Former WA senator and governor Daniel Evans explains why hand recounts are not accurate, and why one should not be done in the still undecided Washington governor’s race.
First, with the advances in our procedures and training, the system we just used (combination hand/machine count) is more accurate than a pure hand count would be. But, if we are forced to endure a third count, then the state law, based as it is on outdated concepts, requires the next count to be a hand count. With a pure hand count, we lose the main thing computers do better than humans  count.
As King County elections director Dean Logan, a Democrat, said the other day of a possible hand count in his county, “When you’re talking about close to 900,000 pieces of paper, I think the machine count is going to be more accurate than a manual count.”
Simply put, a hand count will produce more errors.
To add insult to injury, taxpayers will likely get stuck with a $700,000 bill for this inaccurate recount. Why? While Democrats must pay for recounts in their chosen counties, if those select recounts put Gregoire ahead, state law requires a statewide recount at taxpayer expense.
The second reason not to do another recount: lawyers.
It’s time to be honest about this. The point of challenging the outcome is not about proving the truth; it’s about finding a way to change the result. If Christine Gregoire did not believe there was a chance that challenging the results would change the outcome, she wouldn’t do it.
The unpleasant truth is, a pure hand count subjects the whole process to more second-guessing, more trips to the courthouse, and more judges acting as elections officials. In a close race, if lawyers can cherry-pick the right precincts or counties, pick the right judges, challenge enough ballots and change enough votes, the result could be changed. Remember, it would only take a little more than one vote changed per county.
