Search

We compare the results of two recent statewide recounts in Wisconsin—the 2011 Supreme Court election and the 2016 presidential election. Using the measure of absolute differences between the original tally and the recount, we find an error rate at the reporting unit level of 0.21% in 2011 and 0.59% in 2016. The 2016 error rate drops to 0.17% when write-in votes are removed from the analysis. We also find that paper ballots originally counted with optical scanners were counted more accurately than ballots originally counted by hand. To reach these conclusions, we address the methodology of measuring differences in election night and recounted vote tallies. The most commonly used measure to compare election-night and recounted tallies, the net difference, significantly understates the magnitude of errors in the original tally. We also develop a regression-based technique that estimates what the error rate should be if a ballot-by-ballot recount were possible. We conclude by discussing the implications for requiring post-election audits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Successful election administration depends on an army of poll workers who are responsible for front line interaction with voters at the polling place. Despite their important role in elections, we know surprisingly little about how recruitment and training of poll workers translates into performance. We review research on poll workers and present descriptive information about poll worker characteristics, recruitment, training, and evaluation. We suggest that widespread concern about the quantity of poll workers has distracted from examining the quality of poll workers. More systematic evaluation is necessary to understand how various inputs affect poll worker performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Absentee and early voting are increasingly popular in the United States. Most states have embraced one of these options to make voting easier. Absentee voting is often marginally more convenient and might be less expensive to administer, but it also carries unique costs in terms of ballot insecurity, higher odds of error and fraud, and a concomitant reduction in public confidence. States intent on making the act of voting easier should prefer in-person early voting to absentee voting, while continuing to focus on improving the experience of Election Day voting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]