 |  |
|
| |
|
Residual Vote in the 2004 Election
|
|
Charles
Stewart III,
CalTech/MIT Voting Technology Project,
2/1/2005
|
|
|
Link to Paper (PDF)
|
|
|
|
The high degree of scrutiny over how the 2004 election was run, particularly in the “battleground states,” has in turn led to a steady stream of election horror stories. A casual reading of American newspapers might lead a typical reader to conclude that state and local governments had learned nothing from 2000 --- that the billion dollars spent on upgrading
election equipment and practices under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) had been wasted. A careful consideration of reports from around the country about the conduct of elections in some jurisdictions reveals that election reform is still a work in progress. At the same time, a full consideration of all the evidence from the 2004 election will likely highlight the most important point of all: four years of election reform made a difference on several fronts. Taking the American electoral system as a whole, the emerging evidence is that the election of 2004 was run much better than the election of 2000.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 21
|
|
|
