Monthly Archives: November 2012

2012 US Presidential Election, Electoral College, Electors, US Constitution, Federal Election Law, State Election Laws, State officers, State Election Officials, Judges, US Supreme Court Justices, Questions and answers

2012 US Presidential Election, Electoral College, Electors, US Constitution, Federal Election Law, State Election Laws, State officers, State Election Officials, Judges, US Supreme Court Justices, Questions and answers

“Our Constitution is in actual operation; everything appears to promise
that it will last; but nothing in this world is certain but death and
taxes.”     Benjamin Franklin

Reprinted from Citizen Wells December 13, 2008.

Presidential Election

ELECTORAL COLLEGE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Q: What is the Electoral College?:

A: The Electoral College was established by the founding fathers
as a compromise between election of the president by Congress and
election by popular vote. The people of the United States vote for
the electors who then vote for the President. Read more

Q: Frequently asked questions:

A: Read more here

Q: Why did the Founding Fathers create the Electoral College?:

A:  The Founding Father’s intent

Here is a quote by Alexander Hamilton who, like many of the founding
fathers, was “afraid a tyrant could manipulate public opinion and come
to power.” Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers:

“It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made
by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station,
and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a
judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were
proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by
their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to
possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated
investigations. It was also peculiarly desirable to afford as little
opportunity as possible to tumult and disorder. This evil was not least
to be dreaded in the election of a magistrate, who was to have so
important an agency in the administration of the government as the
President of the United States. But the precautions which have been so
happily concerted in the system under consideration, promise an
effectual security against this mischief.”

Q: What are the state laws governing Electors?:

A: List of states and restrictions on Electors

Q: What are so called “Faithless Electors”?:

A: “The Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require
that electors be completely free to act as they choose and therefore,
political parties may extract pledges from electors to vote for the
parties’ nominees. Some State laws provide that so-called “faithless
electors” may be subject to fines or may be disqualified for casting
an invalid vote and be replaced by a substitute elector. The Supreme
Court has not specifically ruled on the question of whether pledges
and penalties for failure to vote as pledged may be enforced under
the Constitution. No elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to
vote as pledged.” Read more here

The US Supreme Court Obviously has not given Electors the option to
violate the US Constitution. Therefore, obviously, if the presidential
candidate is qualified, party pledges and state laws are permissable.

Q: What must an Elector be aware of when voting for a presidential candidate?:

 A: The following are important considerations when casting a vote. Voting
as instructed by a political party, another person, or a state law in
conflict with the US Constitution or Federal Election Laws is a serious
matter. Those not voting in accordance with higher laws are subject to
prosecution and may be guilty of “High Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
High Crimes and Misdemeanors

UNITED STATES ELECTION LAW

“The following provisions of law governing Presidential Elections are contained in Chapter 1 of Title 3, United States Code (62 Stat. 672, as amended):”

“§ 8.   The electors shall vote for President and Vice President, respectively, in the manner directed by the Constitution.”

ARE ELECTORS REQUIRED TO VOTE ACCORDING TO POPULAR VOTE?

“There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires
electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in
their States. Some States, however, require electors to cast their
votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two
categories—electors bound by State law and those bound by pledges
to political parties.”   (From US National Archives)

SO CALLED “FAITHLESS ELECTORS”

“It turns out there is no federal law that requires an elector to
vote according to their pledge (to their respective party). And so,
more than a few electors have cast their votes without following the
popular vote or their party. These electors are called “faithless
electors.”

In response to these faithless electors’ actions, several states
have created laws to enforce an elector’s pledge to his or her party
vote or the popular vote. Some states even go the extra step to
assess a misdemeanor charge and a fine to such actions. For example,
the state of North Carolina charges a fine of $10,000 to faithless
electors.

It’s important to note, that although these states have created these
laws, a large number of scholars believe that such state-level laws
hold no true bearing and would not survive constitutional challenge.”
Read more here

STATE LAW EXAMPLE: PENNSYLVANIA

Ҥ 3192. Meeting of electors; duties.
The electors chosen, as aforesaid, shall assemble at the seat
of government of this Commonwealth, at 12 o’clock noon of the
day which is, or may be, directed by the Congress of the United
States, and shall then and there perform the duties enjoined upon
them by the Constitution and laws of the United States
.”

“The mysteries of the Electoral College has enabled Pennsylvania
to play an unusually major role in determining who is President.
In 1796, Thomas Jefferson defeated John Adams in Pennsylvania’s
popular election by only 62 votes, but the Pennsylvania electors
gave Jefferson 14 votes and Adams 1, though Adams did win the
Electoral vote, 71 to 68.” Read more here

ELECTORS HELPED SAVE THE UNION

1860 election: 4 electors in New Jersey, pledged for Stephen Douglas,
voted for Republican candidate Abraham Lincoln.

Q: What happens after the Electoral College vote?:

A: Electoral College procedures

Q: What is the significance of your vote?:

A: The US Constitution clearly gives the states the power
and duties associated with electing a qualified president.
It is also clear that the states have not performed their
duties to ensure that the Electoral College votes will be
for a Qualified candidate. The Electors have a constitutional
duty to perform that supersedes any party contract or state
law. Each day that passes without verification of eligibility
of any candidate being voted for by Electors, brings us closer
to a constitutional crisis. There are pending court cases before
the US Supreme Court and state courts. Congress will meet in
January to count and certify votes and there will certainly be
challenges in Congress. If Congress or the courts shall fail to
do their duty, a Supreme Court Justice will be faced with a
decision to uphold the Constitution. The crisis will increase
in intensity.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the
Citizen Wells blog. Every effort has been made to ensure the
accuracy of the content. Readers are encouraged to visit source
material such as the US Constitution, Federal Election law and
state laws.

Ohio stimulus fraud discovered by inspector general audit, Ohio election fraud revealed by audit?, Ohio 2012 election certification includes absentee and provisional ballots

Ohio stimulus fraud discovered by inspector general audit, Ohio election fraud revealed by audit?, Ohio 2012 election certification includes absentee and provisional ballots

“What do you think a stimulus is? It’s spending – that’s the whole point! Seriously.”…Barack Obama

“An additional 2,735 were cast by people who elections officials believe were not registered in Ohio”…The Columbus Dispatch Nov. 21, 2012

“It’s not who votes that counts, it’s who counts the votes”…Joseph Stalin

From The Columbus Dispatch November 27, 2012.

“$255K in stimulus spending questioned by Ohio inspector general”

“than a quarter million dollars in federal stimulus money administered by a state agency may have been improperly spent, the Ohio inspector general found in a report released today.

The Ohio Department of Job and Family Services Office of Workforce Development “failed to adequately oversee” a $1 million federal grant for a jobs training initiative for southwest Ohio and $255,000 in spending was questioned by the inspector general.

The grant was used to pay cell phone bills, buy gift cards and rent an office from the company – shut down after it didn’t pay taxes – of a man on the board of the agency overseeing the grant, the probe found. The president of the group managing the grant got a salary that would have had her working 15.5 hours a day, seven days a week, investigators discovered. And more than $75,000 in wages were improperly documented.”

http://dispatchpolitics.dispatch.com/content/blogs/the-daily-briefing/2012/11/27-november-2012—odjfs-ig-report.html

After processing over 300,000 absentee and provisional ballots the Ohio 2012 election results were supposed to be certified yesterday, November 27, 2012. Some of the counties checked appear to have completed their counts.

From Citizen Wells November 27, 2012.

“Over 300,000 ballots were being processed recently in Ohio. 204,927 provisional ballots and 119,535 absentee ballots.

http://www2.sos.state.oh.us/pls/enrpublic/f?p=212:52:653548358565003::NO:::

How many provisional ballots were discarded?

The Ohio canvass for vote certification is supposed to end today.

Excessive confusion has abounded in Ohio due to most registered voters being sent absentee ballots and voter registration mismatches. Documented voter fraud and mistakes have been documented in many counties. Will the Ohio audit remedy this?

Here is another example of voter fraud or malfeasance.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/11/27/ohio-canvass-vote-certification-november-27-2012-provisional-ballots-counted-and-counted-correctly-hamilton-county-voter-fraud-double-votes-ohio-audit-trustworthy/

Hopefully the 2012 election audits in Ohio will be as vigilant as the Inspector General.

From Citizen Wells November 22, 2012.

“Ohio Secretary of State Directive 2012-56, 2012 post election audits.

DIRECTIVE 2012-56
November 20, 2012
To: All County Boards of Elections
Directors, Deputy Directors, and Board Members
Re: Post-Election Audits
SUMMARY
In 2009, the previous administration entered into a settlement agreement in the case of League of Women Voters, et al. v. Brunner [formerly Blackwell], N.D. Ohio No. 3:05-cv-7309. As explained in Advisory 2009-09, the League of Women Voters settlement agreement requires that county boards of elections conduct post-election audits of all ballots cast following general elections in even-numbered years and following presidential primary elections.
POST-ELECTION AUDIT PROCEDURES

A. Timeline

Each board of elections must conduct a post-election audit beginning no sooner than six days after the official certification of election results by the board of elections, unless there is an automatic recount (declared by the Board or, in the case of a multi-county district election, declared by the Secretary of State) or the board of elections has received a valid application for a recount. If a recount is conducted, the post-election audit shall begin immediately after the Board certifies the results of the recount. A board of elections must not conduct the audit before the Board’s certification of its official canvass of the election.
The Board must complete the post-election audit between the seventh day after the Board declares its official certification and the 28th day after the Secretary of State declares the official certification in a statewide election.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/11/22/ohio-2012-election-audit-november-20-2012-post-election-audit-procedures-secretary-of-state-directive-2012-56-absentee-military-ballots/

 

Obamacare penalties clobber NC hospitals and patients, Economically depressed areas hit hardest, Readmissions within 30 days for any reason trigger fine

Obamacare penalties clobber NC hospitals and patients, Economically depressed areas hit hardest, Readmissions within 30 days for any reason trigger fine

“If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.”…Barack Obama

“About two-thirds of the hospitals serving Medicare patients, or some 2,200 facilities, will be hit with penalties averaging around $125,000 per facility this coming year, according to government estimates.”…NE News Now

“The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA)[1] imposes numerous tax hikes that transfer more than $500 billion over 10 years—and more in the future—from hardworking American families and businesses to Congress for spending on new entitlements and subsidies. In addition, higher tax rates on working and investing will discourage economic growth both now and in the future, further lowering the standard of living.”…Heritage Foundation

Admittedly, hospitals and the medical profession need to be more efficient and strive for patient friendly cost savings. However, arbitrary blanket decisions by government bureaucrats are not the solution.

From the Raleigh News Observer November 24, 2012.

“Hospitals scramble to limit readmissions, avoid new penalties”

“The patient – decked out in non-skid footies, a loose hospital gown and a breathing tube – prays she’s finally on the mend. At age 81, Juanita King had logged nearly five weeks at WakeMed Hospital since October after her breathing became so labored she had trouble walking.

The Clayton grandmother, weakened by a failing heart and obstructed lungs, wasn’t home even two weeks after the first hospital stay before returning to WakeMed earlier this month for another round of needles, meds and tests.

WakeMed, along with hospitals across the country, is scrambling to keep patients like King from coming back. Under federal penalties that kicked in Oct. 1 as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, hospitals lose Medicare reimbursements if their patients are readmitted at an excessive rate.

WakeMed officials, for example, estimate that the 15 readmissions since 2010 that Medicare deemed excessive will cost the Raleigh health care company more than $400,000 in the coming year.

To ease the financial sting, hospitals increasingly are trying to manage patients’ health care after they are discharged. Hospital personnel make follow-up calls, schedule doctors’ visits and set up therapy appointments. Duke University Health System is planning to offer apps designed to send prompts and reminders for patients to take meds and report symptoms.

Hospital administrators say the pressure to reduce readmissions is forcing them to take steps that are long overdue – by coordinating with nursing homes and family caretakers to treat health problems early, before they blow up into emergencies.”

“But industry advocates warn of a potential downside: Struggling hospitals, spooked by the prospect of huge penalties, could develop an unhealthy fixation on finding ways not to readmit patients who need hospital care.

Already hospitals nationwide have seen an uptick in patients being steered to observation beds rather than getting admitted, Foster said. Hospitals in economically distressed areas with limited health care options are most likely to readmit patients and pay penalties for doing so, she said.

“It’s hard to think there will be a financial penalty against your organization to do the right thing by your patient.” Foster said. “We don’t think that hospitals that serve impoverished, safety-net communities should be penalized because those communities lack the necessary resources.”

Readmissions are only one of several factors the federal government is tracking to reduce the cost of health care. All told, within several years hospitals could face up to an 8 percent reduction in Medicare reimbursements – for failing to meet new federal standards for electronic medical records and for too many infections and errors, among other quality measures, according to the American Hospital Association.

Insurance companies are likely to adopt similar measures, based on the model developed by Medicare, the nation’s federal insurance program for the elderly. Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina, the state’s largest private insurer, now offers financial rewards for hospitals that reduce readmissions. But unlike Medicare, Blue Cross doesn’t penalize hospitals for too many readmissions, said spokesman Lew Borman.

The maximum Medicare penalty this year for excessive readmissions is a 1 percent reduction in Medicare reimbursements. The fine will increase to 3 percent in 2015, which can translate to millions of dollars in lost revenue for a hospital.

The fines apply for readmitting too many patients with at least one of three conditions – heart failure, heart attack or pneumonia – within 30 days of discharge. Medicare is expected to add more diagnoses in the coming years, expanding the range of potential penalties.

A readmission can be for any cause – usually not the fault of the hospital. A pneumonia patient who leaves WakeMed, has a car wreck on the way home and is readmitted to Rex Hospital? Under Medicare, that counts as a readmission against WakeMed.

Each hospital is allotted a certain number of readmissions, based on a complex formula that factors in fluke scenarios like auto accidents, slips-and-falls and others unrelated to heart conditions or pneumonia.

Patients often go back into a hospital because they have trouble following directions for their medications. During a hospital stay and while recuperating, patients can be disoriented and confused, making it hard to keep track of multiple medications.

Heart patients, for example, are urged to adhere to a low sodium diet, but not all comply. “We had one patient who was taking their pills with pickle juice,” said Linda Butler, chief medical officer at Rex Healthcare in Raleigh.

In North Carolina, a half-dozen hospitals were levied either the maximum Medicare penalty for excessive readmissions or a penalty very close to the 1 percent max. The hospitals are in Ahoskie, Lumberton, Eden, Williamston, Hamlet and Rocky Mount, according to an analysis by Kaiser Health News. Hospital officials note that areas where hospitals get hit with high penalties are typically in economically depressed areas with limited access to therapists, specialists and other resources essential for preventing hospital readmissions.”

Read more:

Ohio canvass vote certification November 27, 2012, Provisional ballots counted and counted correctly?, Hamilton County voter fraud double votes, Ohio audit trustworthy?

Ohio canvass vote certification November 27, 2012, Provisional ballots counted and counted correctly?, Hamilton County voter fraud double votes, Ohio audit trustworthy?

“An additional 2,735 were cast by people who elections officials believe were not registered in Ohio”…The Columbus Dispatch Nov. 21, 2012

“Eighty-one voters in Hamilton County, Ohio, cast more than one ballot in the Nov. 6 election, officials said, bringing calls for investigation and prosecution.”...UPI Nov. 21, 2012

“It’s not who votes that counts, it’s who counts the votes”…Joseph Stalin

Over 300,000 ballots were being processed recently in Ohio. 204,927 provisional ballots and 119,535 absentee ballots.

http://www2.sos.state.oh.us/pls/enrpublic/f?p=212:52:653548358565003::NO:::

How many provisional ballots were discarded?

The Ohio canvass for vote certification is supposed to end today.

Excessive confusion has abounded in Ohio due to most registered voters being sent absentee ballots and voter registration mismatches. Documented voter fraud and mistakes have been documented in many counties. Will the Ohio audit remedy this?

Here is another example of voter fraud or malfeasance.

From UPI November  21, 2012.

“Eighty-one voters in Hamilton County, Ohio, cast more than one ballot in the Nov. 6 election, officials said, bringing calls for investigation and prosecution.

The disclosure came as the Hamilton County Board of Elections agreed to count nearly 15,000 provisional and absentee ballots which could potentially change the outcome of several local ballot measures, The Columbus Dispatch reported Wednesday.

Election board staffers reported 63 voters cast both an early absentee ballot and a provisional ballot on Election Day, and 18 others voted twice on Nov. 6, typically by casting a regular vote in one precinct and a provisional ballot in another.

The double votes would not have changed the outcome of any election in Hamilton County, which includes the city of Cincinnati and where 420,000 votes were cast, the newspaper said.

“This is a dangerous situation,” elections board member and county Republican Chairman Alex Triantafilou said, noting 81 people “thought it appropriate to go and vote twice,” a situation meriting a possible referral to the county prosecutor’s office.”

Read more:

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2012/11/21/81-Ohioans-voted-twice-board-discloses/UPI-80351353531538/#ixzz2DRBgqME7

Obama vote changing machines to be examined by FBI, Maryland state delegate Kathryn Afzali, Touchscreen machines suspect in other states, 100 percent Obama votes suspect

Obama vote changing machines to be examined by FBI, Maryland state delegate Kathryn Afzali, Touchscreen machines suspect in other states, 100 percent Obama votes suspect

“An additional 2,735 were cast by people who elections officials believe were not registered in Ohio”…The Columbus Dispatch Nov. 21, 2012

“If the voter turnout in Ohio matches the 2008 level of 67 percent, some 5,226,000 votes would be cast. Under that scenario, 250,000 provisional ballots would amount to 4.8 percent of the entire vote — well over the current difference between the two candidates, according to RealClearPolitics poll average.”…NewsMax Nov. 1, 2012

“It’s not who votes that counts, it’s who counts the votes”…Joseph Stalin

From WND November 26, 2012.

“FBI ASKED TO PROBE OBAMA ‘VOTE-CHANGING’ MACHINES”

“A state lawmaker in Maryland has asked the FBI to impound two voting machines used in the 2012 election to determine whether there was a malfunction or something nefarious going on.

“I just feel it is my duty to try to get to the bottom of this,” state Delegate Kathryn Afzali told WND today.“We’re not making any accusations. The Board of Elections are good people. They have checks and balances … but we want to make sure everything is fair.”

She said a number of people contacted her after the Nov. 6 election to report that they pressed a touch-screen button for GOP candidate Mitt Romney, but the vote registered for Barack Obama.

WND has reported a number of first-hand accounts of similar anomalies during the election. One touch-screen technician reported that voters in another state were getting error messages on their touch-screens when they tried to vote for Romney.

Also, suspiciously, a number of precincts reported a 100-percent vote for Obama, and some even reported beyond 100 percent.

“My request [to the FBI] is … I want them to take these machines. Let an FBI computer expert analyze them,” she said.

She said that among those who contacted her with concerns were two  officials, including a state lawmaker who personally experienced a vote machine changing his vote three times to the party whose agenda he opposed.

The lawmaker told her that his computer background left him confident that the problem was beyond a technical glitch, and he insisted that the election judge take the machine out of service and lock it up.

Another concern was raised by Carroll County Commissioner Richard Rothschild. who said it’s critical that the machines be analyzed properly to determine what happened.

“We need to freeze them in their current state, not wipe out data,” he said.

He said his constituent reported the same scenario as has been reported: hitting the touch-screen button for Romney but finding that that it registered for Obama.

Rothschild said it’s a major problem that has to be addressed in order for Americans to continue trusting their election system.

He said the constituent noticed the vote changes on the summary screen.

“It showed Obama as being selected,” Rothschild told WND, even though his constituent reported voting for the GOP ticket.

“After talking with a few other people, this concern seems to be increasing,” Rothschild told WND. “There are just two possible answers. Either he made a mistake, or something caused that machine to switch the vote.”

He said given that his constituent has experience with computers, the contention that he didn’t know how to use the machine seems a stretch.

“I know how easy it would be to introduce a single spurious line of code,” Rothschild told WND, noting a programmer could easily instruct the machine to change the vote periodically, so a routine test wouldn’t reveal any problems.

He said he was told the county had no jurisdiction over the issue and that it would be up to the state, which is why he discussed the concerns with Afzali.

“It’s very scary,” Rothschild told WND. “It creates a sense of helplessness and hopelessness.”

That, in turn, he said, results in people feeling desperate about their failure to impact government.

“If American people feel they cannot trust their voting system, there’s the possibility of more desperate action,” he said. “There are a number of possibilities [for reaction] in nullifications, secession, including throwing off such governments.

“If people think their voting processes do not work, [if] they conclude they are not being afforded constitutional protections, they may conclude their only option is to throw off such government,” he said.

He said the forensics of voting machine examination would be very important, but a good investigatory review could provide a lot of answers.

“We have all seen little pieces of the problem,” he said.

But to determine what is a problem, he said some sort of overview perspective would be needed.

Not only do authorities need to do a review, future elections need to be done so that every voter is given a printed copy of his or her own vote. The copies could be compiled by clerks to provide a point of reference if questions arise, he said.

Afzali told WND that because she’s on the state elections committee, a number of people came directly to her with their complaints.

She said the two machines that were identified now are locked up with all the other equipment, but she’s asked the FBI step in and take custody of them.

WND previously reported in U.S. Rep. Allen West’s re-election fight in Florida, a surge of thousands of votes went to his opponent late in the evening.

“If we do not have integrity in our election process then we don’ t have the exceptionalism as a constitutional republic, we don’t have a rule of law,” West said.

WND also reported a forensic profiler whose previous cases have included the Natalie Holloway disappearance and the O.J. Simpson double-murder case said Obama is confessing to stealing the 2012 president election.

“Obama appears to unconsciously confess on multiple occasions that in his secret fury he stole the 2012 presidential election – continuing his attacks on our nation,” Andrew G. Hodges, M.D., told WND in an assessment of Obama.”

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/fbi-asked-to-probe-obama-vote-changing-machines/

Pravda Obama reelected by illiterate society, Ready to continue his lies of less taxes while he raises them, Liberalism is a psychosis, Bye bye Miss American Pie

Pravda Obama reelected by illiterate society, Ready to continue his lies of less taxes while he raises them, Liberalism is a psychosis, Bye bye Miss American Pie

“And, as I watched him on the stage my hands were clenched in fists of rage.
No angel born in Hell could break that Satan’s spell
And, as the flames climbed high into the night to light the sacrificial rite, I saw…
Satan laughing with delight the day the music died”…Don McLean “American Pie”

“Nobody who makes under $200,000 a year will see their taxes go up as long as I’m president.”…Barack Obama

“I absolutely reject that notion [mandate is a tax].”…Barack Obama

From Pravda November 19, 2012.

“Putin in 2009 outlined his strategy for economic success. Alas, poor Obama did the opposite but nevertheless was re-elected. Bye, bye Miss American Pie. The Communists have won in America with Obama but failed miserably in Russia with Zyuganovwho only received 17% of the vote. Vladimir Putin was re-elected as President keeping the NWO order out of Russia while America continues to repeat the Soviet mistake.

After Obama was elected in his first term as president the then Prime Minister of Russia, Vladimir Putin gave a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland in January of 2009. Ignored by the West as usual, Putin gave insightful and helpful advice to help the world economy and saying the world should avoid the Soviet mistake.

Recently, Obama has been re-elected for a 2nd term by an illiterate society and he is ready to continue his lies of less taxes while he raises them. He gives speeches of peace and love in the world while he promotes wars as he did in Egypt, Libya and Syria. He plans his next war is with Iran as he fires or demotes his generals who get in the way.

Putin said regarding the military,

“…instead of solving the problem, militarization pushes it to a deeper level. It draws away from the economy immense financial and material resources, which could have been used much more efficiently elsewhere.”

Well, any normal individual understands that as true but liberalism is a psychosis . O’bomber even keeps the war going along the Mexican border with projects like “fast and furious” and there is still no sign of ending it.  He is a Communist without question promoting the Communist Manifesto without calling it so. How shrewd he is in America. His cult of personality mesmerizes those who cannot go beyond their ignorance. They will continue to follow him like those fools who still praise Lenin and Stalin in Russia.  Obama’s fools and Stalin’s fools share the same drink of illusion.

Reading Putin’s speech without knowing the author, one would think it was written by Reagan or another conservative in America. The speech promotes smaller government and less taxes. It comes as no surprise to those who know Putin as a conservative. Vladimir Putin went on to say:

“…we are reducing taxes on production, investing money in the economy. We are optimizing state expenses.

 The second possible mistake would be excessive interference into the economic life of the country and the absolute faith into the all-mightiness of the state.

There are no grounds to suggest that by putting the responsibility over to the state, one can achieve better results.

Unreasonable expansion of the budget deficit, accumulation of the national debt – are as destructive as an adventurous stock market game.

During the time of the Soviet Union the role of the state in economy was made absolute, which eventually lead to the total non-competitiveness of the economy. That lesson cost us very dearly. I am sure no one would want history to repeat itself.”

President Vladimir Putin could never have imagined anyone so ignorant or so willing to destroy their people like Obama much less seeing millions vote for someone like Obama. They read history in America don’t they? Alas, the schools in the U.S. were conquered by the Communists long ago and history was revised thus paving the way for their Communist presidents. Obama has bailed out those businesses that voted for him and increased the debt to over 16 trillion with an ever increasing unemployment rate especially among blacks and other minorities. All the while promoting his agenda.

“We must seek support in the moral values that have ensured the progress of our civilization. Honesty and hard work, responsibility and faith in our strength are bound to bring us success.”- Vladimir Putin

The red, white and blue still flies happily but only in Russia. Russia still has St George defeating the Dragon with the symbol of the cross on its’ flag. The ACLU and other atheist groups in America would never allow the US flag with such religious symbols. Lawsuits a plenty against religious freedom and expression in the land of the free. Christianity in the U.S. is under attack as it was during the early period of the Soviet Union when religious symbols were against the law.

Let’s give American voters the benefit of the doubt and say it was all voter fraud and not ignorance or stupidity in electing a man who does not even know what to do and refuses help from Russia when there was an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Instead we’ll say it’s true that the Communists usage of electronic voting was just a plan to manipulate the vote. Soros and his ownership of the company that counts the US votes in Spain helped put their puppet in power in the White House. According to the Huffington Post, residents in all 50 states have filed petitions to secede from the Unites States. We’ll say that these Americans are hostages to the Communists in power. How long will their government reign tyranny upon them?

Russia lost its’ civil war with the Reds and millions suffered torture and death for almost 75 years under the tyranny of the United Soviet Socialist Republic. Russians survived with a new and stronger faith in God and ever growing Christian Church. The question is how long will the once “Land of the Free” remain the United Socialist States of America?  Their suffering has only begun. Bye bye Miss American Pie!  You know the song you hippies. Sing it! Don’t you remember? The 1971 hit song by American song writer Don McLean:

“And, as I watched him on the stage my hands were clenched in fists of rage.

No angel born in Hell could break that Satan’s spell

And, as the flames climbed high into the night to light the sacrificial rite, I saw…

Satan laughing with delight the day the music died

He was singing, bye bye Miss American Pie

Drove my Chevy to the levee, but the levee was dry

Them good ol’ boys were drinking whiskey and rye, singing…

This’ll be the day that I die

This’ll be the day that I die

So, the question remains:

How long will America suffer and to what depths?”

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/19-11-2012/122849-obama_soviet_mistake-0/

 

Thanks to commenter Starla.

Obamacare forces 93000 hospital job cuts in 2013, NC hospitals costs up $7.5 billion the next 10 years, Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements, Mass layoffs

Obamacare forces 93000 hospital job cuts in 2013, NC hospitals costs up $7.5 billion the next 10 years, Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements, Mass layoffs

“Nobody who makes under $200,000 a year will see their taxes go up as long as I’m president.”…Barack Obama

“I absolutely reject that notion [mandate is a tax].”…Barack Obama

“Glenn Beck has presented the frightening spectre of Christmas past created by Obama. But as in Dickens’ “A Christmas Carol”  it is the Ghost of Christmas Future that frightens me. The impact of Obamacare on our health care system and the combined impact of Obamacare and record deficit spending on our economy. The taxes of Christmas future to pay for Obama’s actions.”…Citizen Wells June 30, 2012

By March 26, 2010 I referred to Obamacare as a tax and control bill.

From the Greensboro News Record November 25, 2012.

“Hospitals feeling the pinch”

“Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center launched a distress signal in a gathering storm when it said on Nov. 14 that it will cut 950 jobs.

That storm has at its center national health care reform, possible lower reimbursements for Medicare and Medicaid services, and an increasing number of older patients who need more care.

The hospital industry is in for a direct hit — that’s not in doubt.

But mass layoffs may be only one of many solutions for the health care industry’s problems.

The problem for hospitals is choosing the right one: mass layoffs, refined management techniques or some middle ground.

Wake Forest declined an interview request for this article. But it has said in other accounts that the roughly 6 percent staff cut is a pre-emptive measure for expected budget cuts and rising costs. And it expects remaining workers will become more productive as a result.

That’s a delicate balance, said Mark Graban, a national expert and consultant on health care management who lives in San Antonio, Texas.

“It’s easy to add up the cost savings of reduced payroll,” he said. “But it’s hard to add up the side effect of those layoffs.”

He said layoffs are sweeping the industry. Graban referred to a report from the American Hospital Association that says hospitals will cut 93,000 jobs during 2013.

Wake Forest and other major hospitals across the nation pledge that nurse-to-patient ratios won’t change despite the job cuts. Graban said that simple pledge may only mask lingering problems that hurt the quality of patient care.

Nurses and other professional staff, for example, see the headlines, see friends who may be laid off and work in fear, he said.

“A lot of times, quality and good patient outcomes are a result of nurses and other staff going above and beyond,” Graban said. “My concern would be not that the professionals are going to get lazy, but are they going to continue to be motivated to go above and beyond?”

Across the nation, he said, many medical centers are choosing “no layoff” policies and using management techniques pioneered in industry.

“Lean management” is a term many industries use for a variety of techniques that train workers to improve performance, make fewer mistakes and work with higher morale, he said.

Lean does not mean, as many joke, “Less Employees Are Needed.”

Graban worked with one hospital, ThedaCare in Appleton, Wis., which typifies the technique. The medium-size hospital manages conservatively, he said, doesn’t over-hire workers and saves cash for slow times.

Don Dalton, the spokesman for the N.C. Hospital Association, said hospitals throughout the state are using lean-management techniques — especially the smallest hospitals.

The coming changes could cost North Carolina’s hospitals up to $7.5 billion over the next 10 years , Dalton said.

With limited resources, the state’s small and medium-size hospitals feel financial pressure first, he said. So they are looking for any way they can to operate without compromising service.

Hospitals are combining resources to save money. In some cases, that means nothing more than “group buying” of supplies and services — lower prices for bulk buyers.

On a larger scale, Greensboro’s Cone Health signed a managing partnership earlier this year with Carolinas Health Systems in Charlotte.

Doug Allred, the spokesman for Cone, which employs more than 8,000 people , said: “We do not have plans for any layoffs right now.”

When asked to discuss issues facing the hospital industry in general, Allred said: “We are going to decline” an interview.

Jeffrey Miller, the president of High Point Regional Health System , freely discusses what led to the hospital’s planned merger with UNC Health Care.

He said that many unemployed people in the Triad don’t have health insurance, and those who do find that rising deductibles are too expensive.

“So we have a bad-debt problem,” Miller said.

Federal Medicare reimbursements have declined or remained flat, and the program is asking hospitals to fill out more documents to justify expenses.

And finally, the state, which administers Medicaid programs, is cutting its own stretched budget and program reimbursements.

As a result, High Point Regional has operated at a loss for two years. With its 2,212 workers, the hospital lost $40.8 million on unreimbursed care last year.

“It’s coming at us from all directions,” Miller said.

Through careful expense control, Miller said, High Point has not laid off workers, but it has had to cut hours from time to time to save money — and jobs.

Saving money, changing the way a hospital works, changing the way hospitals work together — all are key issues for UNC Health Care and its subsidiaries, said Karen McCall, vice president of public affairs and marketing for the system.

“We need to reduce costs, and all of us are aware of that and we’re trying to take steps to be able to do that through re-engineering,” she said.

Lean management is a big part of how UNC has managed its hospitals.

“It’s really been a core value at UNC for quite some time.”

UNC is planning for a difficult future, especially the unknown effects of more insured people and a growing population of older people who will need more care.

UNC plans to create a system in which each patient has a “medical home,” or a central doctor and staff that can manage the patient’s total care. That doctor would coordinate care from specialists and a variety of other services.

But getting there, McCall said, means spending more money to upgrade technology.

Finally, UNC is constantly keeping an eye on its employees to make sure their morale is good.

“Having worked very, very hard with patient satisfaction, the key to patient satisfaction is employee satisfaction,” she said. “Employee satisfaction is just very important and it’s something we measure and take into consideration all the time.

“We’re looking for best practices outside the industry,” McCall said. “But I really feel that we’re not the only ones doing that. Everyone in health care looking to the future feels that’s very necessary.””

http://www.news-record.com/content/2012/11/24/article/hospitals_feeling_the_pinch

 

Obama Benghazi lies exposed in print in NC, Rhino Times, November 21, 2012, Obama in the midst of an election didn’t risk sending in air support or ground troops, Spontaneous protest lie

Obama Benghazi lies exposed in print in NC, Rhino Times, November 21, 2012, Obama in the midst of an election didn’t risk sending in air support or ground troops, Spontaneous protest lie

“The question that I had in my mind, was why did we not do something to protect our forces?”…Charles Woods, father of slain Navy Seal

“I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”…Barack Obama

“we leave nobody behind”…Barack Obama

From the Rhino Times, in print in NC, November 21, 2012.

“The most amazing aspect of the tragedy in Benghazi and President Barack Hussein Obama’s response is how well it worked for him. Here he was on 9/11 in the middle of an election caught unprepared by al Qaeda. In a country with known al Qaeda activity the Obama administration had refused to give the US ambassador the security forces he needed, which left him vulnerable on 9/11.

No doubt when the situation was first presented to Obama on the afternoon of 9/11, all they knew was that the consulate was under heavy attack and Ambassador Chris Stevens was thought to be in the safe room of the consulate but was out of contact.

Perhaps Obama bet, that the safe room in the consulate would protect Stevens and other State Department employees and that the terrorists would get tired of banging on a locked door and go away. It’s a little like betting a small fire will burn itself out before it becomes a raging forest fire. It does happen, but most people don’t want to take that chance.

For whatever reason Obama decided to not to risk sending in air support or ground troops. He decided not to send any help and to use “Hope” as his strategy. Hope didn’t work and not only did Stevens die, but Sean Smith died with him at the consulate and two CIA operatives, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, both former Navy Seals, also died in the fighting hours later at the CIA compound.

Obama was in the midst of an election. He could hardly go out and tell the American people that he hoped everything would work out, so he didn’t send troops or security forces of any kind to aid an ambassador under siege at an American consulate. So the White House came up with what seemed to be a plausible lie ñ that this attack, just like the one in Cairo, was the result of a spontaneous protest over a stupid video and it got out of hand. Why you should not send help to a consulate under attack by a spontaneous mob is still a mystery, but the mainstream media bought it and Obama was reelected.

To give the cover story validity Obama sent out UN Ambassador Susan Rice to explain that the attack had been a spontaneous outburst as a result of the video. Rice was perfect for the job for two reasons.

One, as Obama has now said, she had nothing to do with it. She was just a good soldier and went out and said what she was told to say. She had no information on her own. Rice was completely out of the chain of command on this one.

Two, and more importantly, Rice is a black woman, so anyone who criticizes her is by definition racist and sexist. Obama never hesitates to use the race card if it is to his advantage. And his supporters followed through with the accusations of racism and sexism as soon as people were critical of Rice for going on five different shows and telling huge whopping lies on each one.

So Obama and his White House team came up with a story that really doesn’t make any sense and which everyone who knows anything knows is made up. And they found a dupe to sell it to the mainstream media. It helped tremendously that the mainstream media were willing to do everything in their power to get Obama reelected.

The plan worked to perfection because the whole point was simply to push the controversy out past the election. One of the stories that the Obama campaign was trying to sell to the American people was that Osama bin Laden had been killed and the war against terrorism had been won by Obama. That story doesn’t work if al Qaeda attacks and destroys a US consulate, gets in a seven-hour gun battle with personnel at the consulate and at the CIA safe house nearby, and kills four Americans including the American ambassador. The truth makes Obama look weak on fighting terrorism, which of course he is. But it doesn’t matter because it all got pushed past Nov. 6 and now it doesn’t matter what he says. Obama is president for four more years.

Now if Obama wanted to come clean he could go before the American people and says something like, “I made the wrong call. I didn’t want things to escalate just before the election so I was too cautious and I should have sent troops in, or at the very least a fighter jet or an attack helicopter to rescue Chris Stevens and Sean Smith. Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty should not have died because troops should have been there to support them long before they were killed by terrorists.” It wouldn’t matter because people can’t take back their votes.

Obama is president. Mitt Romney had a chance to make Benghazi the issue of the foreign affairs debate and he did not. When he tried to make a point about the Benghazi debacle in an earlier debate Obama was rescued by the moderator who corrected Romney, but was wrong herself. It’s why they call the Republican Party the Stupid Party. They allowed Candy Crowley to moderate the debate even after she said she planned to insert herself into the debate and she did, rescuing the president. But from the comments she made before the debate it was obvious that she was a big Obama supporter, so the Republicans have no one but themselves to blame.

With the help of Crowley and Romney the Obama team pushed Benghazi out past the election, and in politics there is no video review or do-overs. However, cover-ups have not worked out well for presidents.

President Richard Milhous Nixon pushed Watergate out past the election, but it caught up with him and he was forced to resign. For a long time only one newspaper in the entire country was interested in Watergate. It happened to be The Washington Post, with its vast resources, and without The Washington Post the truth about Watergate might never have been known.

President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton pushed the Monica Lewinsky affair out past the election and eventually was impeached for perjury. But look at him now ñ he is the revered elder statesman of the Democratic Party. But if it hadn’t been for Lewinsky’s friend Linda Tripp and Lewinsky’s incredible foresight in hiding the blue dress, the American people would have never known that Clinton had been having an affair with a 21-year-old White House intern.

The key for Obama was not to let the mistake of refusing to provide sufficient security for an embassy under attack by al Qaeda on 9/11 keep him from being reelected and it did not.

Now is the time for some brave American to step forward and tell the truth. It looks like they scared the pants off Gen. David Petraeus and he is not going to be the one to tell the story of what really happened. Petraeus did refuse to go along with the huge lies, but he evidently didn’t break any new ground in his testimony. A former general can hardly testify under oath that he looked at a well-planned and coordinated terrorist attack and thought it was a mob protesting a video. Obama, however, who knows nothing about the military can get away with that and he has.

In the Watergate break-in, which resulted in Nixon resigning, felonies were committed, but no one was injured much less killed. For a president to take advantage of a young White House intern is in no way admirable, but no one was injured or killed during Clinton’s affair with Lewinsky.

In the attack on the consulate in Benghazi, four Americans were killed and any number were injured. The Democrats have no interest in what happened, but the Republicans should insist that an investigation be launched and continued until the American people know exactly how and why those Americans died.

Obama has already told so many lies about what happened and his involvement that nothing he says can be trusted. Originally Obama said that he found out about the attack at night. It was no later than 5 p.m. with the sun still shining brightly in Washington, DC, and there is no way that is night. If he can’t even tell the truth about when he found out about the attack, how can the American people believe anything he says about it?”

I urge you to read more:

http://greensboro.rhinotimes.com/Articles-Columns-c-2012-11-20-213888.112113-Under-the-Hammer.html

 

Ohio 2012 election audit, November 20, 2012, Post election audit procedures, Secretary of State Directive 2012-56, Absentee military ballots?

Ohio 2012 election audit, November 20, 2012, Post election audit procedures, Secretary of State Directive 2012-56, Absentee military ballots?

“An additional 2,735 were cast by people who elections officials believe were not registered in Ohio”…The Columbus Dispatch Nov. 21, 2012

“If the voter turnout in Ohio matches the 2008 level of 67 percent, some 5,226,000 votes would be cast. Under that scenario, 250,000 provisional ballots would amount to 4.8 percent of the entire vote — well over the current difference between the two candidates, according to RealClearPolitics poll average.”…NewsMax Nov. 1, 2012

“It’s not who votes that counts, it’s who counts the votes”…Joseph Stalin

Ohio Secretary of State Directive 2012-56, 2012 post election audits.

DIRECTIVE 2012-56
November 20, 2012
To: All County Boards of Elections
Directors, Deputy Directors, and Board Members
Re: Post-Election Audits
SUMMARY
In 2009, the previous administration entered into a settlement agreement in the case of League of Women Voters, et al. v. Brunner [formerly Blackwell], N.D. Ohio No. 3:05-cv-7309. As explained in Advisory 2009-09, the League of Women Voters settlement agreement requires that county boards of elections conduct post-election audits of all ballots cast following general elections in even-numbered years and following presidential primary elections.
POST-ELECTION AUDIT PROCEDURES

A. Timeline

Each board of elections must conduct a post-election audit beginning no sooner than six days after the official certification of election results by the board of elections, unless there is an automatic recount (declared by the Board or, in the case of a multi-county district election, declared by the Secretary of State) or the board of elections has received a valid application for a recount. If a recount is conducted, the post-election audit shall begin immediately after the Board certifies the results of the recount. A board of elections must not conduct the audit before the Board’s certification of its official canvass of the election.
The Board must complete the post-election audit between the seventh day after the Board declares its official certification and the 28th day after the Secretary of State declares the official certification in a statewide election.

B. Observers

The post-election audit must be open to the public and to duly appointed observers. Each board of elections must give public notice of the time and place of the post-election audit in the same manner that the Board notifies the public of a board of elections meeting.

1. Throughout the audit, ballots may be handled only by boards of elections members, directors, deputy directors, or other designated employees of the Board. No other person, including an observer, may handle a ballot under any circumstances.

2. Any entity having appointed observers pursuant to R.C. 3505.21 or 3505.32(B) (referred to herein as “statutory observers”) may appoint observers to the post-election audit no later than five days after the Board gives notice of the date and time of the post-election audit in accordance with this directive. Substitutes may be appointed if notice of substitution is made in writing and filed with the board of elections at least one day before the post-election audit begins.

3. The general public may observe the post-election audit and, to the extent practicable, must be given the same access as statutory observers, subject to the limitations in B4. Observers are permitted to observe the selection process and to observe the count.

4. Depending on the number of individuals who may be appointed or desire to observe the post-election audit and the available resources of the Board (i.e., physical space, number of counting stations, etc.), the Board may limit the number of observers. However, statutory observers must be allowed to participate regardless of Board resources. If the Board must limit the number of observers, at least two members of the general public, randomly selected from those expressing an interest to observe must also be allowed to observe the audit. As a general rule, Boards must do their best to accommodate the
general public to the extent practicable.

5. Representatives of the media are permitted to attend any portion of the post-election audit.

C. Preparations for the Post-Election Audit

1. After Election Day, the Secretary of State will randomly select at least one other statewide contest to be included in the post-election audit in addition to the “top of the ticket” contest (e.g., President). Further, in addition to any contest selected by the Secretary of State, the board of elections must randomly select at least one other contest (candidate contest or question/issue contest), preferably from the universe of all countywide contests, unless circumstances (i.e., no, or only one, countywide contest) necessitate the selection of some other contest. The Board shall exclude any contest in which the number of candidates for that contest (including eligible write-in candidates)
does not exceed the number of candidates to be elected or nominated in that contest.

2. At the time the Board meets to certify the official results of the election (or within ten days of certification, if the Board has already met to certify the official results, the Board should determine whether it will conduct its post-election audit by precinct, by polling place, or by individual voting machine
1 (herein collectively referred to as “units to be  audited”); the date and location that the selection of units to be audited will take place; and the date and place that the audit will commence. It is preferable to audit the smallest unit available to the Board. A Board should conduct a post-election audit by polling
place only if, on Election Day, the voting machines in a multiple-precinct polling place were not precinct-specific (i.e., a voter could cast his or her ballot on any voting machine in the multiple-precinct polling place without regard to the precinct in which the voter was registered to vote).

3. On the date the Board selects the units to be audited, the Board must randomly select a sufficient number of units to be audited until the number of votes cast (machine public count) on all selected units to be audited equals at least 5% of the total number of votes cast for the county (countywide voter turnout).

a. If the Board is auditing by precinct, and the randomly selected precinct’s public count is greater than or equal to 5%, the Board must randomly select an additional precinct to be audited.

b. If the Board is auditing by polling place, and the public count from the selected polling place is greater than or equal to 5%, the Board must randomly select an additional polling place to be audited.
Note: While it is reasonable for the Board to organize its materials and ballots
between the date the selection is made and the date the audit begins (i.e., it
may take time to sort through comingled absentee ballots to segregate those
from the selected precincts, etc.), the Board should both allow observers to be
present during these preparations and should take great care to prevent a preaudit from inadvertently taking place, either in fact or in perception, before the actual audit.

4. In General:

a. When determining the public count, the Board must include all relevant categories of ballots, including regular ballots (VVPAT and/or optical scan paper ballots), counted provisional ballots (whether cast in person before, or on, Election Day), and counted absentee ballots of all types for the precinct or polling place. The Board is permitted to open sealed VVPAT canisters for the purpose of conducting the post-election audit, even if there is not a recount in the precinct.

b. If absentee ballots are accumulated and reported as a single precinct, then the Board must conduct the audit using defined batches of absentee ballots equaling 5% of all absentee ballots cast. If the ballots are not already kept as defined batches, the Board must first batch the ballots into batches of 50 and then randomly select batches equaling 5% of all absentee ballots cast.

c. Selection of units to be audited must be random (meaning that each possible unit to be audited has the same chance of being selected). The Board need not follow any particular method to ensure random selection of units to be audited. The casting of differently colored multi-sided die (with each die representing a different numeral in the precinct number) or drawing numbered slips of paper from a transparent container are both acceptable methods.

d. A board of elections may choose to audit a universe greater than 5%. For contests where the margin is above the statutory threshold for an automatic recount but is close, selecting a greater percentage of ballots to be audited is advisable.

e. Elections records generally are public records and must be available for public inspection, including to observers during a post-election audit. Records that may be of interest to observers, and that should be available for inspection, include documents that show the number of ballots ordered and received by the Board; the number of ballots that were voted, remade, spoiled, and uncounted; the number of absentee and provisional ballots issued, returned, validated, and invalidated; poll worker and board reconciliation sheets; and chain of custody logs.

D. Conducting the Post-Election Audit

This Directive requires the use of either a simple, percentage-based post-election audit or a “risk-limiting audit.” Risk-limiting audits are recommended. For more information about risk-limiting audits, go to http://cuyahogaelectionaudits.com/audit/post-election/risklimiting.
2 If you have questions about risk-limiting audits, please contact Matt Damschroder or Matt Masterson in the Elections Division.

1. The post-election audit must be conducted by teams of elections officials equally divided among the state’s two major political parties (e.g., 2, 4, 6, etc.).

2. A post-election audit team of at least two election officials must compare the total number of votes cast in the contests being audited to the number of voters listed in the poll book, poll list or signature poll book. If more votes appear for a particular contest in a precinct (including precincts contained in multi-precinct polling locations) than the number of marked names in the poll book, poll list or signature poll book (indicating which electors voted, including absentee and provisional voters), such discrepancy must be documented.

3. Ballots must be checked to verify that each contest has been properly identified on the ballot. Observers and members of the public may observe the inspection of the ballots but may not handle ballots.
Note: “Ballot” refers to both:

• A paper ballot that is optically scanned and counted at the precinct polling
place or centrally tabulated, and
• The Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) produced by any Direct
Recording Electronic (DRE) touch screen voting machine.

4. For each contest to be audited, the Board must physically examine and hand count the ballots for each randomly selected unit to be audited and must hand count the votes cast on the ballots. The Board then must compare the hand count to the recorded electronic summary of the votes contained in the official certification of the votes for that contest in that precinct or polling location. The Board must make a record of the comparison for each precinct (including precincts contained in a polling location if conducting the audit by polling place) included in the post-election audit. The Board shall document this process using the audit reporting work book.
Note: If any comparison of the hand count and official certification tally as noted above results in a difference between the hand count and the official certified tally, the Board must determine if a mistake occurred in the hand count. If the Board determines that no hand-counting mistake occurred, the hand count of the ballots shall be taken to be the accurate count. The Board shall provide written notification to the Secretary of State of any such discrepancy.

5. At the conclusion of the post-election audit, the Board must calculate the individual accuracy rate of each contest included in the audit by taking the sum of any discrepancies for each contest audited and dividing it by the sum of all ballots audited for that contest, then subtracting the resulting number from 100 to return the accuracy rate as a percentage.

Note: The Board should use the absolute value of each discrepancy so that offsetting discrepancies (a one vote gain and a one vote loss) do not net out as zero discrepancies.

6. A county is required to escalate the audit if its accuracy rate is less than 99.5% in a contest with a certified margin that is at least 1% (calculated as a percentage of ballots cast on which the contest appeared), or less than 99.8% in a contest with a certified margin that is smaller than 1%. Escalation entails drawing a second random sample of at least 5% of votes cast, selected from units that were not audited in the original sample, and auditing the ballots (using the same procedures) with respect to any such contest. If, after the second round of auditing, the accuracy rate from the two samples is below 99.5%, the county shall investigate the cause of the discrepancy and report its findings to
the Secretary of State’s Office within the same time for completing the post election audit. In such cases, the Secretary of State’s Office may require a 100% hand-count.

E. Reporting Results after the Post-Election Audit is Complete

If the post-election audit results in change of vote totals reported in the official canvass, the Board shall amend its certification of the official results of the affected contest and submit it to the Secretary of State within the time limits set forth in this directive, in the same manner required for making of the original official declaration of the result of such election, pursuant to R.C. 3505.32(A).
After a board of elections has completed its post-election audit, the Board must file the following with the Secretary of State’s Office:

1. All final results from the audit using the audit reporting work book; and
2. If vote totals in the randomly selected contest change, a certified amended abstract that shows both:

a. The votes cast in each precinct in the county in which the contest was submitted to electors, and
b. The votes of the precincts in which the ballots were audited as shown by the audit documents.

Boards must transmit their post-election audit results no later than five days after completion of the post-election audit to Kathy Malott at the Secretary of State’s Office:

• via fax: (614) 485-7590 (include a cover sheet), or
• via email: kmalott@ohiosecretaryofstate.gov (subject: Post-Election Audit)

If you have any questions regarding this Directive, please contact the Secretary of State election’s attorney assigned to your county at (614) 466-2585.

Sincerely,
Jon Husted

Click to access Dir2012-56.pdf

Citizen Wells: I am conducting my own audit. The vast numbers of provisional ballots generated by sending out so many absentee ballots and by  registered voter status confusion are  a concern. Possibly of more concern is the drop in military absentee votes.

Franklin County Ohio reveals Ohio voting problems, Tens of thousands of ballots in question, Provisional ballots, 2735 cast by non Ohio citizens, Audit OH votes

Franklin County Ohio reveals Ohio voting problems, Tens of thousands of ballots in question, Provisional ballots, 2735 cast by non Ohio citizens, Audit OH votes

“An additional 2,735 were cast by people who elections officials believe were not registered in Ohio”…The Columbus Dispatch Nov. 21, 2012

“If the voter turnout in Ohio matches the 2008 level of 67 percent, some 5,226,000 votes would be cast. Under that scenario, 250,000 provisional ballots would amount to 4.8 percent of the entire vote — well over the current difference between the two candidates, according to RealClearPolitics poll average.”…NewsMax Nov. 1, 2012

“It’s not who votes that counts, it’s who counts the votes”…Joseph Stalin

There are 2 state elections that should be, without a doubt, audited. Florida and Ohio.

Franklin County Ohio, containing Columbus, was one of the counties in Ohio that went for Obama by a large margin.

Obama 325,654     60.1%

Romney 207,941  39.1%

If Franklin County is any indication, the elections in Ohio cannot be trusted.

From The Columbus Dispatch November 21, 2012.

“New Albany schools await provisional ballot count”

“New Albany schools officials must continue to wait to find out whether their combined bond issue and tax levy passed.

Yesterday, the Franklin County Board of Elections told workers to begin opening and scanning most of the 29,751 provisional ballots cast in the Nov. 6 election, but they can’t be counted until the board decides what to do with the rest of the ballots.

Work began yesterday on 20,545 ballots that election officials believe were cast correctly. They are awaiting a response from other county boards to determine whether 2,438 more ballots, which were cast by voters registered elsewhere in Ohio, are valid.

An additional 2,735 were cast by people who elections officials believe were not registered in Ohio, and 1,849 were cast by people voting in both the wrong precinct and polling location. Other categories of provisional votes are also under review, election officials said.

The board will meet again today to make a determination on the remaining ballots, and the actual vote count can begin. But the Thanksgiving holiday means it will be at least Monday before the board has an unofficial tally.

The final, official count of votes is to be complete on Tuesday.

At issue is the 87-vote margin of victory — not counting provisional ballots — held by the New Albany schools in its $45 million bond issue and 4.24-mill operating levy.

A Dispatch analysis found that 666 voters cast provisional ballots at sites where the tax request was on the ballot. It’s possible that not all of those ballots were from school-district voters, however, because they include votes from polling sites with voters who also live outside the district.

If even half the provisional ballots are from district voters and deemed valid, it could swing the decision or trigger a recount. Ohio law requires a recount when the margin is less than half a percentage point.

Elections Board members also struggled to decide what to do about 44 people who signed a poll book on Election Day, signifying they were cleared to vote on a machine, but who also cast provisional ballots.

Election workers told the board that the people might have gotten as far as signing their names before telling a poll worker about a recent address or name change, and were then asked to vote provisionally. There’s no way to determine whether they both cast an electronic ballot and filled out a provisional ballot, however.

The board voted to ask the secretary of state’s office for guidance in the matter, as no one on staff could remember a similar situation.

Board members will consider the matter again at today’s meeting.”

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2012/11/21/new-albany-schools-await-provisional-ballot-count.html