Good vs. Ugly:

How to Spot True Post-Election
Audits From Sham Reviews
Post-election audits play a significant role in providing evidence that voters can trust
election outcomes, but we continue to see calls for sham reviews disguised as “audits.”
Sham reviews are designed to undermine legitimate election results, mislead the public,
and ultimately leave our elections – and our democracy – less secure. Here’s how to tellthe difference:

Who is conducting the audit process?
Sham reviews are conducted by unqualified, politically motivated actors, often forpersonal profit and political gain. True audits are conducted without political bias
by election officials who are sworn to impartiality, often working in bipartisan teams.
These officials retain control of the ballots and equipment at all times (third parties
may provide specific expertise and assistance).

Is the audit routine?
Sham reviews arise as a reaction to election results, can happen at any time, and are
not within existing election laws. They are also usually initiated by a partisan group ofpoliticians. True post-election audits usually are conducted shortly after an election
as a routine part of election administration specified in law, regardless of the reported
election results.

Are the processes transparent?
Because sham reviews intend to mislead the public, they are conducted with little, ifany, transparency about the processes and greatly restrict observers. The so-called
results are not published in a timely manner, further stoking public distrust in theelection outcome as conspiracy theories continue to proliferate. True audits are open
to all candidates, political parties, election integrity advocates, and other independent
observers. The final audit results are reported publicly and kept in publicly available
records with the elections office.
VerifiedVoting.org

Philadelphia, PA

Info@VerifiedVoting.org

Good vs. Ugly:

How to Spot True Post-Election
Audits From Sham Reviews
Are the election systems kept secure?
Sham reviews are conducted by those with no expertise in true post-election audits,which can expose voting equipment to vulnerabilities, lose chain of custody of voted
ballots, potentially expose voters’ personal information, and undermine the processes
that election officials work to protect. A true audit has a documented process that
does not threaten the integrity of the voted ballots, voting equipment, or other artifactsof an election in any way. A true audit also protects a voter’s constitutional right to asecret, anonymous ballot.

What are the audit methods?
Sham review “methods” are shrouded in secrecy because they do not follow any
scientifically sound auditing practices. Best practice audits follow guiding principles
that are procedurally and statistically sound. Verified Voting and others especially
recommend risk-limiting audits. For more information, resources, and research on true
post-election audits, visit https://verifiedvoting.org/audits.
True audits have an important role to play in giving voters justified confidence inour elections. The more effectively we can distinguish them from sham reviews,
the more equipped we will be to advocate for policies and practices that make ourdemocracy stronger.
Verified Voting’s team provides advice and assistance to election officials aroundthe country in conducting statistically sound post-election audits and we areavailable as a resource.
Please contact us at audits@verifiedvoting.org.

VerifiedVoting.org

Philadelphia, PA

Info@VerifiedVoting.org