March 22, 2001
Mr. Thomas Fitton
President
Judicial Watch
501 School Street N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20026
We have performed the procedures
enumerated below, with respect to our review of Presidential ballot counting
procedures in specific precincts in the State of Florida, in connection with
the November 7, 2000 Federal Election. The purpose of our review was to inspect
undervote ballots from the following counties and record and report on the
condition of chad in the Presidential race, particularly with respect to George
W. Bush and Albert Gore.
This report includes the findings of our inspection of
undervote ballots for the six non-manual recount counties of:
Collier
Hillsborough
Indian
River
Miami-Dade
Pinellas
Sarasota
It
also includes the findings and reports of our inspections of the ballots in
Broward and Palm Beach counties.
Both
Broward and Palm Beach conducted manual recounts of the ballots. Broward’s
manual recount tally is included in the certified State tally. The Palm Beach
manual recount netted 176 votes for Mr. Gore. However, Palm Beach did not meet
the extended reporting deadline ordered by the State Supreme Court, so these
votes are not included in the certified State tally.
In
total, we have inspected ballots representing 42,724 (68%) of the 62,605
ballots reported as undervotes in the certified State tally. Based upon the
results of this inspection, the results of the Florida election would not have
changed with a manual recount of these counties. Further, based upon the scope
of our inspection and the analysis of the results thereof, it is our view that
the results of the Florida election would not have changed with a manual
recount of all the counties in the State.
Summary
of Findings
·
We inspected a total of
25,203 ballots representing undervotes at the six non manual recount counties
listed above. Included in the certified elections results for the State of
Florida for these counties were 25,456 undervotes. The difference of 253
ballots is presumed to be ballots that the vote counting machines or elections
officials recognized as valid votes during the process of separating the
ballots for this review. These have not been recorded anywhere. Whatever the
cause, there is no way to know, at this time, how these 253 ballots would have
been counted in any recount.
·
Notwithstanding these
missing ballots, the results of our inspection of the 25,203 ballots reveal the
following possible adjustments to the certified state totals had a manual
recount been included from these six counties:
Additional votes using the strict
standard (no dimples)
Mr. Bush + 116
Additional votes using a moderate
standard( dimples ) Mr.
Bush + 107
Additional votes using the liberal
standard
Mr. Bush + 116
·
The Palm Beach manual
recount resulted in a net increase in vote margin for Mr. Gore of 176 votes.
While there is no way to verify these results without a total recount of all
the Palm Beach ballots, we did observe errors in the way some ballots were
either adjudicated and recorded for the candidates during this manual recount.
If our observations represent errors, Mr. Gore’s 176 net vote margin increase
would be reduced by 62 votes.
·
Broward County began
their recount using a Strict Standard for determining votes, which primarily
required clear punches or chad hanging by one or two corners in order for a
vote to be counted. About mid-way through the process, the standard was changed
to a Liberal Standard, which allowed dimples and pregnant chad to be considered
primary evidence of voter intent. This change in standard resulted in
additional vote to Mr. Bush and Mr. Gore of 446 and 884, respectively.
OUR
PROCEDURES
We conducted our review at each of the Supervisor of
Elections offices over the course of December, January, and February 2001.
An elections worker at each county was assigned to
hold the undervote ballots for our inspection. At no time did we handle or hold
any of the ballots. We inspected the front and back of each ballot and recorded
the flowing characteristics for each:
§
Clear Punch – The chad was cleanly punched through
and totally detached
§
Hanging Chad- The chad was punched through and hanging by one
corner
§
Swinging Chad- The chad was punched through and hanging by two
corners
§
Tri Chad- The chad was through with one corner detached
§
Other Hole – A pinhole was punched through some portion of the
candidate box but not necessarily the chad.
§
Other Marks- The presidential chad had a distinguishing mark from
a writing instrument, such as a circle or an “X”, which clearly showed intent
to caste a vote in that instance.
§
Pregnant Chad – The Chad was indented or dimpled to the extent that
light was visible through a portion of the chad.
§
Dimpled Chad – The individual chad showed some sign of physical
disturbance to its originally smooth surface.
We
recorded these characteristics for the Presidential chad, including for those
candidates other than Mr. Gore or Mr. Bush. We also recorded instances where
chad for other races on the ballot were hanging, swinging, dimpled or pregnant.
The data were recorded in a database, from which
summarization and the following analyses were performed.
NON MAUNUAL RECOUNT COUNTIES
ANALYSIS
None of these
counties performed a recount by hand. In fact, most had not separated their
undervotes during the first and second machine counts. This task was performed
after the Florida Supreme Court ordered a manual count of the undervotes. Some
of the counties separated the undervote by putting all of the ballots through
the machines a third time, using software to segregate undervote ballots.
Others performed this process by hand using teams of elections workers.
The six non manual recount counties represented in
this report reported a total number of undervotes of 25,456 with their
certified totals in November. However, these counties presented 25,203 ballots
for our inspection. The difference of 253 represents ballots that are not included
in any count or analysis. These “missing” ballots are probably the result of
chad falling off between the November machine recount and the separation
process or elections workers erroneously not separating them. It is impossible
to know, at this point, what their adjudication might have been. Thus it is
important to bear in mind the possibility that these 253 ballots could, if we
were to know their ultimate adjudication, affect the following analysis.
It is also important to note that dimples are often
times very subtle and difficult to distinguish and subject to personal
interpretation, attentiveness of the reviewer and even bad lighting. Similarly,
judging whether a chad is sufficiently broken to be pregnant is subjective and
the distinction between dimpled and pregnant chad clouded accordingly.
With these caveats, our analysis shows that under any
of three standards, as described below, the results of the November 7, 2000
would not have changed had hand recounts been done in these six counties. Regardless
of the standard used, Mr. Bush’s margin would have increased as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard
|
|
|
|
|
Net Increase
in Bush Votes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Strict, only clear punches, hanging or swinging chad
|
|
|
|
or other clear marks
|
|
|
|
116
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderate, includes dimples & pregnant chad where
|
|
|
|
other chad are also dimpled or pregnant
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liberal, all dimples without conflicting presidential
|
116
|
|
|
marks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The details of
the calculation follow:
PALM BEACH COUNTY
PALM
BEACH COUNTY RECOUNT PROCESS
Based on our conversations with
Board of Elections employees, published reports at the time and our
observations, we understand that the manual recount process during the period
up to November 26, 2000 occurred as follows:
Teams comprised of Palm
Beach County employees and observers from both the Republican and Democrat
parties conducted phase l of the manual recount by inspecting and adjudicating
all of the ballots cast on November 7. The Parties’ representatives were
allowed to challenge ballots where they did not agree with the adjudication.
These ballots, approximately 14,500 according to published reports, were
separated from the precinct stack, compiled and given to the three member
Canvassing Board.
The Canvassing Board
conducted its own review of the ballots under the observation of
representatives of the Parties. The Board made the final determination of vote
status of each ballot. If either of the
Parties’ representatives disputed any ballot adjudication by the Canvassing
Board, that ballot was separated and placed in an envelope labeled as “R” or
“D,” according to which party objected, and to the ruling of the Canvassing
Board, as shown by the following dispute categories:
1.
D-U/V: Democrat disputed under vote
2.
D-O/V: Democrat disputed over vote
3.
R-U/V: Republican disputed under vote
4.
R-O/V: Republican disputed over vote
5.
D-#3: Democrat disputed vote for punch position #3
(Mr. Bush)
6.
R-#5: Republican disputed vote for punch position
#5 (Mr. Gore)
The recount was conducted under a written statement of standards,
which did not specifically address or give guidance as to how dimples on the
ballots were to be considered as evidence of voter intent. This was left up to
the judgment of the inspection team and the Canvassing Board. Mrs. Theresa
LePore, Supervisor of Elections for Palm Beach County, however, stated to us
that a dimple alone would not necessarily indicate voter intent; that, some
other evidence such as a consistent pattern of dimpling on the card would have
to also be present. The adjudication of these ballots was a subjective exercise
based on the understanding of the individual elections board employees and
members of the Canvassing Board. She
also indicated, and published reports at the time support, that this standard
remained in effect consistently during the entire process; that, unlike in
Broward County, Palm Beach did not change its standard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
BOARD OF ELECTION’S TEAMS REVIEW
ALL BALLOTS
|
|
|
|
 |
The results of the manual
recount were ultimately not included in the certified elections results for the
State of Florida. Therefore, the totals included in the certified State tally
were from the second machine count submitted as of November 14, 2000, the
predecessor to this recount
The ballots were stored by
precinct in metal ballot boxes. More than one precinct may be stored in a box.
The ballots were organized, without any kind of physical separators,
within the box as follows:
A.
Ballots that were not
questioned by either party or counters during the first phase of the hand count, as follows:
1.
Ballots sorted by
presidential candidate
2.
Under votes
3.
Over votes
B.
Ballots which had
been questioned by either party or counters during the first phase of the hand
count but which had been adjudicated by the Canvassing Board during the second
phase, as follows:
1.
Ballots sorted by
presidential candidate
2.
Under votes
3.
Over votes
C.
Ballots which had
been adjudicated during the second phase but which were disputed by either the
Democrats or Republicans. These were contained in envelopes within the boxes.
We,
along with representatives of several news organizations, conducted a review of
ballots over a 15-day period during January 2001. We inspected 10,399 ballots,
comprised of the following categories:
Disputed ballots judged by the
Canvassing Board to be Mr. Gore votes 689
Disputed ballots judged by the
Canvassing Board to be Mr. Bush Votes 189
Disputed ballots judged by the
Canvassing Board to be Other Presidential Votes 8
Disputed ballots judged by the
Canvassing Board to be Undervotes 4,540
Disputed ballots judged by the
Canvassing Board to be Overvotes 64
Ballots for which no
determination is indicated 13
Total Disputed Ballots 5,502
Ballots determined to be
Undervotes by the election Teams
4,897
Total
Ballots Inspected 10,399
The
disputed ballots were represented to us to be all of the ballots that had been
disputed by either party.
The
inspection was conducted by close examination each ballot which was physically
held and displayed by a Palm Beach County employee. We were not allowed and did
not handle or touch the ballots.
We
recorded the following characteristics of the ballots:
§
Clear Punch – The chad was
cleanly punched through and totally detached
§
Hanging Chad- The chad was punched through and hanging by one
corner
§
Swinging Chad- The chad was punched through and hanging by two
corners
§
Tri Chad- The chad was through with one corner detached
§
Other Hole – A pinhole was punched through some portion of the
candidate box but not necessarily the chad.
§
Other Marks- The presidential chad had a distinguishing mark from
a writing instrument, such as a circle or an “X”, which clearly showed intent
to caste a vote in that instance.
§
Pregnant Chad – The Chad was indented or dimpled to the extent that
light was visible through a portion of the chad.
§
Dimpled Chad – The individual chad showed some sign of physical
disturbance to its originally smooth surface.
We
recorded these characteristics for the Presidential chad. We also recorded
instances where chad for other races on the ballot showed evidence of hanging
or swinging chad or dimples or pregnant chad. In addition, we recorded the
precinct number, the dispute category and adjuducation, if any, of the
Canvassing Board, as indicated on the envelope.
The
only indication of the adjudication result for any of the ballots was what was
written on the dispute envelope. There was no other reference or physical
indication of the result either on the ballot or in any other record.
As for undisputed undervotes, there was also
no reference or physical indication on the ballot or elsewhere as to their
ultimate adjudication. The employees of
the elections department made the determination of this pool of ballots for our
examination. The employees looked for the beginning and the end of the section
of undervotes within each ballot box. Since there are no physical separators
within the ballot boxes between the various sections of ballots for each
precinct, the elections employees had to look through the ballots to determine
where undervote ballots started and ended in the pile. Elections officials
admitted to being unable to accurately identify all under votes and
disputed ballots. There was no way to verify that all of the undervote or
disputed ballots were accumulated for
our review.
ANALYSIS
The
official tally of the manual recount showed net gain for Mr. Mr. Gore of 176
votes. However, because of the lack of segregation and the absence of subtotals
to trace counts to, and the apparent errors noted in our inspection as detailed
below, it is impossible to verify this result without a complete recount of all
of the Palm Beach ballots. Even a complete recount would undoubtedly result in
different totals, as chad fall off and people see dimples differently.
Further,
this official tally does not reconcile with apparent adjudication of disputed
ballots observed by us in which 689 votes were judged to be votes for Mr. Gore
and 189 as votes for Mr. Bush( or a net gain of 500 vote for Mr. Gore ).
This
apparent discrepancy might result from the parties disputing ballots that were
counted as votes in the machine count.
The
following table summarizes an analysis of the disputed ballots, which breaks
down the disputed ballots, turned into votes, between those which could have
been read by machine and those which could not have: This table separates ballots, which could potentially
have been read in the second machine count from those that could not have. The
312 (343 – 31) vote differential between Mr. Gore and Mr. Bush ballots that
could have been read by machine could account, in part, for the 324 (500 –176)
vote discrepancy between our observed results and the results of the manual
recount.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manual
Recount Votes For Challenged Ballots That Are Machine Readable
|
|
|
|
|
Mr.
Bush Votes
|
|
Mr. Gore
Votes
|
|
|
|
|
Dimples in Other Races
|
No
|
Yes
|
Total
|
No
|
Yes
|
Total
|
|
|
|
All Ballots
|
21
|
10
|
31
|
250
|
93
|
343
|
|
|
|
Errors
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
16
|
5
|
21
|
|
|
|
Inconsistencies
|
0
|
10
|
10
|
0
|
73
|
73
|
|
|
|
Others
|
19
|
0
|
19
|
234
|
15
|
249
|
|
|
The
total ballots that we examined were 10,399. The total of undervotes included in
the second machine count certification is 10,582. There is no way to
reconcile the 182-ballot difference between these totals.
We
were presented with 9,437 undervotes; 4,897 of these were among the
unchallenged ballots and 4,540 were undervotes from the disputed ballots
adjudicated by the Canvassing Board. According to the official tally of the manual
recount, there were 9,273 undervotes from this recount. Presumably, the
difference of 164 is ballots that were incorrectly identified as undervotes by
the elections workers who separated the ballots for this exercise, but which
were counted as votes during the recount. The is no way to definitively
determine which of the 9,437 ballots presented to us as undervotes were in fact
counted as votes during the recount.
The
remainder of the 10,399 ballots we inspected were from Canvassing Board
adjudication of challenged ballots; these consist of 189 Mr. Bush votes, 689
Mr. Gore votes, 63 overvotes and 13 ballots for which no Board determination is
indicated.
In total we reviewed 5,502 disputed ballots. In the
population of these ballots, the overall rate at which dimpled presidential
chad were evaluated as votes was far lower than we had observed in Broward
County. And, consistent with the stated
standard for dimples, the rate was very low when no other races had dimpled
chad. When other races have dimpled
chad, Mr. Gore has 18.7% (174/931) of his dimpled chad counted as votes and Mr.
Bush has 14.4% (69/478) of his dimpled chad counted as votes. When other races do not have dimpled chad,
Mr. Gore has 4.7% (90/1,902) of his dimpled chad counted as votes and Mr. Bush
had 1.9% (27/1431) of his dimpled chad counted as votes. We note that Mr. Gore's success rate from
dimples exceeded Mr. Bush's rate regardless of the presence of other races with
dimpled chad.
Pregnant presidential chad were counted as votes at much
higher rates than dimpled chad were. As
with dimpled presidential chad, the presence of dimpled chad in other races
increased the likelihood that a pregnant presidential chad would count as a
vote. When other races have dimpled
chad, Mr. Gore has 54.5% (36/66) of his pregnant chad counted as votes and Mr.
Bush has 43.2% (16/37) of his dimpled chad counted as votes. When other races do not have dimpled chad,
Mr. Gore has 33.7% (31/92) of his dimpled chad counted as votes and Mr. Bush
has 31.7% (26/82) of his dimpled chad counted as votes. We note that Mr. Gore's success rate from
pregnant chad exceeds Mr. Bush's rate regardless of the presence of other races
with dimpled chad.
Judging whether a chad is sufficiently broken to be pregnant
or is merely dimpled is subjective and the distinction between dimpled and
pregnant chad clouded accordingly.
However, the very different rates observed for pregnant and dimpled
presidential chad being considered as
votes indicates that the Canvassing Board was accepting chad we judged as
pregnant as stronger evidence of a vote than chad we judged as merely
dimpled.
The
following table summarizes the findings of errors among disputed ballots, which
were adjudicated as votes:
|
|
Manual
Recount Votes For Challenged Ballots That Are Not Machine Readable
|
|
|
|
Mr.
Bush Votes
|
|
Mr.
Gore Votes
|
|
|
Dimples in Other Races
|
No
|
Yes
|
Total
|
No
|
Yes
|
Total
|
|
|
All Ballots
|
66
|
92
|
158
|
132
|
214
|
346
|
|
|
Errors
|
1
|
4
|
5
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
|
|
Inconsistencies
|
53
|
6
|
59
|
121
|
7
|
128
|
|
|
Others
|
12
|
82
|
94
|
10
|
206
|
216
|
|
Further
analysis, however, indicates that there were potential errors and inconsistent
determination of votes in both categories. The nature of these errors was chad
cleanly punched or hanging for a candidate other than the vote indicated on the
disputed envelope.
Among the non-machine readable ballots, Mr. Bush has 5 questionable votes and Mr. Gore has 2 questionable votes.
If these questionable votes are, in fact, errors, Mr. Gore's gain over Mr. Bush
of 188 votes from the Canvassing Board's review of 'Not Machine Readable'
ballots would be increased by 3 votes.
Among the 'Machine Readable'
ballots, Mr. Bush has 2 questionable votes and Mr. Gore has 21 questionable
votes. If these questionable votes are,
in fact, errors, Mr. Gore's gain over Mr. Bush of 312 votes from 'Machine
Readable' ballots would be reduced by 19 votes margin.
Altogether then, while remembering that the only
indication of how a ballot was adjudicated is what is written on the dispute
envelope and that this is un-verifiable, the condition of the ballots that
the Canvassing Board's review had determined to be votes indicates that 18
votes in the Mr. Bush-Mr. Gore vote differential are potentially due to
inaccurate evaluations, or recording errors.
A similar analysis of the undervotes reveals the
following:
|
|
Manual
Recount Disputed Undervotes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Mr. Gore)
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Bush
|
Mr. Gore
|
Mr. Bush
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clear
punch, hanging
|
|
|
4
|
7
|
(3)
|
|
Clear
punch, hanging
|
|
|
3
|
3
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manual
Recount Un-disputed Undervotes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Mr. Gore)
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Bush
|
Mr. Gore
|
Mr. Bush
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clear
punch, hanging
|
|
|
36
|
8
|
28
|
|
Clear
punch, hanging
|
|
|
19
|
1
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are clear errors among the undervotes where
clearly punched chad exist for either Mr. Bush or Mr. Gore and where no
conflicting condition exists in other presidential chad. The net of these
errors is a net gain for Mr. Bush of 43 votes.
BROWARD
BROWARD COUNTY RECOUNT PROCESS
Broward County officials conducted a manual recount in three
stages. In the first stage, all ballots
were evaluated by teams, which consisted of a Board of Election’s worker who
actually handled the ballots and made a decision on the disposition of the
ballot, and observers from the Republican and Democratic parties. If either the Democratic or Republican
observer disagreed with the Board of Elections worker the ballot was considered
challenged (“Challenged Ballots”) and sent to the County Canvassing Board for
adjudication.
The County Canvassing Board conducted its initial review of
Challenged Ballots under a standard that required a chad to be clearly punched
through or hanging by no more than two corners of the chad to be counted as a
candidate vote (referred to herein as the Initial Determination).
Thereafter, the Canvassing Board changed its standard to
one, which considered dimpled and pregnant chad as primary evidence of voter
intent (referred to herein as the Revised Determination). The Board then used this standard to
re-examine the ballots, which they had originally judged to be
under-votes. The Board did not issue
any specific written rules governing this new standard.
Based upon its changed standard, the Canvassing Board
identified an additional 1,354 votes, which it determined to be presidential
votes from the 2,529 votes, which it had originally identified as
under-votes. The overall process is
outlined below.
BROWARD COUNTY BALLOT HAND RE-COUNT PROCESS
|
|
VOTES FOR A
CANDIDATE
1354 BALLOTS
|
|
ANALYSIS
Revised Determination-The 2,529 Initially Determined Under-Votes
In its Revised Determination the Canvassing Board identified
an additional 1,354 votes, which includes 446 additional votes for Mr. Bush and
884 additional votes for Mr. Gore.
Tables 1 and 2 ( in the Broward exhibit section) reveal that both
candidates received similar percentages of these additional votes from each
type of chad condition. Specifically,
Mr. Bush received 64.3% of his 446 additional votes and Mr. Gore received 59.5%
of his 884 additional votes from having his chad merely dimpled; Mr. Bush
received 33.6% of his additional votes and Mr. Gore 37.4% from having his chad
pregnant; Mr. Bush received .9% of his additional votes and Mr. Gore 1.2% from
having his chad clearly punched out; Mr. Bush received .7% of his additional
votes and Mr. Gore .9% from having his chad hanging in some fashion. If dimpled and pregnant chads are combined
into the same category, then Mr. Bush received 97.9% of his additional votes
from this category and Mr. Gore received 96.9% of his additional votes from
this category. Therefore, each
candidate’s additional vote total under the Revised Determination was due almost
exclusively to subjectively evaluating chad conditions. Ballots with clearly punched out or hanging
chad make up a negligible 26 votes of the combined vote totals for Mr. Bush and
Mr. Gore. This is consistent with the
reported procedures in that the Initial Determination should have filtered out
all ballots that could be clearly and objectively evaluated.
Tables 1 through 5 break down the Bush votes, the Gore
votes, the other presidential votes, the over votes and the under votes,
respectively, according to the condition of the Bush and Gore chad. From Table 1, two Bush votes come from
ballots with no blemish at all to either the Bush chad or the Gore chad. From Table 2, eight Gore votes come from
ballots with no blemish to either the Gore chad or the Bush chad. These ten votes were either evaluation or
recording errors
From Table 3, one of the 24 votes for other presidential
candidates also had the Gore chad dimpled.
From Table 4, all six over votes had the Gore chad clearly punched;
three of them also had the Bush chad clearly punched. From Table 5, 390 (33.4%) of the under votes have no blemishes on
either the Bush or Gore chad. One under
vote had a solitary clear punch to the Mr. Bush chad, one had a solitary punch
to the Gore chad and one has a hanging chad; these three under votes are
errors. The Bush chad was dimpled on
159 under votes and pregnant on 7. The
Gore chad was dimpled on 578 under votes and pregnant on 17.
The dimpled chad that led to a counted vote are
indistinguishable from those that led to under votes.
Initial Determination
We reviewed a sample of 1,517 Challenged Ballots for which
the Initial Determination made by the Canvassing Board identified them as
presidential votes. From the ballots
reviewed, Mr. Bush gained 394 votes and Mr. Gore gained 1,104 votes. There were 19 votes for other presidential
candidates. Tables 6 through 8 break
down the Bush votes, the Gore votes, and the other presidential votes,
respectively, according to the condition of the Bush and Gore chad.
Tables 6 and 7 reveal that both candidates received very
similar percentages of their votes from each type of chad condition. Specifically, Mr. Bush received 77.9% of his
votes and Mr. Gore received 80.6% of his votes from having his chad clearly
punched out; Mr. Bush received 15.2% of his votes and Mr. Gore 15.8% from
having his chad hanging in some fashion; Mr. Bush received 3.8% of his votes
and Mr. Gore 2.6% from having his chad pregnant; and Mr. Bush received 2.0% of
his votes and Mr. Gore .9% from having his chad merely dimpled. Based upon our understanding of the
standards used in the Initial Determination, all votes should have been decided
on the basis of clearly punched or hanging chad. Although about 95% or more of each candidate’s vote total did
come from his chad being clearly punched or hanging, dimpled and pregnant chad
were the basis for a small percentage of the vote totals.
From Table 6, four Mr. Bush votes came from ballots with no
blemish at all to the Bush chad. In
fact, two of these ballots had the Gore chad clearly punched or hanging. From Table 7, one Mr. Gore vote came from a
ballot with no blemish to the Gore chad but with the Bush chad clearly
punched. These five votes were either
evaluation or recording errors. From
Table 8, 11 of the 19 votes for other presidential candidates also have
blemishes on either the Bush or Gore chad.
Although the Initial Determination would allegedly award
votes only in unambiguous cases, only 91.6%
(361) of Bush votes had an unmarked Gore chad, and only 92.8% (1,025) of
Mr. Gore votes had an unmarked Bush chad.
Hence, at least seven percent of each candidate’s votes came from
ballots with some mark on the other candidate’s chad. Of Bush votes with a blemished Gore chad, three had the Gore chad
clearly punched, one has it hanging, one has it pregnant and 28 have it
dimpled. Of Mr. Gore votes with a
blemished chad, six have the Bush chad clearly punched, one has it hanging,
eight have it pregnant and 64 have it dimpled.
Therefore, eleven ballots that counted as votes for one candidate have
the other candidate’s chad clearly punched or hanging; these ballots should
have been determined as over-votes and were either incorrectly evaluated or
their disposition was incorrectly recorded.
For the remaining
101 doubly marked but counted ballots, the Canvassing Board apparently ruled
that these ballots were instances where the voter considered voting for either
Mr. Bush or Mr. Gore to the extent of blemishing a chad before ultimately
casting a vote for the other candidate.
Such rulings are in contradiction with later rulings where pregnant and
dimpled chad were ruled an intent to vote rather than only an initial
consideration. Twenty-nine Bush votes
and 72 Gore votes resulted from these rulings.
This report is intended solely for the use of the specified
users listed and should not be used by those who have not agreed to the
procedures and taken responsibility for the sufficiency of the procedures for
their purposes.
NON MANUAL COUNT COUNTIES
CONDITION OF THE BALLOTS
COLLIER
------- County=Collier
Condition of Mr. Bush & Mr. Gore Chad=Both Have No Marks --------
Condition
of
Other Number
Presidential of
Chad
otherdimp Ballots
Clear Punched Dimpled
Only 2
Clear Punched
Pregnant Only 1
Clear Punched Without
Dimples 74
Dimpled Dimpled
& Preg. 4
Dimpled Dimpled
Only 20
Dimpled Pregnant
Only 1
Dimpled Without
Dimples 22
Hanging Without
Dimples 6
Without Blemish Dimpled
& Preg. 1
Without Blemish Dimpled
Only 67
Without Blemish
Pregnant Only 4
Without Blemish Without
Dimples 424
--------------- -------
Mr. Bush_Mr. Gore 626
-------- County=Collier
Condition of Mr. Gore Chad=Mr. Gore Only Dimpled --------
Condition
of
Other Number
Presidential of
Chad otherdimp Ballots
Clear Punched Without
Dimples 1 *
Dimpled Dimpled
Only 1 *
Dimpled Without
Dimples 2 *
Without Blemish Dimpled
& Preg. 4
Without Blemish Dimpled
Only 220
Without Blemish
Pregnant Only 2
Without Blemish Without
Dimples 323
--------------- -------
Mr. Bush_Mr. Gore 553
-------- County=Collier
Condition of Mr. Gore Chad=Mr. Gore Only Hanging --------
Condition
of
Other Number
Presidential of
Chad
otherdimp Ballots
Without Blemish Dimpled
Only 2
Without Blemish Without
Dimples 13
--------------- -------
Mr. Bush_Mr. Gore 15
------- County=Collier
Condition of Mr. Gore Chad=Mr. Gore Only Pregnant --------
Condition
of
Other Number
Presidential of
Chad
other chad Ballots
Without Blemish Dimpled
& Preg. 4
Without Blemish Dimpled
Only 5
Without Blemish
Pregnant Only 2
Without Blemish Without
Dimples 9
--------------- -------
Mr. Bush_Mr. Gore 20
* Duplicate marks no vote
----- County=Collier
Condition of Mr. Bush Chad=Mr. Bush Only Clear Punched -----
Condition
of
Other Number
Presidential of
