Account from A Watcher in a Pennsylvania Central Tabulation Facility

NOTE: If you worked the 2024 election in any capacity, and would like to weigh in with your experience for a methodical collection and reporting of issues, you can do so through this data collector. The results will be released via a future Liberty Lens story.

It’s easy to speculate that mail-in ballot tabulation centers in Pennsylvania are nefarious hotbeds for voter fraud.  Certainly, the concept of voting by mail is in itself most susceptible to misconduct and fraud.  The lack of both proper identity verification of the voter and following the chain of custody would be two key elements I would describe as issues in these centers.  How could you spot misconduct and fraud in this fast paced environment, with so much going on and from a distance that you’d most likely need binoculars?  Sadly, even if you found misconduct you couldn’t challenge this during the count.  You might have recourse to bring the issue to light with the election center supervisor.  Most likely these battles will be fought after the fact, days later and with no real immediate resolution.  This is because once the Ballot hits the tabulators, there is no way to identify or remove the result.  

Some might say that it’s possible through court litigation and ballots found with issue before tabulation are certainly part of this process.  With the inability to challenge anything during the processing, this leaves only the options of taking notes and reporting issues.  I fear this sounds like I’m not doing my job.  While many times seated across the room from the tabulation machines. The inability to really walk, we can’t ask questions with the exception of one Person – the supervising election employee – there is little that can be discovered.  You’d stand a better chance as an election worker where you can see the ballots as they pass through your hands.

Know that someone is “watching”!  That alone might be a deterrent for misconduct. If it wasn’t effective then why did other tabulation centers find ways to have watchers removed or not present? I like to think that watchers come prepared. We’ve gone through training and have an idea of the task.  I arrive with a fresh notepad, prepared to fill the pages with anything that I can write.  Most information might be irrelevant.  Days later I’m able to reflect back and give answers using this seemingly irrelevant information to others’ surprise.  I also know the numbers.  I have an expectation of how many ballots will be processed that day.  I’m trying not to make this article county specific but each time I’ll have a copy of my counties voter rolls on my phone and can tell which individuals are mail-in ballot associated. The most important part has been the outcome at the end of the evening. Receiving totals finalizes that precinct or tabulation center.  Certainly, there will be provisional, overseas, military and federal ballots left to count.  There might even have been ballots that arrived on Election Day left to count.  Although not certified yet, the amount finalized at the mail-in ballot tabulation should signal an end to the election ballot counting.

One Day Becomes Two!

I’ve had mail-in ballot center counting go late into the night.  One specific time it was near 1:00 am when everyone was leaving.  The 2020 Presidential election threw everyone a curve ball and nobody in Pennsylvania was prepared for what transpired. I could imagine angry election officials not wanting to be watched over during this new mail-in ballot process.  I can also see watchers in their duties for the first time, unfamiliar with what to expect. One thing was certain: we had a lot to learn, so the next Presidential Election wouldn’t be like the last. The 2024 Presidential election was expected to take days to count. It was to my surprise when my county was finishing up in the late afternoon.  Some last minute hiccups delayed the final totals till near 8pm. They ran 3 tabulators at this mail-in ballot center.  Tabulators A, B, & C.  Precinct X was missing a single ballot, based on an envelope that seemed void of a ballot.  During that multiple count search, Precinct Z came up with 5 ballots missing.  It took time but the 5 missing from Precinct Z were found still in secrecy envelopes. That resolved this issue.  Precinct X wasn’t found and was assumed it might have been an empty envelope.  

These final precincts were run through the tabulators. Precinct X had been run through multiple times in the attempt to find one missing ballot.  It was hoped that the machine just miscounted one. It’s important to watch that the “BATCH” is zeroed out if they want to re-run a precinct through again.  We can only take notes and watch from a distance.  Precinct X and Precinct Z were in the notes that evening.

Once all tabulation is completed, there is a final report for each tabulator as the data is exported to a USB “thumb drive”.  This is secured and taken to the county building for transmitting and reporting.  In the past, this transmitting process hasn’t been “watched”.  This evening, we had an awesome watcher that followed that process through, and it was a good thing too. Out of three tabulators, two of them wouldn’t transmit and complete.  It was later decided that ballots from those two machines, A & B, would need to be processed again. After very little sleep, I was called on again to watch this process the next morning.  

Here we go Again!

Upon arriving, to our surprise, the ballots were already in the room. The prior night they had been bagged, placed in bins, with a security strap locking the bin from tampering. At this point the ballots were on a shelf in a caged cart. I didn’t see the bins anywhere.  It would appear that election officials don’t think the chain of custody is necessary at the Elections Office in the presence of county employees. They had initially waited for tabulators A & B to arrive and get set up.  These tabulators were the offending machines that caused the transmission issues.  Only ballots processed previously on tabulators A & B would be processed that day.  Tabulator C’s data had been successfully transmitted the night before.  Zero counts were verified, and the scanning began.  

There is a lot of time to think and plan while scanning is going on.  Thankfully the task of verification and removing ballots from envelopes had already been completed the day before.  County workers also commented that after a day of laying flat, pressed against one another the Ballots seemed to scan a lot easier.  Less rejection and jams in the discharge trays.  The watchers had asked if the county officials could let us know the precinct they’re scanning and the final total of that precinct.  They obliged by writing this information on the dry erase board each time. I found myself keeping track using the numbers I had calculated and the prior nights totals from the machines.  We had roughly 24,000 Ballots the prior evening, and that meant the two machines today would run roughly 13,400 Ballots.  Around mid-afternoon everything looked great for finishing before 5:00 pm.  I was excited to be finished and, having kept a running total, began showing the amount of ballots remaining to scan.  2,000 then 1,513 and then 600.  Soon, it was became obvious there were more ballots on the table remaining to be scanned than my count.  I started saying something to the officials and they didn’t want to hear this.  I remember the response was always “We’ll be with you in a minute!”  The county officials sat down and started going through the books and the numbers.  I checked mine also, as my lack of sleep might have led to a mistake.  Checking against the dry erase board, I found a mistake!  But that mistake added another 42 Ballots to the count.  We were now over by 961 Ballots! It was later found that Precinct Z had that exact amount of ballots (give or take 1).  County officials found that Precinct Z had been previously scanned on Machine C and was not intended to be scanned here today.  It mistakenly made its way here because the missing ballot from Precinct X had been in the lead of the stack.  We’ll just say at this point that their numbers matched, and the officials always resorted to that comment afterward.

So, why do I type all of this about watchers and a rescan of ballots?  Thinking back, there were lots of opportunities for misconduct had watchers not been present. And even with watchers present, there were many opportunities for mistakes or fraud that watchers would not be in a position to identify. Why hadn’t the initial scanned ballots been able to transmit the night before? If the same two tabulators were used to scan again, what changes could have been made to allow it to work this time, when previous attempts failed? What’s the sense in a locked bin with security tags if the county can simply open them without anyone witnessing this action? The biggest question might be if I hadn’t been counting down, would this final tally have had 961 additional ballots added to the voting? I checked the Precinct Z totals for Mail-In Ballots and this would have equated to roughly a 370 vote advantage to the Democrat Party.  Perhaps an honest mistake, but one I’m sure the county didn’t want to have happen either.  Residents should be thinking about ways to press their elections officials to find ways to eliminate these kinds of vulnerabilities. In the meantime, watchers… keep honing your watching skills!

Appreciate what you’re reading? Be sure to share it!

Have a story? Break it at LibertyLens.News! Become a Contributor.

Support platforms, like The Liberty Lens, that enable independent grassroots journalism. Donate here.