Dear ALSB Colleagues,

        I have been obtaining my election coverage via the Internet and
through Australian television reports.  This apparently has been quite good
as I think I am just as confused as other members of the listserve.  Here
now are a couple of questions:

1)      Is it just me, or is the term "partial recount" an oxymoron?

        It seems to me that the purpose of a "recount" is to arrive at a
result, and to use that result to replace any previous result.  The
presumption is that the recount total will replace the existing result. In
other words, the recount becomes the "count".

        Would anyone on the listserv argue that any election result in their
state could be certified only on a partial first count??  For example based
on selection of counties or precincts, whether random or not?  I suspect
not. (N.B.  Please not that this is how the media so accurately predicted
the results in Florida or other states!!!)

        It seems to me that partially recounting is like being partially
pregnant.  Given the closeness of the election, a reasoned argument that a
careful counting must take place to ensure an accurate outcome.  To argue
that it is important to use such care only in selected places but not others
would seem difficult to justify.

2)      Regarding the "chad" on the punch ballots.

        A few days ago, I think CNN had a list of the rules the elections
board was applying regarding whether an undetached chad counting as a vote.
As I recall, if the chad was detached from the ballot even in one corner
(i.e. 3 corners attached, but one detached) this would be counted as an
intention of the voter to cast a vote in favor of that candidate.  If the
chad were dimpled, but still attached in all corners, it would not count as
a vote (please check you  CNN website verification on this.

        My questions:

        Does anyone know how these standards were developed?


        More importantly.  Are the standards being applied to every chad on
the ballot.  Much concern has been expressed about double punching of the
ballot.  If a ballot contains a fully punched chad, but also a 1/2 punched
chad, does the full punch win?  If the 1/2 punched chad counts as intent to
vote on a ballot with no other punches, does it also count as an intent to
vote on ballot with more than one chad at least half detached?  If a ballot
contains two chads more 1/4 or more detached, then should this be
interpreted as intention to vote for two candidates, thus making the ballot
invalid.

        It seems to me that if the degree of detachment of the chad is the
standard for interpreting intention of the voter, then detachment of the
chad must apply to all chads equally.  This may  result in more invalid
ballots.

        Thanks for listening (or not)!

Rick Kunkel