Audits and recounts are two different post-election processes, but both are designed to build confidence in our elections—they help demonstrate that the winner won and the loser lost. Audit and recount laws vary by state and the table below summarizes important information about recount and audit laws in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
{!{types field=’publication-type’}!}{!{/types}!} {!{types field=’publication-title’}!}{!{/types}!} Date: {!{types field=’publication-date’}!}{!{/types}!} Author: {!{types field=’publication-authors’}!}{!{/types}!} Issue: {!{types field=’publication-issue’ separator=’, ‘}!}{!{/types}!} Download Publication Information While each jurisdiction is unique and there is no one-size-fits-all model for risk-limiting audits, Verified Voting developed these messaging recommendations informed by findings from a research study conducted by Lake Research Partners. The study included eight focus…
{!{types field=’publication-type’}!}{!{/types}!} {!{types field=’publication-title’}!}{!{/types}!} Date: {!{types field=’publication-date’}!}{!{/types}!} Author: {!{types field=’publication-authors’}!}{!{/types}!} Issue: {!{types field=’publication-issue’ separator=’, ‘}!}{!{/types}!} Download Publication Summary Downloadable resource on studies examining internet voting. Internet voting has been assessed many times and always comes up short. Below we highlight notable studies. More studies—including those of some systems currently being marketed—are available at verifiedvoting.org/internet-voting-resources/. Securing…
This paper examines the risks of full election night hand counts, explains when hand counts should be used, and emphasizes why common-sense best practices that employ voting machines and post-election audits make our election outcomes verifiable and resilient.
Democracy depends on citizens’ trust in our elections, the ability to cast a ballot without obstacles, and having
verifiable proof that the winner won and the loser lost. If expanded, internet voting would undermine the fundamental
principles of our democracy: private and trustworthy elections that give voters justified confidence that their
votes were counted as cast. We address internet voting’s dangers and discuss better options that enable voter
enfranchisement while still protecting the security of our elections.
Verified Voting’s downloadable resource on what risk-limiting audit pilots are and how Verified Voting helps jurisdictions across the country conduct them.
{!{types field=’publication-thumbnail’ title=’%%TITLE%%’ alt=’%%ALT%%’ align=’center’ size=’custom’ width=’225′ height=’300′ resize=’stretch’}!}{!{/types}!} {!{types field=’publication-type’}!}{!{/types}!} {!{types field=’publication-title’}!}{!{/types}!} Date: {!{types field=’publication-date’}!}{!{/types}!} Author: {!{types field=’publication-authors’}!}{!{/types}!} Issue: {!{types field=’publication-issue’ separator=’, ‘}!}{!{/types}!} Download Publication Summary Our 2022 annual report is here. View our interactive version here, or download the PDF here.
Our paper explains how, despite continued disinformation about the security of voting systems, U.S. voting equipment deployment has become more resilient over time—and how, with the right resources, election officials can make more improvements to how elections are administered ahead of the 2024 elections.
A downloadable one pager explaining why expanding insecure technology like internet voting makes election results less trustworthy — at a time when having secure and verifiable elections is more important than ever.
This paper, coauthored by Verified Voting and Citizens for Election Integrity Minnesota, describes how to dovetail audits and recounts to bolster public confidence in election results. Every state can do better, and this paper provides guidelines for how.