Baldeo's maverick consultant-but one who knows his stuff I am sure you will agree-when the cronyism and special relationship between the local party officials and bosses sold Baldeo down the river. Malcolm Smith-who was recently made Democratic minority boss, Eric Schneiderman, Liz Kruger, and the entire DSSC as it existed at that time, were of NO help to gaining this seat.  Baldeo sought their support, but got none.

Doug Forand should have been fired immediately. The DSSC should have been shot for what they did. They sold Baldeo-and all democrats- down the river and conceded the race to Maltese, pretending to help Baldeo's campaign. The next day, they announced Addabbo would be seeking the seat! I would not be surprised if Baldeo backs Maltese in this one! The DSSC then spent $1 million with Spitzer to win Craig Johnson's seat, and is spending millions in the 48th District!

Apart from the fact that these are all white candidates getting the money and support, don't you think that democratic leaders are sending the wrong message here by not being fair to Baldeo? Andrea Stewart Cousins lost by 1%, but was allowed to run-and took out Spano!  Sounds like race to me, don't you think?When you look at Addabbo's record here, I am angry, as a democrat, why Baldeo is not given the respect he has earned, and the opportunity to deliver the seat to his unworthy bosses!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1OX7BJnpGg

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1T_2FYYG4WY

http://joeaddabboagenda.blogspot.com/


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 02/18/2008 - 10:39pm.

The fact that the DSCC fucked up (and the Queens Dems punted) does not mean the lection was stolen, it means that it was needlessly lost; this is not the same thing as "stolen", except in the meaningless parlanace of Rock Hackshaw and Gary Tilzer, where received wisdom and spite are more imporatnat than truth. The proof of that here is the writer's own assertion that Baldeo is going to back Maltese. This makes him the moral equivalent of the Queens Dems who threw the seat by discouraging Addabo from making the race last time.  

And, if it was really about race prejudice, why would DSCC back Stewart-Cousin twice? Are you saying they bear a special grudge against Guyanans, but none towards African-Americans?  


Submitted by Democrat statesman (not verified) on Tue, 02/19/2008 - 1:15am.

I don't want to deal with the race issue. That would only take on another dimension locally with the grassroots democrats. We should not go there. We know how the plantation system can work. Baldeo and Andrea are merely pawns. Even the so called minority leaders can be expedient. We know Malcolm Smith is earning brownie points by suppressing other minorities. With the Obama focus, let's stay off this path.This can destroy our beloved Democratic party.

The fact is that Addabbo's record shown by these sites will only lead to a massive defeat at the hands of Maltese and their 5 million dollar war chest. Addabbo will be beaten like a drum by them. His record is too much in the public domain. Maltese's republicans did their research.  My research shows that, on the other hand, Maltese sent false allegations district wide last elections, and outspent Baldeo 2 to 1, yet Baldeo still got 49%. That says a lot for Baldeo. He has enhanced his profile considerably since then. I think we should work with him, groom him, and see our democratic base expand. The Republicans will snatch up people like Baldeo in a heart beat! LET'S WORK WITH DEMOCRATS LIKE HIM, BY KEEPING OURSELVES HONEST!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1OX7BJnpGg

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1T_2FYYG4WY

http://joeaddabboagenda.blogspot.com/


Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.