2004 United States election voting controversies

During the 2004 United States elections, there was controversy around various aspects of the voting process, including whether voting had been made accessible to all those entitled to vote, whether ineligible voters were registered, whether voters were registered multiple times, and whether the votes cast had been correctly counted.

There was generally less attention paid to the Senate and House elections and to various state races, but some of them were also questioned, especially the gubernatorial election in Washington, which was decided by less than 0.01% and involved several recounts and lawsuits. The final recount also reversed the outcome of this election.

Voting difficulties

Voter registration

In the months leading up to the 2004 election, both parties made efforts to register new voters. In some cases, Republicans challenged or prepared to challenge the validity of many new registrations, citing instances of fictitious names such as Mary Poppins appearing on the voter rolls. ^[1]

There were also complaints about the rejection of registrations by government agencies. College students encountered difficulties in registering where they attended school. ^[2] Some officials rejected voter registration forms on grounds that were contested, such as a failure to use paper of a particular weight (in Ohio) ^{[3] [4]} or a failure to check a box on the form (Florida). ^[5]

A New York Daily News article alleged 46,000 people were registered to vote in both New York City and Florida. ^[6] A Cleveland Plain Dealer article identified 27,000 people possibly registered in both Ohio and Florida, with 400 possibly voting in both states consistently in the previous four years. ^[7] The articles attempted to match voter rolls to each other, ^[8] which probably did not produce accurate results due to similarity of names. ^[9]

Voter intimidation

Court injunctions were placed by the Franklin County Common Pleas Court against MoveOn for verbally threatening and harassing individuals who identified themselves as Republican. ^[10] On October 5, a Bush-Cheney campaign volunteer in Orlando had his arm broken when trying to stop union activists from storming the campaign office. The "storming" was part of a massive simultaneous campaign against 20 pro-Republican headquarters. ^{[11] [12] [13]}

Practical impediments

In every election, some voters encounter practical impediments to voting, such as long lines at the polling place. In 2004, however, the issue received increased attention. ^{[14] [15]} In many places, some voters had to wait several hours to vote. ^[16] In Ohio, some precincts had too few machines, causing long waiting times, while others had many machines per registered voters. Officials cited a late rush of registrations after voting machines had already been allocated as one source of long lines. ^{[17] [ better source needed ] [18]}

Voting machines

Further information: Electronic voting § Analysis

In the 2000 election, especially in the disputed recounts in Florida, there were issues concerning the ambiguities and uncertainties that arose from punch-card ballots, such as the hanging chads (incompletely punched holes). In 2004, the punch-card ballots were still widely used in some states. ^[19] Most Ohio voters used punch-card ballots, and more than 90,000 ballots cast in Ohio were treated as not including a vote for President; this "undervote" could arise because the voter chose not to cast a vote or because of a malfunction of the punch-card system. Undervotes were down slightly from the 2000 election on the whole. ^[20]

For the country as a whole, the voting technology used in the 2004 election breaks down as follows: ^[21]

Machine type	% of ballots cast
Punch card	22.3
Lever machine	14.7
Paper ballot	1.7
Optical scan	29.6
Electronic	22.1
Mixed	9.6

Before 2004, the increasing use of electronic voting machines had raised several issues:

• Security. Without proper testing and certification, electronic voting machines could produce an incorrect report due to malfunction or deliberate manipulation. ^{[22] [23] [24]}
• Recounts. Voting machine recounts should include auditing of hardware, software and the comparison of multiple vote records. Nevada was one of several states which insisted on electronic voting systems that create a paper trail. ^[25]
• Partisan ties. Democrats noted the Republican or conservative ties of several leading executives in the companies providing the machines. ^[26]

The state of California ordered that 15,000 of its Diebold voting machines not be used in the 2004 elections due to flaws that the company failed to disclose. ^{[27] [28]}

In September 2005, the Government Accountability Office released a report noting electronic voting systems hold promise for improving the election process while citing concerns about security and reliability raised by numerous groups, and detailing specific problems that have occurred. ^[29]

Provisional and absentee ballots

In Ohio, Secretary of State Ken Blackwell ruled that Ohio would not count provisional ballots that were submitted at the wrong precinct. This ruling was ultimately upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. ^{[30] [31]}

Absentee ballots were also an issue. There were reports of absentee ballots being mailed out too late for some voters to complete and return them in time. ^[32] In Broward County, Florida, some 58,000 absentee ballots were delivered to the Postal Service to be mailed to voters, according to county election officials, but the Postal Service said it had never received them. ^{[33] [34]}

Exit polls

According to Richard Morin of the New York Times , the 2004 election "may have finally stripped exit polling of its reputation as the crown jewel of political surveys, somehow immune from the myriad problems that affect telephone polls and other types of public opinion surveys. Instead, this face-to-face, catch-the-voters-on-the-way-out poll has been revealed for what it is: just another poll, with all the problems and imperfections endemic to the craft." ^[35] Exit polls showed a higher percentage of the vote for Kerry than he actually received, leading some, including Tony Blair, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, to conclude that Kerry won the election prematurely. ^[36]

Mitofsky International, the company responsible for exit polling for the National Election Pool (NEP) and its member news organizations, released a report detailing the 2004 election's exit polling. ^[37] The NEP report stated that "the size of the average exit poll error ... was higher in 2004 than in previous years for which we have data" and that exit polling estimates overstated Kerry's share of the vote in 26 states by more than one standard error and overestimated Bush's share in four states by more than one standard error. ^[37] It concluded that these discrepancies between the exit polls and the official results were "most likely due to Kerry voters participating in the exit polls at a higher rate than Bush voters". The NEP report further stated that "Exit polls do not support the allegations of fraud due to rigging of voting equipment. Our analysis of the difference between the vote count and the exit poll at each polling location in our sample has found no systematic differences for precincts using touch screen and optical scan voting equipment." ^[37] A study performed by the Caltech / MIT Voting Technology Project concluded that "there is no evidence, based on exit polls, that electronic voting machines were used to steal the 2004 election for President Bush." ^[38]

Following the 2004 election, researchers looked at ways in which polling methodologies might be flawed ^[39] and explored ways to improve polling in the future. ^[40]

Recounts and close elections

Further information: Moss v. Bush

Ralph Nader requested a recount of 11 wards in New Hampshire where vote totals for Bush were 5–15% higher than predicted by exit polls. The Nader campaign reported that "only very minor discrepancies were found between the optical scan machine counts of the ballots and the recount. The discrepancies are similar to those found when hand-counted ballots are recounted". ^[41]

Two poll workers in Cuyahoga County were convicted of preselecting ballots for recounts in Ohio. ^[42]

Around the country there were also recounts of races for state and local office. Most of them reflected simply the closeness of the official tally, but some also raised issues of election irregularities. These included the elections for:

• Governor of Washington, between Dino Rossi and Christine Gregoire. Issues raised included the mailing of absentee ballots, the counting of provisional and absentee ballots, correction of improper marks on optically scanned ballots, and alleged tampering with electronic voting machines. The first tally and the first recount gave the election to Republican Dino Rossi. However, after two statewide recounts, Gregoire, the Democrat, had a narrow lead of 129 votes out of 2.8 million cast. A Republican lawsuit seeking to overturn the result and force a re-vote was rejected by the court, after which Rossi conceded the election. See Washington gubernatorial election, 2004.
• North Carolina Commissioner of Agriculture, between Britt Cobb and Steve Troxler. The number of votes lost due to a voting machine malfunction in Carteret County (over 4,000) exceed the reported margin of about 2,000. The state board of elections initially called for a new election in Cartaret County before a judge struck the idea down; a new statewide election was also struck down. The Troxler campaign attempted to gather affidavits from Cartaret County voters to establish they had won; this was mooted when Cobb, who said he wanted to "avoid the terrible precedent of settling elections by affidavit", conceded. ^[43]
• Governor of Puerto Rico, between Aníbal Acevedo Vilá and Pedro Rosselló. Aníbal Acevedo-Vilá was declared the winner after several months of disputes. The two candidates were separated by just under 4,000 votes. ^[44]

Objection to Ohio's electoral votes

After the election, many blogs published false rumors claiming to show evidence that voter fraud had prevented Kerry from winning. ^{[45] [46]} Unfounded conspiracy theories about the election were circulated and promoted. ^[47] Conspiracy theorists argued the election was stolen, arguing that votes were switched from Democratic to Republican, that "phantom voters" voted in Ohio, that exit polls that favored Democrat John Kerry were "more accurate" than the actual result, ^[48] and that voting machines were rigged to favor George W. Bush. ^[49]

Although the overall result of the election was not challenged by the Kerry campaign, Green Party presidential candidate David Cobb and Libertarian Party presidential candidate Michael Badnarik obtained a recount in Ohio. This recount was completed December 28, 2004, although on January 24, 2007, a jury convicted two Ohio elections officials of selecting precincts to recount where they already knew the hand total would match the machine total, thereby avoiding having to perform a full recount. ^[50] Independent candidate Ralph Nader obtained a recount in 11 New Hampshire precincts that used Accuvote voting machines. ^[51]

As a result of these conspiracy theories, some Democratic members of Congress asked for investigations into the vote count. ^[48] At the official counting of the electoral votes on January 6, an objection was made under the Electoral Count Act (now 3 U.S.C.   § 15) to Ohio's electoral votes. Because the motion was supported by at least one member of both the House of Representatives and the Senate, the law required that the two houses separate to debate and vote on the objection. In the House of Representatives, the objection was supported by 31 Democrats. It was opposed by 178 Republicans, 88 Democrats and one independent. Not voting were 52 Republicans and 80 Democrats. ^[52] Four people elected to the House had not yet taken office, and one seat was vacant. In the Senate, it was supported only by its maker, Barbara Boxer, with 74 senators opposed and 25 not voting. During the debate, no Senator argued that the outcome of the election should be changed by either court challenge or revote. Boxer claimed that she had made the motion not to challenge the outcome, but "to cast the light of truth on a flawed system which must be fixed now.". ^{[53] [54]}

Kerry would later state that "the widespread irregularities make it impossible to know for certain that the [Ohio] outcome reflected the will of the voters." In the same article, Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said "I'm not confident that the election in Ohio was fairly decided... We know that there was substantial voter suppression, and the machines were not reliable. It should not be a surprise that the Republicans are willing to do things that are unethical to manipulate elections. That's what we suspect has happened." ^[55]

Senate vote on the objection (3:18 pm EST on January 6, 2005) ^[56]

Party		Votes for	Votes against	Not voting
	Republican (55)	–	38	17
	Democratic (44)	1 Barbara Boxer	35	8 Daniel Akaka Evan Bayh Jeff Bingaman Jon Corzine Dianne Feinstein John Kerry Mary Landrieu Patty Murray
	Independent (1)	–	1 Jim Jeffords	–
Total (100)		1	74	25

House vote on the objection (5:02 pm EST on January 6, 2005) ^[57]

Party		Votes for	Votes against	Not voting
	Republican (230)	–	178	52
	Democratic (199)	31 Corrine Brown Julia Carson Lacy Clay Jim Clyburn John Conyers Danny K. Davis Lane Evans Sam Farr Bob Filner Raúl Grijalva Alcee Hastings Maurice Hinchey Sheila Jackson Lee Jesse Jackson Jr. Eddie Bernice Johnson Stephanie Tubbs Jones Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick Dennis Kucinich Barbara Lee John Lewis Ed Markey Cynthia McKinney John Olver Major Owens Frank Pallone Donald M. Payne Jan Schakowsky Bennie Thompson Maxine Waters Diane Watson Lynn Woolsey	88	80
	Independent (1)	–	1 Bernie Sanders	–
Total (430)		31	267	132

References

1. Becker, Jo (October 29, 2004), "GOP Challenging Voter Registrations", The Washington Post , retrieved December 1, 2008
2. DI Editorial Board (September 20, 2004), "Disenfranchising youth & minorities", The Daily Iowan , archived from the original on December 29, 2004, retrieved July 12, 2008
3. "Playing With the Election Rules", New York Times , September 30, 2004, retrieved January 30, 2023
4. Tokaji, Daniel, "Early Returns on Election Reform", The George Washington Law Review: 1227, retrieved January 30, 2023
5. Goodnough, Abby (October 14, 2004), "Florida flooded with pre-emptive election lawsuits", San Francisco Chronicle , retrieved July 12, 2008
6. Buettner, Russ (August 22, 2004), "Exposed: Scandal Of Double Voters", New York Daily News , archived from the original on January 22, 2009, retrieved June 18, 2009
7. "Voters Double-Dip in Ohio, Fla.," Scott Hiaasen, Dave Davis and Julie Carr Smyth, [Cleveland] Plain Dealer, October 31, 2004
8. Analysis of Alleged Fraud in Briefs Supporting Crawford Respondents, Justin Levitt, Brennan Center for Justice. Accessed June 18, 2009. Archived June 20, 2009.
9. Michael McDonald & Justin Levitt, Seeing Double Voting (2007) SSRN   997888
10. Timms et al. v. MoveOn, Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 04 CVH11 011533. (Exhibit K)
11. "Protestors Ransack Bush/Cheney Headquarters In Orlando", Local 6 News, October 5, 2004, archived from the original on January 16, 2009, retrieved December 22, 2008
12. Postman, David (October 12, 2004), "Second Break-In Hits A Bush Office In State", The Seattle Times , archived from the original on December 2, 2008, retrieved December 22, 2008
13. Schneider, Mike (October 5, 2004), "Florida GOP Workers Claim Intimidation By Labor Protesters", Associated Press , archived from the original on October 29, 2004
14. Voting Problems in Ohio Spur Call for Overhaul, The New York Times , December 24, 2004.
15. Belenky, Alexander S.; Larson, Richard C. (May 8, 2009), "Voting standards are the key to avoiding long lines on Election Day", The Plain Dealer , archived from the original on May 11, 2009, retrieved May 22, 2009
16. Democratic National Committee: Institute of Voting Rights (2005), Democracy At Risk: The 2004 Election in Ohio (PDF), DNC Services Corporation, archived from the original (PDF) on March 25, 2009, retrieved January 12, 2009
17. Keith, Tamara (November 17, 2004), "Election day lines caused by voting machine shortage and other factors", WOSU Radio, archived from the original on May 9, 2020, retrieved November 20, 2008
18. Hearing – 2004 election and the implementation of the Help America Vote Act J. Kenneth Blackwell via archive.org
19. New Study Shows 50 Million Voters Will Use Electronic Voting Systems, 32 Million Still with Punch Cards in 2004, Election Data Services Inc
20. Tokaji, Daniel (February 8, 2005), How Did Ohio's Voting Equipment Fare in 2004?, Moritz College of Law, archived from the original on June 11, 2008, retrieved July 21, 2008
21. Warf, Barney (June 2006). "Voting technologies and residual ballots in the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections". Political Geography . 25 (5): 530–556. doi:10.1016/j.polgeo.2006.03.001.
22. Schneier, Bruce (November 10, 2004), The Problem with Electronic Voting Machines , retrieved December 21, 2008
23. Electronic Voting Offers Opportunities and Presents Challenges Government Accountability Office
24. Brown, Chappell (October 28, 2004). "Voting machines remain unsecured, expert warns". EE Times. Retrieved September 23, 2010.
25. Konrad, Rachel (September 7, 2004), "'Paper trail' voting system used in Nevada", NBC News , archived from the original on October 18, 2015, retrieved December 5, 2008
26. Warner, Melanie (November 9, 2003), "Machine Politics in the Digital Age", The New York Times, retrieved July 12, 2008
27. Ross, Brian (October 27, 2004), "Touch-Screen Trouble", ABC News , retrieved November 18, 2008
28. Lucas, Greg (May 1, 2004), "State bans electronic balloting in 4 counties", San Francisco Chronicle, retrieved December 4, 2008
29. Federal Efforts to Improve Security and Reliability of Electronic Voting Systems Are Under Way, but Key Activities Need to Be Completed U.S. Government Accountability Office. September 2005
30. "Ohio provisional ballot ruling reversed", USA Today , October 23, 2004, retrieved November 20, 2008
31. "Sandusky County Democratic Party; the Ohio Democratic Party; Farm Labor Organizing Committee; North Central Ohio Building and Construction Trades Council; and Local 245 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. J. Kenneth Blackwell, Defendant-Appellant, and Gregory L. Arnold; Glenn A. Wolfe; and Thomas W. Noe, Intervenors-Appellants: Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio at Toledo" (PDF). October 26, 2004. File Name: 04a0367p.06. Archived (PDF) from the original on February 6, 2012. Retrieved May 29, 2014.
32. Moss, Michael (September 29, 2004), "Hurdles Remain for American Voters Who Live Overseas", The New York Times, retrieved December 23, 2008
33. Local 10 Uncovers Big Ballot Mystery Archived October 27, 2004, at the Wayback Machine WPLG Miami, October 26, 2004
34. Florida ballot papers go missing BBC News, October 28, 2004
35. Morin, Richard (November 21, 2004), "Surveying the Damage", The Washington Post, retrieved July 20, 2008
36. Rutenberg, Jim (November 5, 2004), "Report Says Problems Led to Skewed Surveying Data", The New York Times, archived from the original on December 11, 2008, retrieved November 11, 2008
37. Edison Media Research; Mitofsky International (January 19, 2005), Evaluation of Edison/Mitofsky Election System 2004 (PDF), archived from the original (PDF) on June 14, 2007. Alt URL
38. Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project (November 11, 2004), Voting machines and the underestimate of the bush vote (PDF), archived from the original (PDF) on December 1, 2007, retrieved July 23, 2008.
39. Traugott, M. W. (2005), "The Accuracy of the National Preelection Polls in the 2004 Presidential Election", Public Opinion Quarterly, 69 (5): 642–654, doi: 10.1093/poq/nfi061 , ISSN   0033-362X.
40. Barreto, Matt A.; Guerra, Fernando; Marks, Mara; Nuño, Stephen A.; Woods, Nathan D. (2006), "Controversies in Exit Polling: Implementing a Racially Stratified Homogenous Precinct Approach", PS: Political Science & Politics, 39 (3): 477–483, CiteSeerX   10.1.1.565.6435 , doi:10.1017/S1049096506060689 (inactive November 1, 2024), ISSN   1049-0965, S2CID   54075522.
41. Nader for President 2004 (October 3, 2006). "Nader-Camejo Hand Recount in New Hampshire Ends With No Significant Discrepancies". Archived from the original on October 3, 2006. Retrieved May 24, 2010.
42. Kropko, M.R. (January 24, 2007), "Election Staff Convicted in Recount Rig", The Washington Post, retrieved October 16, 2008
43. "Cobb Concedes Ag Commissioner Race To Troxler", WRAL-TV , February 4, 2005, retrieved December 1, 2008
44. Goodnough, Abby (December 29, 2004), "Puerto Rico Certifies Results in Election for Governor", The New York Times, archived from the original on May 28, 2015, retrieved December 1, 2008
45. Zeller, Tom Jr. (November 12, 2004). "Vote Fraud Theories, Spread by Blogs, Are Quickly Buried". The New York Times. Retrieved April 11, 2024.
46. Weiss, Joanna (December 19, 2020). "What Happened to the Democrats Who Never Accepted Bush's Election". POLITICO. Retrieved February 8, 2021.
47. "What Happened to the Democrats Who Never Accepted Bush's Election". POLITICO . Retrieved August 13, 2024.
48. "Conspiracy Theories Abound After Bush Victory". ABC News . November 9, 2004. Retrieved August 13, 2024.
49. Gumbel, Andrew (October 25, 2016). "The history of 'rigged' US elections: from Bush v Gore to Trump v Clinton". The Guardian . Retrieved August 13, 2024.
50. Kropko, M.R. (January 24, 2007). "Election Staff Convicted in Recount Rig". The Washington Post . Retrieved May 26, 2010.
51. Herron, Michael C.; Wand, Jonathan (June 1, 2007). "Assessing partisan bias in voting technology: The case of the 2004 New Hampshire recount". Electoral Studies. 26 (2): 247–261. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2006.02.004. ISSN   0261-3794.
52. "Final Vote Results for Roll Call 7". Clerk.house.gov. January 6, 2005. Retrieved May 24, 2010.
53. "Congress Ratifies Bush Victory After Challenge". The New York Times . January 7, 2005.
54. "Senator Barbara Boxer's (Democrat California) Objection To The Certification Of Ohio's Electoral Votes". The Green Papers. January 6, 2005.
55. Kennedy, Robert F. "Was the 2004 Election Stolen? : Rolling Stone". Rollingstone.com. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
56. "On the Objection (Shall Objection Submitted Be Sustained Re: Electoral Ballot Count)". United States Senate. Archived from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 27, 2020.
57. "Roll Call 7". Clerk of the United States House of Representatives. Archived from the original on December 17, 2020. Retrieved December 27, 2020.

External links

• Steve Rosenthal, Washington Post "Okay, We Lost Ohio. The Question Is, Why?" December 5, 2004
• William Raspberry, Washington Post Comments on problems with the 2004 election January 10, 2005
• Manuel Roig-Franzia and Dan Keating, Washington Post "Latest Conspiracy Theory – Kerry Won – Hits the Ether" November 11, 2004
• Mark Hertsgaard, Mother Jones, "Recounting Ohio" November 2005
• Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Rolling Stone , "Was the 2004 Election Stolen?" June 1, 2006
• Farhad Manjoo, Salon, Was the 2004 Election Stolen? No. – Critique of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s Rolling Stone Article June 3, 2006
• Final Tallies Minus Exit Polls=A Statistical Mystery!, John Allen Paulos. November 24, 2004
• Mark Crispin Miller, Harper's None Dare Call it Stolen August 2005