The NASOS (National Association of Secretary of State) in November of 2019 fearing public distrust of elections started a nation wide advertising program: #trustedinfo. The emphasis was on how these institutions had foreseen the many possibilities that could corrupt the vote integrity and had put into place the proper protections.

Among the most impressive systems that the average voter does not see is the certification of machinery, the accuracy testing, and the audit system (usually under 3%). Combined they form a reasonable “proof” the results were correct. I have been promoting state run transparent full hand count audits of all federal races which would provide solid evidence. Ballots for this process have tight security and are stored for nearly 2 years.

Ballotpedia, is a web site dedicated to election information. Realize these elections used certified machinery, accuracy testing, and audits (under 3%) precautions. From 2000 - 2015 there were 27 full hand recounts only 3 caused a reversal of election results. Since 2017, Ballotpedia has covered 5 noteworthy recounts which showed 2 reversals of election results.

The reasonable “proof” when compared to a second source of tallying was 60% correct.

This is not good enough. This is a failure of the system. Let’s add mandatory state run transparent full hand count audits of all federal races to our arsenal of mitigation measures for vote integrity.

Kenny Cail


(4) comments


Since it is the same voters that vote in elections for federal, state, county offices and for judges all in the same ballot, then doing a hand count or an audit for federal offices only would mean that a hand count as such is worthless. Cheating and fraud at the state,county, and local levels is O.K.? But not at the federal level ? Give me a break!! Better yet, any person,organization, politician or government official that initiates a hand count or audit on false pretenses should be fined 25 million dollars for wasting taxpayers time and money.


Since 2017 6 European Nations and Canada run a machine count of their elections for speed and security. They also mandate a full hand count audit for safety.

If I hear you right, a fine should be placed on anyone suggesting improving our vote integrity? So if our percentage correct from tested and certified machines was found to be 60% that's ok with you? I don't understand how you felt this article is in support of cheating and fraud at the state, county, and local levels.


Scubagal, If European nations and Canada mandate a hand recount for safety as you say, please elaborate what in their election process is unsafe? Nobody is against improving our vote/election integrity, but first you have to prove and identify that a legitimate problem does exists. When local election officials, county election officials, state election officials and the courts, all agree that the election results were valid, then there is no need to waste taxpayer's time and money chasing windmills. Consider this, if the percentage of the voting count by election machines is 60% correct, then it affects all political races (federal,state,county) for office that are being voted on in that ballot. To suggest that a hand count audit on only federal races would mean that a 60% correct percentage of votes by the machines is O.K. and acceptable for state, county, local and judicial elections but not O.K. for federal elections. Give me a break!!! That process reeks of a lack of integrity itself.


Vtrone, full hand count audits are extremely rare. When they have done so recently it has been found that the mitigation efforts that rely on certified machines, logic and accuracy tests and audits of less than 3% will guarantee the election was 100% safe and secure. However when tested with hand recounts they have been found to be 60% accurately designating the election winner.

The FBI & Mueller reported Russians had hacked into 50 Secretary of State offices and the software companies who develop vote tally machines. With the ability to change tallies undetected you might see some unusual political wins. For example.

2010-2014: 24 senate seats change from Blue to Red, none Red to Blue (Largest change in 3 elections)

2016: Unpopular presidential win (defying polls)

2018: Expected Blue Wave is a ripple

2020: Blue wins Presidential race (well below polls) but no "coat tails"- 27-0 Toss up congressional races won by Red and 7 blue favored seats unexpectedly.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.