Guidelines around what the sample/ formula should look like.
The 24 initiative states currently use various categories for determining how many signatures to pull in order to determine the validity rate. Three states (ND, OH and OK) use the presumed valid test, simply counting the number of signatures submitted and assuming that the submissions are valid. AK, AR, FL, IL, ME, MA, MS, MT, NE, SD, UT and WY check all submitted signatures and the remaining states (AZ, DC, CA, CO, ID, MI, MO, NV, OR and WA) use a random sample. We feel that the more signatures examined for duplicates, invalid voter registration and fraud the better and examining 8% of submitted signatures should be the minimum.
The most valid way to choose a sample is randomly, and it should be drawn electronically. For example, in Montana, there are no real uniform guidelines for counties as they pull the samples. This has the effect of tainting the sample because of human error; people will often check a signature that is most readable, potentially skewing the sample towards validity.
Although having a large sample sent out for verification is crucial in catching instances of fraud, this can also be a mixed blessing. Some states only have a matter of weeks after signatures are submitted to decide if they wish to pursue legal options, and wading through hundreds of thousands of signatures can be a daunting task to say the least. Although Michigan's required sample size is only 500 signatures, the Secretary of State has the discretion to expand the sample size for verification. The advantage of Michigan's system is that both sides are notified of which signatures have been chosen for verification.
