quadraginta
Becoming Beth
It is an audit which is being conducted by manual recount. Not the same as an official recount ... which, it turns out ... cannot be conducted by hand.
I had only seen a brief mention of this before I posted, but your response prompted me to further, in depth research.
Here's one example of what I found.
"Hand recounts are not permitted by Georgia law. But the public seems to be demanding one. Moreover, the state was already planning to conduct a risk-limiting audit to verify accuracy of the results. So, audit or recount? Here’s what’s happening.
Recounts and audits are distinct processes. A recount occurs after an election when the margin between candidates is narrow, or if a candidate asks for a recount. Recounts are a literal counting of ballots, sometimes by hand, to confirm the result. Some states have automatically triggered recounts for contests decided within a small margin; other states offer an option for a recount when a candidate requests it. Georgia does not have automatic recounts, but a candidate can request a recount after certification.
Contrary to recounts, an audit seeks to verify that the primary counting method is accurate. In Georgia, Risk Limiting Audits, or RLAs, are required by state statute. In an RLA, a certain number of ballots are audited based on the margin of victory between candidates in the race selected for auditing. Closer margins require more ballots to be reviewed in order to achieve a high standard of statistical confidence in the overall result. The process involves taking a small batch of ballots from precincts based on a unique identifier. Even pulling a few hundred ballots can be labor intensive. For contests with very small margins of victory, manually auditing all ballots is more efficient.
Audits are important. BPC recommends that states use audits to instill confidence in the reported outcome. While an RLA cannot confirm a 100% accurate count of the initial results—since it is not a full recount and therefore can only provide confidence within a specific interval—it offers a sound statistical check on the voting process that is sufficient in most cases.
So, what is happening in Georgia right now? Raffensperger ordered a hand-tally of all ballots across the state. One may think that this is a recount, but there are two reasons it is not. First, recounts in Georgia are not done by hand. Second, in Georgia, the results must be certified before a recount can be requested while an audit—per BPC’s recommendation—occurs before certification.
So, the Georgia maneuverings must be an RLA, right? Not quite. What Raffensperger has essentially ordered is a hybrid of an audit and a recount. This means that while they will be assessing every ballot, which is not normal in an ordinary RLA, they will be doing it by hand, which is not normal of a typical recount. After the completion of this process, which is set to happen on or before November 18, Raffensperger will the assess the results and then continue to the certification process on November 20. After certification, a recount can be requested which would see all the ballots scanned by machine again across the state."
Recounts and audits are distinct processes. A recount occurs after an election when the margin between candidates is narrow, or if a candidate asks for a recount. Recounts are a literal counting of ballots, sometimes by hand, to confirm the result. Some states have automatically triggered recounts for contests decided within a small margin; other states offer an option for a recount when a candidate requests it. Georgia does not have automatic recounts, but a candidate can request a recount after certification.
Contrary to recounts, an audit seeks to verify that the primary counting method is accurate. In Georgia, Risk Limiting Audits, or RLAs, are required by state statute. In an RLA, a certain number of ballots are audited based on the margin of victory between candidates in the race selected for auditing. Closer margins require more ballots to be reviewed in order to achieve a high standard of statistical confidence in the overall result. The process involves taking a small batch of ballots from precincts based on a unique identifier. Even pulling a few hundred ballots can be labor intensive. For contests with very small margins of victory, manually auditing all ballots is more efficient.
Audits are important. BPC recommends that states use audits to instill confidence in the reported outcome. While an RLA cannot confirm a 100% accurate count of the initial results—since it is not a full recount and therefore can only provide confidence within a specific interval—it offers a sound statistical check on the voting process that is sufficient in most cases.
So, what is happening in Georgia right now? Raffensperger ordered a hand-tally of all ballots across the state. One may think that this is a recount, but there are two reasons it is not. First, recounts in Georgia are not done by hand. Second, in Georgia, the results must be certified before a recount can be requested while an audit—per BPC’s recommendation—occurs before certification.
So, the Georgia maneuverings must be an RLA, right? Not quite. What Raffensperger has essentially ordered is a hybrid of an audit and a recount. This means that while they will be assessing every ballot, which is not normal in an ordinary RLA, they will be doing it by hand, which is not normal of a typical recount. After the completion of this process, which is set to happen on or before November 18, Raffensperger will the assess the results and then continue to the certification process on November 20. After certification, a recount can be requested which would see all the ballots scanned by machine again across the state."
Last edited:
