Mr. THOMAS. So that means it is counted under your summation here, "Election Night". And that is counted.

Mr. SANDSTROM. Yes.

Mr. THOMAS. They were not instructed to inform voters to look for initials, and after, ensuing ballots where punch card ballots were used, election clerks must instruct the voter to be certain that the clerk's initials appear on the ballot, and if they do not, the ballot will not be counted. Does that mean that they were instructed to inform voters to look for initials?

The back side of the third tab?

Mr. SANDSTROM. With respect to the methodology, putting this together, primary reliance was put on any specific county developed instruction forms that were given to the poll workers. Mr. THOMAS. Were they given—

Mr. SANDSTROM. We believe that they well may have been at least some of them, maybe all, were also given this. We had the two items in our methodology with respect to the study-nothing in that.

Mr. THOMAS. You make a flat-out declaratory statement that they were not instructed. I asked how they got the instructions and it was based upon written materials presented to them, and the written materials presented to some of them, I assume all of them-if 50 people are getting an orange booklet, the other half say, "Where is mine?"

Mr. SANDSTROM. You bring up a point which neither the majority or minority staff has raised before, and this was the documentMr. THOMAS. I just

Mr. SANDSTROM. That is a legitimate point.

Mr. THOMAS. My concern is we make declaratory statements, if we are going to end up evaluating whether folks had information or not, I want to be as accurate as possible. We can say on this point some of them.

Mr. PANETTA. Or you have to say pursuant to county instructions, they were not instructed.

Mr. THOMAS. Yes.

Mr. PANETTA. Obviously Vanderburgh is one-I would like to have the staff look more closely at the vote count there and if they have a basis for defining how they were voided, that would be very important.

Mr. THOMAS. In addition, on the recount where they said there are no written instructions, they weren't provided with the county booklet or the orange booklet; is that correct?

Mr. SANDSTROM. On the recount-—

Mr. THOMAS. The judge just said count in accordance with Indiana law?

Mr. SANDSTROM. Yes.

Mr. THOMAS. I would like to find out how the recount commissioners felt they were informed on Indiana law to perform up to the judge's challenge to them.

Mr. SANDSTROM. The staff may come to an agreement.

Mr. THOMAS. We are talking about three people, right?

Mr. SANDSTROM. Yes.

Mr. THOMAS. Let's call those three people and ask what they did.

Mr. PANETTA. The point is to try to determine just exactly what they understood to be their instructions.

Mr. THOMAS. Yes. Indiana law, and I understand when you ask what Indiana law is, it is more important to me to find out whether the guy making the decision had in their head what was Indiana law, because we can argue Indiana law for months. I want to know whether the guy said, "The judge told me I have to go by Indiana law," and whether they threw this or that at him.

Somebody was making decisions to throw a bunch of stuff and I hope they have a reason for doing it or feel comfortable in what they did. I would like to know what their comfort level was on what information. If they are saying on the orange sheets, because I went to the clerk, that is different from somebody winging it. So that I would like to know.

Mr. PANETTA. Would you try to prepare that for tomorrow so we have a specific rundown on Vanderburgh?

Mr. SANDSTROM. Yes.

Mr. PANETTA. Warrick.

WARRICK COUNTY

Mr. SANDSTROM. Warrick is another county in which punch cards were used to cast regular and absentee ballots. They were given fairly consistent instructions consistent with a number of other counties with respect to regular and absentee ballots. With respect to recount, we do not know if written instructions were given. If they were, they were not available. We know because of the report filed by the recount commission on what basis they threw out ballots.

For Warrick

Mr. CLAY. What was the basis?

Mr. SANDSTROM. There were varying bases for throwing out ballots. They were checked for initials and those with initials of only one poll clerk were invalidated.

Mr. PANETTA. What do you mean the initial?

Mr. SANDSTROM. If only one poll clerk initialed, they were not valid.

Mr. PANETTA. So out of the approximately over 500 votes there, some of those may have been invalidated by virtue of the initial problem. Would you also do a study on that and see what you can find with regard to those numbers?

Mr. SANDSTROM. Yes.

Mr. PANETTA. Washington.

WASHINGTON COUNTY

Mr. SANDSTROM. That is a county which uses machines to cast regular ballots and paper ballots for absentee ballots. They were instructed to initial each absentee ballot in cursive handwriting by joining the letters together. They were instructed to certify that the ballots were initialed, given a form to vouch they did what they were instructed to do.

With respect to the recount, they were instructed not to count ballots that had not been properly initialed by poll clerks in their ordinary handwriting.

Mr. THOMAS. Were these instructions written or verbal?

Mr. SANDSTROM. Those are written instructions. That is pretty specific and direct. I wouldn't want to cross the county clerk in that county.

Mr. PANETTA. They get the cursive connection, you got to believe they are specific.

Mr. THOMAS. Must be written in cursive by joining the letters together.

Mr. PANETTA. This is Washington. Do we know if any of the two votes there that were invalidated were based on initialing just by chance?

Mr. SANDSTROM. No. It may just be a counting difference.

Mr. PANETTA. At least as far as you know, there is no

Mr. SANDSTROM. Yes.

Mr. CLAY. How much did they pay them?

Mr. THOMAS. Ten bucks an hour.

Mr. CLAY. Subminimal.

Mr. PANETTA. That concludes initialing with regard to all the counties. Obviously I think the principal focus would be on Vandenburgh and Warrick. We did mention some problems perhaps in Orange.

Mr. THOMAS. Greene County also, was that one that was suspect? Mr. SANDSTROM. For the sealing?

Mr. PANETTA. Greene as to the possibility of initials.

Mr. THOMAS. No initials in Greene, so we don't worry about that. Mr. PANETTA. Their instructions were not to worry about it on the recount. I don't know whether that makes a difference. Mr. THOMAS. I will have to look at it.

Mr. PANETTA. Let's go to precinct numbers.

Mr. SANDSTROM. With respect to Crawford County, here again is the one county which we did not get any written instructions with respect to being provided to poll workers.

Mr. PANETTA. So you got neither on election night or on the recount?

Mr. SANDSTROM. Correct. With respect to the recount, they were instructed to count ballots.

Excuse me-no mention of precinct numbers in the judge's written instructions.

Mr. PANETTA. This is when he said count under Indiana law?
Mr. SANDSTROM. Yes.

Mr. THOMAS. Is that a specific deletion in his written instructions or were his written instructions to count under Indiana law and therefore obviously he did not mention the precinct numbers because he didn't mention anything specific. Do you understand what I am saying?

Mr. SANDSTROM. I would have to make some conclusion about what was in his mind. Certainly-

Mr. THOMAS. Did he mention anything else specific? Did he mention the-

Mr. SANDSTROM. No. He did get-on paper ballots, he got fairly specific with respect to distinguishing marks and those sorts of items with respect to actually marking the ballots because in paper counties, that is the issue that usually come up.

Mr. PANETTA. But there is no reference to precinct numbers?

Mr. SANDSTROM. NO.

Mr. PANETTA. I take it as far as Crawford is concerned, were precinct numbers a problem in invalidating votes there?

Mr. SANDSTROM. No.

Mr. PANETTA. Daviess.

Mr. SANDSTROM. They were instructed to write precinct numbers on both the regular and absentee ballots. With respect to the recount, there were no written instructions from the judge. The recount commissioners were provided with the 1982 or 1984 orange manual.

Mr. PANETTA. The 1984 manual says what? To write the precinct numbers?

Mr. SANDSTROM. Yes.

Mr. THOMAS. I am doing a comparison between 1982 and 1984. 1982 says,

Make sure ballot package seals remain intact as the inspector opens the package to let both clerks of opposite political parties initial 25 each of the state and local ballots.

1984 says,

Make sure ballot package seals remain intact as the inspector opens the packages to let both clerks of opposite political parties initial 25 each of the State and local ballots by writing their initials and printing the precinct number on the back of each ballot.

So that was added between 1982 and 1984, a change in State law? Mr. PANETTA. At least in interpretation.

Mr. SANDSTROM. Again we didn't go in to find out why they changed it.

Mr. THOMAS. But I am asking a question, why they changed it. Mr. SANDSTROM. I think given maybe some of the court cases that were taken to be fairly harsh they changed it as a safeguard to assure that mistakes might not be made.

Mr. PANETTA. You are guessing now, Carl. I think the answer is we don't know and we had better check.

Mr. THOMAS. Well, either they changed the law or they changed it in response to someone telling them what they are doing wasn't proper, not to make choices on why they added it. I didn't think they added it because they wanted to give the printer more money or because it looked better as a larger paragraph, so either they passed a State law or it was in response to a court decision that told them they had better cover themselves by putting that on. It is one or the other, isn't it?

Do we know which one it is?

Mr. SANDSTROM. For sure, no.

Mr. GINSBERG. It is not a State law.

Mr. THOMAS. Was it a State law passed or a court case that burned them on this?

Mr. GINSBERG. Yes.

Mr. THOMAS. They were found to be remiss in carrying out their duties, so they added it, but it is added in 1984 and they got the 1984 booklet.

Mr. SANDSTROM. Daviess County, I believe that is the booklet we are working from.

Mr. PANETTA. What, the 1984?

Mr. SANDSTROM. Yes.

Mr. THOMAS. Another intent question-if they instructed themwell, no, they were good up top, too. That is OK, because they were very meticulous on the other. I wonder if they had some kind of a hint list sent out. These are points to mention. It is just that these people were fairly meticulous as they were initially.

Mr. PANETTA. It looks on the recount that they basically used the orange State manual as the principal guide.

Mr. THOMAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. PANETTA. OK; Martin.

Mr. SANDSTROM. Gibson?

Mr. PANETTA. I am sorry; Gibson.

GIBSON COUNTY

Mr. SANDSTROM. Gibson is another county that uses punch cards for both regular and absentee ballots. However, their system is a voice system which uses the data vote manual rather than the orange State manual.

Mr. PANETTA. What is that, a different

Mr. THOMAS. It is put out by the company that makes the machines.

Is it substantially different?

Mr. SANDSTROM. With respect to precinct numbers, yes, in that they were not instructed to put it in that manual.

Mr. THOMAS. How different is this data vote manual from the 1982 orange manual?

Mr. SANDSTROM. I imagine it holds the things from the 1982 manual.

Mr. PANETTA. On the recount

Mr. SANDSTROM. In Gibson County, they were given oral instructions to count ballots according to their understanding of the law. Mr. PANETTA. In Gibson, let's see, that was the one we don't have the numbers on. We think it is about 10 votes. Were precinct numbers a problem as far as we know?

Mr. THOMAS. We do know and they were not a problem.

Mr. PANETTA. Greene.

Mr. SANDSTROM. Greene County is a county that uses machine ballots and so paper absentee, they use the 1984 manual. They also went through some training. On the 1984 manual, it instructs them to put the precinct number on the absentee ballot. With respect to the recount, the Greene County judge said that the precinct poll clerks initials were not required to be on the absentee ballots.

Mr. PANETTA. So that was a specific no. I remember don't refer to the precinct numbers in recounting.

Mr. THOMAS. So the assumption is that the downcount wasn't because of precinct numbers because they were told to disregard them, so it has to be something else. That is the seal, right?

Mr. PANETTA. Do you know if Greene has a pretty good chunk of votes there? Do we know what the problems were in Greene? Mr. SANDSTROM. That is primarily

Mr. PANETTA. All three or AB or BA?

Mr. SANDSTROM. The seals for-the judge told them what the statutory requirement was.

Mr. PANETTA. OK.