Columnist and Editor Differ On Why 'Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch' Election Poll Was Wrong

By: Dave Astor Robert Koehler wonders, in his current column, if electronic-voting-machine manipulation or malfunctions were among the reasons why most results of Ohio's Nov. 8 ballot issues were so different than predicted by a usually reliable Columbus Dispatch poll.

"There's always a chance [of electronic fraud] in this crazy day and age, but I don't see how it's realistically possible," responded Dispatch Public Affairs Editor Darrel Rowland, when reached by E&P. "There would have to be some super nano-technology."

Koehler, who's syndicated by Tribune Media Services, wrote in his "Poll Shock" column that the Dispatch "has no interest in raising doubts about the integrity of the U.S. electoral system, and so hasn't looked in that direction for an explanation of what voting-rights activist Bob Fitrakis called a polling error of 'Landon beats FDR' proportions." Koehler said the Ohio paper -- which he described as "a member in good standing of the mainstream media" -- instead blamed its inaccurate poll on "the notorious volatility of statewide referendum issues."

Rowland said that may have been one reason for the inaccuracies in the Dispatch poll, which was mailed to about 12,600 Ohioans -- of which about 1,900 responded. He added that the ballot issues were "incredibly confusing," and that "a lot of last-minute money" was spent to defeat four of them. "It's easier to cause people to vote no than to vote yes," Rowland said.

But Koehler, who has also written about major problems in Ohio during the 2004 presidential election, said there's "evidence that pandemic chaos and perhaps even centrally orchestrated malfeasance are accompanying the spread of electronic voting machines to the nation's precincts. We know there's cause to worry about the state of our democracy because of the historical accuracy of The Columbus Dispatch voter poll."

Rowland, who supervises coverage of state government and politics for the Dispatch, said he's skeptical that fraud occurred because the new electronic machines have "individual memory cards" and printed receipts (though voters can't keep the receipts). He added there's bipartisan oversight of the election process below the state level, which is Republican-dominated.

Koehler, who interviewed Rowland before writing his column, described the five issues on Ohio's Nov. 8 ballot in his column. "Only the first -- a $2 billion state bond initiative to promote high-tech industry -- was not related to the conduct of elections, and oddly enough its results were accurately forecast in the poll," he wrote. "Then it gets hairy.

"Issue 2 would have made absentee voting easier in the state. It had lots of high-profile support, and the Dispatch poll predicted a cakewalk for it: 59 percent yes, 33 percent no, 9 percent undecided. The actual result: 36 percent yes, a whopping 63 percent no.

"Then there was issue 3, which would have lowered the campaign-contribution limits that a lame-duck state legislature had raised a year ago. Prediction: 61 percent yes, 25 percent no, 14 percent undecided. Actual result: 33 percent yes, 66 percent no.

"The results of issue 4, to control gerrymandering by establishing an independent board to draw congressional districts, were only slightly less dramatic. Prediction: 31 percent yes, 45 percent no, 25 percent undecided. Result: 30 percent yes, 69 percent no. And for issue 5, to establish an independent board instead of the secretary of state's office to oversee elections, a 41 percent predicted yes vote shrank to 29 percent, while the no vote ballooned from 43 to 70 percent."

Rowland responded: "We have a proven polling process. It has worked year after year. This time, the cigar blew up in our face." He told E&P that "polls are not predictions -- they're the proverbial snapshots in time."

Will the Dispatch look into possible fraud or malfunctions connected with electronic voting technology? "We need solid evidence that there's something untoward," replied Rowland.

But Koehler wrote: "Why, I wonder, in a state that made a national spectacle of itself with widespread irregularities and voter disenfranchisement a year ago, would there be so little interest in investigating whether the 'voting chaos' reported by the Toledo Blade or the 'night of surprises' reported by the Dayton Daily News could have produced tainted results?"

And Koehler concluded sarcastically that "the spark won't jump in the media mind. You know: Hmm, we have widespread confusion in the voting process, a recent GAO report that cites many glaring insecurities in e-voting, and our own polls indicating big victories that turn into big defeats. Could it be? Nah! What are we thinking? This is the world's greatest democracy."