Punch cards. Complete with little paper clippy type things to do the punching . CHeers Lynne Prof. Lynne Henderson Boyd School of Law--UNLV 4505 Maryland Pkwy Box 451003 Las Vegas, NV 89154 702-895-2625 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Edward A Hartnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 10:07 AM Subject: Re: Paper ballots?
> Why would new forms have to go out to absentee voters? Don't absentee > voters in Santa Clara use paper ballots already? Or does Santa Clara send > out punch card ballots to absentees? (I can only imagine how high the > error rate for absentee punch card ballots would be.) > > Am I missing something? > > Ed Hartnett > Seton Hall > > > > > > Lynne > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > .COM> cc: > Sent by: Discussion Subject: Re: Paper ballots? > list for con law > professors > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > v.ucla.edu> > > > 09/16/03 12:50 PM > Please respond to > Discussion list for > con law professors > > > > > > > On the paper ballots vs punchcard ballots question--For those of us who are > absentee voters in the affected counties (ie, the counties that specialize > in hanging chads, and Santa Clara is one of 'em. . .), problems of getting > *new* forms printed and mailed to all absentee voters within next 2 weeks > arise. And wasn't the absentee ballot question an issue in the Florida > litigaton? > sincerely > Lynne > Prof. Lynne Henderson > Boyd School of Law--UNLV > 4505 Maryland Pkwy > Box 451003 > Las Vegas, NV 89154 > 702-895-2625 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Edward A Hartnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 7:34 AM > Subject: Re: Paper ballots? > > > > If the error rate for paper ballots and the error rate for optical > scanners > > (or electronic touch panels or mechanical levers) are sufficiently > > different so as to violate equal protection -- and I don't know if they > are > > -- then the state may have to use the same method throughout the state. > > If so, then the whole state can use paper ballots -- just as the whole > > nation of Canada (Sandy notes) does. And as Glenn points out, paper > > ballots provide a paper trail. > > > > As for Frank's broader point: If the error rates from different > > applications of the same method are sufficiently different so as to > violate > > equal protection, is there _any_ constitutional way to count votes? Am I > > right that the point is intended as a reductio ad absurdum of Bush v. > > Gore's equal protection analysis? > > > > Ed Hartnett > > Seton Hall > > > > > > > > > > > > Frank Cross > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > .EDU> cc: > > Sent by: Discussion Subject: Paper ballots? > > list for con law > > professors > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > v.ucla.edu> > > > > > > 09/16/03 09:40 AM > > Please respond to > > Discussion list for > > con law professors > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Will paper ballots really fix this problem? They are going to have an > > error rate, all systems do. Any state that uses two systems will have > > differential error rates for different voting systems. Indeed, even if a > > state used a single uniform system,the inevitable differences in its > > application will produce different error rates. Theoretically, I think > > this is an irresolvable mess. > > > > One could establish some de minimis acceptable difference in vote > counting > > systems, but I don't see that rule in Bush v. Gore. I'm not sure it > could > > be pulled from Bush v. Gore, because I don't think there was any evidence > > of greater than a de minimis difference there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Frank Cross > > Herbert D. Kelleher Centennial Professor of Business Law > > CBA 5.202 > > University of Texas at Austin > > Austin, TX 78712
