I've now sent Public Disclosure Requests to the elections departments of King, Snohomish and San Juan counties asking for the following information:
a list of all X County voters who submitted ballots in the Nov. 2, 2004 election. This list should include at least the following data items for each voter, as of the day of the election:In addition, I asked King County for the names and voter ids of the final 723/735 magical mystery voters and an indication of which of them had their ballots accepted by the canvassing board and which rejected. I also asked for the list of name and voter ids of the 20 or so voters whose ballots that were discovered in ballot boxes, along with the precincts and polling places where the ballots were found.* voter_id
* first, last and middle names
* residence address
* mailing address
* precinct
* date of registration
* gender
* date of birth
* type of ballot submitted, (e.g. Polling Place, Absentee, Provisional)
* an indication whether the ballot was accepted or rejected
--
Snohomish County replied and promises me the data on Wednesday at 1pm. They agree to provide all of the requested data but not the birth dates. This is unfortunate, according to my read of elections law, RCW 29A.08.125 and RCW 29A.08.720, a voter's birth date is public information. This information also serves the essential public purpose of identifying voters in whose names illegal ballots were cast. Should a judge finds Snohomish County in violation of the Public Disclosure Act, the fine could be $5 - $100 per voter record per day that the information is withheld. If you live in Snohomish County, you might want to contact your Auditor's office and request that he release all of the public information pertaining to this election that he is required by law to release.
Snohomish County is also acting funny about the way they are willing to deliver the information. They are willing to give me a choice of:
(a) a CD ROM containing a tab-delimited file
(b) an email containing a PDF file.
A PDF file containing this much data is useless. A tab-delimited file is the appropriate type of file and e-mail delivery would spare me the extra cost and time of having to obtain the CD. Oddly, they are unwilling to send me a tab-delimited file by email even though I stated it in my request as my preferred form of delivery and even though it is no extra burden for them. They won't give me a logical explanation why they won't email a tab-delimited file. They're simply imposing an arbitrary inconvenience on me for no legitimate reason. Government customer service at its finest.
UPDATE: As Richard Pope mentions in the comments and as the Snohomish County Auditor's Office asserts, RCW 29A.08.710 prohibits disclosure of birth dates. That's too bad. Having access to birth dates would make it easier to identify fraud. The office also wrote me:
Regarding your request for reconsideration of delivery mechanisms of the requested information, I have conferred with appropriate personnel and have been instructed to continue delivery of records in the format in which delivery has already been established.San Juan County, on the other hand, offered to e-mail me the data in an Excel spreadsheet.Tab-delimited format is available via CD which can picked up by the requester or mailed. Electronic transmission of the records is available in PDF format only.
For whatever reason, the Snohomish County Auditor thinks it's his duty to act a petty, snot-nosed jerk.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at December 28, 2004 12:27 PM | Email Thisyou know how to get ahold of me, I can get you going with it.
Posted by: bmvaughn on December 28, 2004 12:34 PMThey just don't want you to be able to PROCESS the information immediately.
Posted by: David on December 28, 2004 12:48 PM RCW 29A.08.710
Originals and automated files. (Effective until January 1, 2006.)
(1) The county auditor shall have custody of the voter registration records for each county. The original voter registration form must be filed without regard to precinct and is considered confidential and unavailable for public inspection and copying. An automated file of all registered voters must be maintained pursuant to RCW 29A.08.125. An auditor may maintain the automated file in lieu of filing or maintaining the original voter registration forms if the automated file includes all of the information from the original voter registration forms including, but not limited to, a retrievable facsimile of each voter's signature.
(2) The following information contained in voter registration records or files regarding a voter or a group of voters is available for public inspection and copying: The voter's name, gender, voting record, date of registration, and registration number. The address and political jurisdiction of a registered voter are available for public inspection and copying except as provided by chapter 40.24 RCW. No other information from voter registration records or files is available for public inspection or copying.
A PDF file would in fact be larger than plain text.
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on December 28, 2004 01:00 PMBottom line, they are pulling his chain.
Posted by: Jason on December 28, 2004 01:01 PMI also asked for this info, I would like to stuff it all into a db and run some queries.
We will see what they say to me, I also included a couple of other counties just to see what their response is.
Posted by: todd on December 28, 2004 01:33 PMThoughts anyone?
Posted by: scott on December 28, 2004 02:03 PMThe Times is trying to persuade Rossi not to challenge. Liberal newspapers always try to discourage Republicans by creating the false impression that what the paper says reflects public opinion. But it doesn't.
However, I believe Rossi will sue, and he must--the sooner the better. Otherwise, Washington will be the new high-tax backwater of America, replacing godforsaken Rhode Island.
Posted by: FedUpWithThis on December 28, 2004 02:17 PMhttp://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/access_onlinetools.html
There are also numerous other such services or programs available if you google for it.
Posted by: Crucio on December 28, 2004 02:43 PMQuick question: why didn't you ask to see the records from Pierce County? The percentage change there between the machine recount and the manual recount was more than twice that of King County.
Posted by: Steven on December 28, 2004 03:04 PMAnd thanks to Caleb White for answering the security question. I have always wondering the same thing myself, in different contexts.
Posted by: Richard Pope on December 28, 2004 03:05 PMBesides, has anyone ever really ASKED DIno if he would want to run against maria C?
Shoot this down, if I am way off, but I propose we consider creating a supporter's fund, publicly disclosed, to support the Stefan's and Jim's Herculean investigative efforts (hire some college Republicans as analysts) or applied as financing for litigation that will come.
Any thoughts? Direction? Who knows how to do this?
Posted by: Kevin Leo on December 28, 2004 03:15 PMYou can email the Chairman of the Washington College Republican Federation at: pschafer "at" gonzaga.edu or visit the WCRF website for chapter contact info:
http://www.wcrf.us/MT/chapters.html
Alternatively, you can email the UWCRs who have the location and immediate manpower to get the ball rolling: Brent Ludeman policy "at" uwcr.net or Aaron Schwitters political "at" uwcr.net
Sincerely,
Patrick E. Bell
President & Executive Chairman
PLU College Republicans
Before you get too wound up about the Snohomish auditor, I think Caleb is right on the mark. As an IT guy who works with data analysis on a day-to-day basis, I would do exactly what Snohomish is doing: i.e., provide the data, but also take steps to ensure that the integrity of the data is protected. When we exchange electronic technical data with subcontractors, we never provide it in an editable format - it is always "frozen", either in something transmittable like a PDF file, or a physical medium like a CD. I suspect they already have a process in place to produce (and track) these files when requests are received; sticking to the process ensures there is an audit trail (sort of what we wish Ukraine County had done, eh?).
Posted by: Patrick on December 28, 2004 04:36 PMThe data integrity explanation that has been offered is pretty lame. What is the essential difference between issuing a file on CD vs. issuing it by e-mail? Once I have the CD in my hand, I can do the same thing with it that I can do once I receive the e-mail.
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on December 28, 2004 04:40 PMKing County gets rewarded for their incompetence by being allowed to count rejected/dubious ballots.
Other counties get punished for their competence by following the law, and not including rejected ballots.
If Gregoire sits as governor, it will be bureaucratic incompetence that would have defeated the will of the voters.
Posted by: noel on December 28, 2004 04:49 PMStefan - I'll be happy to drive up to Snohomish County and pick the damn thing up - they are too much up there. Let me know!
Posted by: CP on December 28, 2004 04:50 PMThey also told me they do not track the progress of the ballot, that intially rejected then accepted or whatever path it takes etc. which is really wierd to me, somewhere that info has to be kept, though they say it isnt recorded.
As to the CD and PDF issues, well IT people are known to be anal, but thats just stupid if it is their reason.
They have the originals to counter any claims and whats to stop anyone from re-creating the CD and PDF after the fact, no sorry it's either laziness from the IT department (possible) or arrogance, the person responding of course has no control over the issue, she seems fairly nice.
I also have to say though that niether KC, Pierce, or San Juan have replied and Snohomish did almost immediately.
I have also requested from the USPS a list of registered PBE's in the state, getting a list of storage unit companies wont be too hard either.
Results will be interesting.
When we had our troubles in Maryland, the Baltimore City authorities did everything they could to delay releasing voter info to Ellen Sauerbrey. They made sure that she only got her necessary information a day or two before she had to present oral arguments in her court challenge.
What is Rossi's deadline?
One other thing. I really don't want my personal e-mail information here when I post. Is there any way to hide it from the spam-bot types? Thanks.
Keep up the great work!
Ron J. in Virginia
Posted by: Ron J. on December 28, 2004 05:15 PMKeep some humor in it.
Chuck
Lookout Mountain, GA
tracking you guys from DC at the moment, keep up the good work Stefan.
Posted by: Chuck on December 28, 2004 05:33 PMFor those out there that don't know who Sideshow Bob is, he is a recurring character on The Simpsons voiced by Kelsy Grammer.
His full name is Robert "Sideshow" Terwilliger.
He was Krusty The Clowns sidekick until he tried to frame Krusty for armed robbery.
Luckily Bart and Lisa figured out that it wasn't Krusty, but in fact Sideshow Bob.
Bob swore revenge on Bart, and has tried to kill Bart on numerous occasions.
In one the best Bob episodes, Bob runs for Mayor of Springfield, against the Kennedyesque Diamond Joe Quimby.
He wins the election and tries to destroy the town, just to kill Bart.
So a couple years ago, I saw something that made me laugh, until I realized it wasn't a joke.
In Snohomish County, where I live, the County Auditor was running for re-election. His name, Robert Terwilliger.
Keep going Shark, et al!!! Afraid my day job prevents me from helping out much in this horrendous process.
As for the IT stuff...I remember working for the state and I NEVER wanted to give people original data if I could help it...anytime I needed to release anything it was locked, password protected, or somehow regulated. I think it's an anal thing.
Posted by: megs on December 28, 2004 05:48 PMWhat would the non-political be doing reading Stefan's opinions? Is ignorance a virtue?
It's whinning.....it's ridiculous and it must stop.......
When you say it "must" stop, I assume you are speaking figuratively?
Stefan, I think it's great you have so many people stepping up unselfishly, offering to show you the error of your ways.
Posted by: South County on December 28, 2004 06:55 PMI don't consider it to be whining when all anyone on the GOP side is trying to do at this time is track down and document the problems that occurred.
While I would hate to see Gregoireovich in office, I'm confident she'll do as poorly as governor (probably much worse) than she did as AG. In the long run this would be good for the Republican party.
Say what you want about Gary Locke... he wasn't that bad as governor... because he didn't really do much of anything in 8 years! At times I wish the US Congress could be as "affective" :-)
T
Posted by: Tom Pultz on December 28, 2004 07:42 PMAnd editable data on a CD is similarly "sealed" to prevent further edits (even accidental) which could lead to incorrect assertions about the original data.
It's good practice to ensure the integrity of the source data is maintained, especially when the conclusions to be drawn from the data have such importance.
Posted by: Paul on December 28, 2004 08:33 PMI don't have OCD, but I am offended by those who make sport of people with serious medical problems. Troll elsewhere, "Christine G".
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on December 28, 2004 08:42 PMKeep up the good work. We greatly appreciate it.
Posted by: Shaun on December 28, 2004 09:12 PMConsidering their record so far, I'm more concerned about the integrity of the data they give you. I wouldn't put it past them to change things or make excuses for not giving all the information requested.
Thank you for all you've done to keep us informed, please let us know if there is anything we can do to help you with this endeavor. From what I see there are a lot of people that just want the truth, and an honest election.
Stefan, you should also get the computer file of the manual recount election results, and do a precinct analysis of changes in ballot count ....
=========================================
Likely y'all already know, but since did not see mention in case not:
At end of Ukraine County manual recount, and actually I THINK every night while that recount was in process, floor managers for both (R)s and (D)s got CDs of the master spreadsheet that tracked input of all the precinct tally sheets. Believe they got copies of the actual Excel spreadsheet, but don't know that for sure. If the parties got ALL the Excel data columns, they got some good stuff (one of the better arguments while I was observing data entry was how many spreadsheet columns we the observers would be allowed to see while data was being entered (classic bureaucratic solution by Uk. Cty managers: ALL extended columns were hidden)).
Anyway, WRT Uk. Cty manual recount data:
Instead of fighting the county bureaucrats for an expedited copy, maybe somebody over at Rossi H.Q. or WSRP would burn a CD copy on the spot if they were asked. It would sure seem to be to their advantage to help Stefan out as much as they can. Just a thought.
Methow Ken
I wonder if the Greens, Libertarians & D's will insist on a hand recount now. I don't know if the law allows that in Ohio, but if they thought they could somehow undermine the legitimacy of the Bush's decisive victory, I'm sure they would demand it.
Posted by: Kevin S on December 28, 2004 10:27 PM"Another Website that should be of great interest to you is: www.klamathbasincrisis.org. An Oregon attorney named James Buchal had an important commentary published there on Dec. 27. First graf went like this:
"Last week, while most Washingtonians were focused on the ongoing effort by Democrats to seize control of the office of governor, Governor Locke last week jumped the gun and released a proposal for new water legislation that gives a preview of life under a Gregoire Administration, where every fervid fantasy of Seattleites can become legislative reality."
Everyone should recognize why natural resource producers are fighting for their economic lives in Wash right now. Buchal's piece proves that point quite well.
The results in Ohio have been certified. The electoral votes were cast December 13th. On January 6th, the House of Representatives will open the electoral college results "envelope" and declare Bush and Cheney the winners. Remember, that's the new Republican-controlled House,
with its new majority of 232 to 203.
The only reason the Democrats are whining is to earn the long-term support and trust of their looniest members.
Posted by: FedUpWithThis on December 28, 2004 11:48 PMSomebody needs to do a public records requests for copies of the original signed tally sheets for each precinct on the manual recount. It would have been a simple matter to change some of the data when inputting it into the computer.
Posted by: Richard Pope on December 29, 2004 12:00 AMI think Richard misquoted RCW 29A.08.710. He has it written that it is effective until 2006, but 710 is the one that is effective in 2006. RCW 29A.08.125 is effective until January 1st, 2006. 125 is the one that says the birth date MUST be included in the voter information. Verify for yourself:
http://www.leg.wa.gov/RCW/index.cfm?fuseaction=section§ion=29A.08.710
http://www.leg.wa.gov/RCW/index.cfm?section=29A.08.125&fuseaction=section
Somebody needs to do a public records requests for copies of the original signed tally sheets for each precinct on the manual recount. It would have been a simple matter to change some of the data when inputting it into the computer.
=========================================
Good luck reading some of them: I complained several times that 3-4 percent or so of the tally slips had numbers so small and so poorly written that it was VERY hard to decipher them: Was the digit a 3 or an 8; a 1 or a 7; a 5 or a 6; etc. A few were so illegible that they had to be sent back to the counting tables. Some of the people at the counting tables should have been dismissed for (apparently) not being able to write.
And in fact the actual data input operation itself was IMO probably the lowest risk for altering data: Both parties had experienced IT people watching every last tally slip being entered (well, ALMOST every tally slip: out of hundreds I watched go in maybe I missed cross-checking all the numbers on 4 or 5). And the spreadsheet had an auto total cross-check column that we COULD see; which means to avoid that very visible red flag the operator would have to alter TWO numbers without being detected by observers.
Plus everything was dual entry: Two data entry operators at 2 separate data entry stations input pink and yellow NCR copies of the white tally top-sheet master into 2 different copies of the master spreadsheet. Therefore to fudge numbers on actual data entry would I think have been very difficult; especially since the 2 data entry people were never on the same precinct at the same time; i.e.: they would have had to agree between themselves AHEAD OF TIME exactly how and on which precincts they would alter totals for both Dino and That Woman, in such a way that the totals would still be correct; WITHOUT getting caught by the observers. I doubt very much that happened; it would have been hard to do and high-risk.
SIDEBAR: Giving credit where credit is due, the data entry operators actually caught quite a few errors, and pointed them out to supervisors. The number of tally slip errors coming in from the counting tables was IMO considerably higher than it should have been, with 3 people (supposedly) cross-checking each other. I stand by my original impression of the whole counting operation: Messy. VERY messy.
Also, even if somebody still wants to look at all the tally slips (there are IIRC 2663 precincts in Uk. Cty), I believe originals are still sealed in the precinct ballot boxes; getting at those would be a HUGE operation. And many of the pink / yellow NCR copies are faint enough that I expect a legible copy would be hard to produce.
SUMMARY just from my perspective:
The actual dual data-entry from the tally slips is not an area I would focus on; unless somebody wanted to verify the final spreadsheet data matches what was on the slips. I don't know how many Uk. Cty supervisors had the master password for the spreadsheet, but it was probably half a dozen people or so.
Methow Ken
Both RCW 29A.08.125 and RCW 29A.08.710 change on 01/01/2006. The changes in each section are not relevant to the date of birth issue.
RCW 29A.08.125 requires the county auditor to keep the date of birth information on its own computer system.
RCW 29A.08.710, on the other hand, does not include date of birth in the information the auditor may release to the public.
Posted by: Richard Pope on December 29, 2004 12:26 PMEven though the date of birth is not public information, can we request that the county auditor do some queries that use the date of birth and then show us the results? For instance: Which voters have similar names and reside at the same address and have the same birthdate?
Posted by: Jonathan Gardner on December 29, 2004 01:48 PM