Difference between revisions of "Hanging chad"
(te) |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|image=Looking for hanging chad, 2000 Presidential election.jpg | |image=Looking for hanging chad, 2000 Presidential election.jpg | ||
|image_width=130px | |image_width=130px | ||
| + | |constitutes=Election/Fraud | ||
|image_caption=An election worker closely examines a [[Florida]] [[punch card]] [[ballot]] from the [[2000 US Presidential election]] for signs of a hanging chad. | |image_caption=An election worker closely examines a [[Florida]] [[punch card]] [[ballot]] from the [[2000 US Presidential election]] for signs of a hanging chad. | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | '''Hanging chad''', alternately '''dimpled chad''' or '''pregnant chad''', is a term that was widely used following the | + | '''Hanging chad''', alternately '''dimpled chad''', or '''pregnant chad''', is a term that was widely used following the [[2000 United States presidential election|United States presidential election of 2000]].<ref name=Risks21-12-1-1>[http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/21.12.html#subj1.1 Sanity in the Election Process] publisher [[Risks digest]] volume=21 issue=12 author [[Lauren Weinstein]] date=2000-11-11</ref> |
| − | + | <ref name=Risks21-70-2-1>[http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/21.70.html#subj2.1 Pregnant chad revisited] publisher [[Risks digest]] volume=21 issue=70 author [[Douglas W. Jones]] date=2001-10-19</ref> | |
| − | + | <ref name=JonesChad>[http://www.cs.uiowa.edu/~jones/cards/chad.html Chad — From waste product to headline] publisher [[University of Iowa]] author [[Douglas W. Jones]] date=2002 [http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cs.uiowa.edu%2F%7Ejones%2Fcards%2Fchad.html&date=2009-02-22 mirror]</ref> | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | </ref> | ||
==Controversy== | ==Controversy== | ||
| Line 45: | Line 19: | ||
Bipartisan committees were going to examine every punch card ballot. | Bipartisan committees were going to examine every punch card ballot. | ||
| − | The term " | + | The term "chad" is used for the piece of paper left when a hole is punched out of a card or piece of paper. The punch card ballots were to be examined for the presences of partially punch out chads. |
==Reverse engineering the problem== | ==Reverse engineering the problem== | ||
| Line 54: | Line 28: | ||
Proper design of ballots using these machines will never place a candidate's name above one of these support bars. | Proper design of ballots using these machines will never place a candidate's name above one of these support bars. | ||
| − | The "hanging chad" problem, with the same votomatic machines, had marred the results of the 1988 Florida Senate race between [[Buddy Mackay]] and [[Connie Mack]].<ref name=Risks21-71-9-1> | + | The "hanging chad" problem, with the same votomatic machines, had marred the results of the 1988 Florida Senate race between [[Buddy Mackay]] and [[Connie Mack]].<ref name=Risks21-71-9-1>[http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/21.71.html#subj9.1 Pregnant chad revisited] publisher [[Risks digest]] volume=21 issue=71 author [[Peter G. Neumann]] date=2001-10-22</ref> |
| − | + | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
{{SMWDocs}} | {{SMWDocs}} | ||
| + | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
Latest revision as of 17:39, 12 November 2024
 Hanging chad  (Election/Fraud)   | |
|---|---|
 An election worker closely examines a Florida punch card ballot from the 2000 US Presidential election for signs of a hanging chad. | |
Hanging chad, alternately dimpled chad, or pregnant chad, is a term that was widely used following the United States presidential election of 2000.[1] [2] [3]
Controversy
In the United States electoral system the design of ballots, and their collation, is not the responsibility of a Federal agency. Each state appoints its own chief returning officer. Each county designs its own ballots.
The results in Florida were very close. Several counties used voting machines that used punch cards. The punch card system did not provide an independently verifiable audit trail. Bipartisan committees were going to examine every punch card ballot.
The term "chad" is used for the piece of paper left when a hole is punched out of a card or piece of paper. The punch card ballots were to be examined for the presences of partially punch out chads.
Reverse engineering the problem
Douglas W. Jones, a professor of Computer Science at the University of Iowa, and the curator of a museum on the history of the punch card, reported having one of the controversial votomatic machines delivered to him, and reverse-engineering the problem with the punch card ballots in the 2000 elections.[2][3]
Jones reported that the problem was due to improperly designed ballots that placed candidate Al Gore's name above hidden support bars, that did not allow enough clearance for chads punched out by voters who selected him.[2][3] Proper design of ballots using these machines will never place a candidate's name above one of these support bars.
The "hanging chad" problem, with the same votomatic machines, had marred the results of the 1988 Florida Senate race between Buddy Mackay and Connie Mack.[4]
References
- ↑ Sanity in the Election Process publisher Risks digest volume=21 issue=12 author Lauren Weinstein date=2000-11-11
- ↑ a b c Pregnant chad revisited publisher Risks digest volume=21 issue=70 author Douglas W. Jones date=2001-10-19
- ↑ a b c Chad — From waste product to headline publisher University of Iowa author Douglas W. Jones date=2002 mirror
- ↑ Pregnant chad revisited publisher Risks digest volume=21 issue=71 author Peter G. Neumann date=2001-10-22
