While a recount may give a losing candidate emotional satisfaction and a sense of closure, the vote shifts tend to be very, very small.

Iowa absentee ballot with outer envelope and secrecy envelope.

I don’t mention my day job here much, but I’ve worked in the Johnson County Auditor’s Office for the past 11 years (which explains why you didn’t see as many of my stories the last couple weeks before the election). In that time, I’ve had hands-on experience with three recounts.

In 1999, we re-fed all the ballots from an Iowa City council race, nearly 8,000, and only one vote shifted, narrowing a three vote lead down to two. In a three-county recount in a 2002 state senate race, about three votes moved. In 2005 a recount in the North Liberty mayor’s race changed no votes at all out of over 1,000 ballots fed into the machine. The write-in winner lost a couple votes because the recount board interpreted the spelling of his name just a little more strictly than the Election Day poll workers, and tossed a couple votes where they thought the name was too vague. That wasn’t enough to change the outcome.

Multiply those one or two vote county shifts by a whole state with a 200 or so vote margin, which is where the Al Franken-Norm Coleman U.S. Senate race sits in Minnesota, and you might have something. But a state legislative district that’s, say, 100 votes? Highly unlikely.

In fact, the big shifts have already happened with the decisions on the provisional ballots as boards met Thursday and Friday. Those boards also counted absentee ballots that arrived on Wednesday and Thursday, but were postmarked by the day before the election.

Sure, more absentees might show up before canvasses make the results final this week, but there’s a law of diminishing returns. Auditors don’t all of a sudden get a bigger pile of absentees in the mail six days after the election than they do one day after the election. And the later it gets, the more likely it is that those ballots have an Election Day postmark and are thus worthless.

In seesaw House races in Woodbury County, Democratic incumbents Wes Whitead and Roger Wendt held leads of 43 and 155 votes respectively at the end of Friday, with 168 provisionals to be counted Tuesday.

Given the heavily Democratic nature of Iowa’s absentee voting this year, any Republican who’s trailing is harder pressed catch up, which means state Sen. Jeff Danielson in Waterloo, who trailed Election Night, is likely to hold his single digit lead. But that doesn’t necessarily mean a Democrat who’s trailing, like state Rep. Art Staed in Cedar Rapids, who’s down by a couple dozen votes, will either.

And if Barack Obama is going to win Iowa, it’s already happened. Depending on how you look at it, it happened in the past six weeks, or it happened starting two years ago.

Record early voting and Election Day voter registration could increase the impact of ballot challenges on Iowa’s seven electoral votes.

Iowa absentee ballot with outer envelope and secrecy envelope.

Iowa has seen unprecedented levels of early voting since ballots became available Sept. 25. Through Saturday, 553,669 voters had voted early or requested ballots by mail, and 481,179 ballots had been returned. Democrats held a roughly 100,000-voter edge in total ballot requests.

Early voting continues through Monday, the day absentee ballot boards start the work of processing ballots, opening envelopes, and dealing with challenges.

Republicans, as part of their “voter integrity” program, issued an unprecedented number of absentee ballot challenges in 2004, concentrating on urban and academic counties. In liberal Johnson County, over 2,000 ballots were challenged for mistakes such as bad addresses and missing signatures. Of the challenged and provisional ballots that were counted, John Kerry won 77 percent — better than any Election Day precinct in the county.

Should McCain or the GOP make a similar attempt to challenge ballots this year, it would happen Monday.

But Democrats took note of the Republican ballot challenges in 2004, and, after taking control of the state legislature in 2006, they passed election law changes making ballot challenges more difficult. Each challenge must now be presented individually, rather than as a group or “blanket” challenge, and the law restricts challenges to a few items such as citizenship, felony status, and residence.

A voter cannot be challenged for registering or changing address on election day. Challengers must provide a name, address and phone number, and are subject to misdemeanor charges for frivolous challenges.

In another legal change, auditors are directed to open the outer, “return carrier” envelope of absentee ballots when they arrive in the mail and check the inner “affidavit envelope” for problems like missing signatures. The change gives voters a chance to fix their own mistakes. In 2004, the outer envelopes weren’t opened till the day before the election.

The Democratic Party also adapted to the 2004 absentee challenges by targeting precincts with especially mobile populations, like college towns, later in the campaign. That way, fewer voters will have moved after having requested a ballot from an old address, thus subjecting themselves to a potential challenge. Democrats also steered voters toward more in-person early voting and less voting by mail.

The trend toward heavier early voting may produce some anomalous precinct results. With so many Democrats out of the Election Day voting pool, Republicans may “win” some precincts they haven’t before. Polk County saw the dynamic a few years back in a Democratic supervisor primary, where Gene Phillips won every Election Day precinct, but John Mauro had an exceptional early voting program and won 80 percent of the absentee vote to win the nomination. He lost the Election Day vote because his people had already voted.

That happened at the presidential level in 2004. John Kerry led the Iowa absentee vote by 70,000 votes, but George W. Bush carried election day by 80,000 to win the state by 10,000.

After all is said and done, some Republicans may look at the Election Day results, compare them to the absentee vote, and cry foul. They may already be laying the groundwork for that with the national attention to problem voter registrations collected by the ACORN community organization. But in Iowa, we’ll be able to look at the details. For the first time, absentee results will be released by precinct, rather than lumped into one county-wide “special precinct.” Political numbers geeks will be able to look at absentee results and Election Day results side by side to check the effectiveness of their absentee ballot programs in minute detail.

Casual election watchers Tuesday night may see Iowa’s vote totals narrow as the votes come in. Absentee totals, which will favor Democrats, tend to be released earlier. The Election Day precincts, which will lean Republican because Democrats disproportionately voted earlier, will trickle in later.

Statistics from the Iowa secretary of state through Monday afternoon show Democrats with 218,000 ballots requested and 168,000 cast — either by mail or in person at a satellite voting location. Republican requests are at 130,000, with 96,000 cast. No party voters have requested 112,000 ballots and returned 76,000.

Official Iowa Voter Registration Form (from Iowa Secretary of State)

The Democrats’ apparent 88,000-vote edge is more that George Bush’s 10,000-vote margin of victory in Iowa four years ago — but then, John Kerry won the early vote, too, only to lose on Election Day.

Voter registration in Iowa has topped 2 million for the first time, and, while voters with no party affiliation are still the single largest group, Democrats hold a 5.5 percent edge over Republicans.  Current active registration is just under 2,001,000. 34.9 percent are Democrats, while 29.6 percent are Republican and 35.5 percent are registered with no party.

The voter registration statistics run through Saturday’s deadline for traditional voter registration. Voters may still register using the new Election Day registration process, which requires an ID and a proof of current address. This is Iowa’s first general election with same-day registration.

Going into the 2004 presidential election, state voter registration was at 1,965,000. Both parties were at 31 percent, with Republicans holding a narrow, 4,000-voter edge. George Bush carried Iowa that year by just under 10,000 votes.

Party percentages normally drop in the run-up to a presidential election, as the newest voters tend to register with no party affiliation. But this year, Democrats have actually gained a half a percent since June at the expense of Republicans, whose percentage share of the electorate has decreased.  No party percentages have held steady.

Democrats have an edge in four of the states five congressional districts, trailing only in western Iowa’s fifth district. The Democratic registration edge is biggest in eastern Iowa’s second district.

The state’s hottest congressional race is in the 4th District, where Democrat Becky Greenwald is challenging incumbent Tom Latham. Democrats have a 9,000-voter registration advantage there.

Statewide, fewer than 1,000 voters have taken advantage of changes in state law that allow Green and Libertarian registration.

The new version of the bill, House File 2367, specifies that it would apply only to partisan primary and general elections, and would exclude precincts with fewer than ten absentee voters in order to protect ballot secrecy.  It passed the House State Government Committee last week.

Rep. Kraig Paulsen, R-Hiawatha, is HF2367’s chief sponsor and says he intoduced the bill at the behest of constituents.  “From our discussions with the Secretary of State and my Auditor, it doesn’t appear to be overly cumbersome,” Paulsen told Iowa Independent.  “However, it may not take effect prior to the November 2008 election.”

Senate File 2089 by Sen. Herman Quirmbach, D-Ames, would roll back a 2004 change that required auditors to accept absentee requests only if they were on one specific statewide form.  “I am just trying to restore the prior practice, which as far as I know was never a problem,” said Quirmbach.  With the change, any signed request on paper could be accepted as long as contained the required information: name, residence address, birthdate, and signature, plus a separate mailing address if needed and a party affiliation for primaries.

Under present law, voters who think a handwritten letter is sufficient now face delays as they wait for or look for a form.

Quirmbach said the change could help service personnel.  “How tragically ironic if somebody risking his life to serve our country were denied its most basic right because he didn’t use the proper bureaucratic form,” he told Iowa Independent.The initial catalyst was a Story County constituent who was hospitalized just before the 2006 general election.  “His wife, who did not have internet access, had some difficulty getting her husband an absentee ballot,” said Quirmbach.  “That was ironic because she had previously been an employee at the Story County Auditor’s office and knew what information had to be included.  She was also aware that the law before 2004 allowed a letter request but apparently was not aware that the code had been changed.”  Quirmbach said despite the difficulties, the hospitalized man was able to vote.

Sen. Brad Zaun, R-Urbandale, raised the spectre of requests on envelopes, matchbooks and napkins.  But Republican amendments specifically excluding those items and requiring use of an 8 1/2 by 11 sheet of paper lost on party lines.

The biggest secret, of course, is the raw vote total from the Democratic caucuses.  That’s still hush-hush.  But the second-biggest mystery is how the absentee votes break out by precinct.  Current Iowa law, drafted in an age when the only absentee voters were shut-ins, service people and expatriates, requires that all absentee ballots across a county be counted as a separate precinct.  The law forbids auditors from releasing any breakdown below the county level.

But Iowa’s absentee voting rate has soared since 1990, when the law was changed to allow any voter to vote early for any or no reason.  And as parties have targeted early voting, they’ve been starving for data.  House File 2132, sponsored by Rep. Kraig Paulsen, R-Hiawatha, would direct auditors to count and report absentee ballots by precinct.  This could affect not just election reporting, but the Iowa caucuses as well.As early voting increased during the 1990s, it had an impact on caucus results.  It wasn’t so much that the overall rate went up.  The issue was that even within a county, absentee rates tend to vary sharply by precinct.  Urban voters like the convenience of early voting, while in rural precincts, the social tradition of neighborhood election day voting is still alive.  In Johnson County in 2004, absentee request rates by precinct ranged from 17 percent to nearly 57 percent. 

The Democrats’ delegate apportionment formula for caucuses was based on election results by precinct.  But since absentees weren’t included, urban voters were in effect taking caucus delegates away from themselves by following the Democratic Party’s constant advice to vote early. 

The Democrats addressed this in the late 1990s and modified the formula.  But the new formula is based on the number of Democrats requesting absentees by precinct, since breaking out the actual absentee count by precinct is still illegal.  Those requests are multiplied by a percentage, to account for independent and Republican absentee voters who voted Democratic.  But even that assumes that non-Democrats are voting Democratic at the same rate across a whole county, and penalizes precincts where a lot of independents vote Democratic, such as student precincts.

The system of counting absentees by county also affects the appearance of results.  The Democratic Party has made a stronger absentee effort in recent cycles.  That leaves a disproportionate share of Republicans left to vote on Election Day, and makes it look like Republicans are “winning” more precincts because more Democrats are lumped into that one big absentee precinct per county.

Rep. Mary Mascher, D-Iowa City, is chairing the subcommittee handling the bill.  Her county, Johnson, had the highest absentee rate in the state in 2004, with more than 50 percent of voters requesting early ballots.  Worth County was on the low end, with only a 14.6 percent absentee rate.

Mascher says the bill as amended would apply only to partisan primary and general elections.  “The intent is to get a better tracking on the Democratic-ness or Republican-ness of any given precinct,” she said.  “It helps us do a better job targeting races and candidates.”

Rep. Mary Gaskill, D-Ottumwa, is also on the subcommittee and has a unique perspective as the former Wapello County auditor.  “It’s just a tough thing for auditors to have to do, especially with the huge turnout this year and on-day registration,” she said.  “They’ve also had changes in handling absentee ballots which will be time-consuming.  We’re trying to figure out how to make it as easy as possible.”

Still, Gaskill said, there’s political interest in the bill.  “Both parties are very interested, because so many more people are voting absentee,” she said.  “They’re doing their work by precinct, and they can’t tell how effective they are.”

Gaskill said equipment may also effect implementation.  “It was a lot easier with a central count system” where all ballots were brought into the courthouse and counted on one machine.  The federal Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002 mandates that all election day ballots are counted at the precinct, to allow voters a chance to fix errors.  Mascher says most equipment could handle the change, but implementation could be delayed past the 2008 presidential election.  That would give auditors until the June 2010 primary.

Despite the political push to early voting, some small counties still have low absentee rates.  Gaskill is concerned that ballot secrecy may be compromised in small precincts if only one or two people vote absentee.  But Mascher says an amendment could waive the requirement for precincts with fewer than 10 absentee voters.

“But that’s all going to change in 2008,” it then notes.  By voting absentee, Vote Hope says, Californians can cast ballots before Iowans trek through winter weather to school gymnasiums, neighbors’ homes and civic centers to caucus for their preferred candidates.  And that, they imply, is a good thing.  Inspired “by Barack Obama’s life experience, his vision for the country, and his calls for people to self-organize in a new wave of political participation,” they seek to diminish the impact Iowa will have in their state.In other words, they are motivated not by the desire for “direct democracy” through a national primary day or by similar philosophical arguments for abandoning Iowa’s (or New Hampshire’s) “first in the nation” status; they are driven by strategic concerns, and their primary goal is supporting Obama, the Democrat from Illinois.

The question to ask, then, is why use this strategy?  Does Vote Hope think that Obama is best served if the supporters he has when California’s absentee ballots are mailed out  (Jan. 7) before the caucus results are announced?

From a purely numbers-based standpoint, Vote Hope’s strategy is a good one.  For any campaign, absentee votes are all upside, no downside.  If someone is willing to support your candidate two weeks before Election Day, why not encourage them to vote right then?  An absentee ballot eliminates the risk that a voter will change his or her mind in the final two weeks (usually packed with controversial debates and last-ditch attack ads), not to mention the risk that the voter just won’t show up at the polls on election day.  It also conserves valuable campaign resources in the final weeks, because absentee voters stop receiving campaign literature in the mail, and they do not require “GOTV” phone calls on Election Day.

Vote Hope hopes to have 500,000 absentee votes for Obama returned to election officials in California before Jan. 27.  This, they note, “represents more Democrats than voted total in the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries in 2004.”  To put that in a bit more perspective, that is more than double the total number of absentee votes recorded for Iowa’s most recent general election (224,774), and it is nearly five times the number of Democrats who voted absentee in that election (109,862).  And those absentee turnout numbers were unexpectedly high.

As a member of the Iowa Democratic Party’s 2006 field staff, I know how hard turning out absentee votes can be.  Both the Republican and Democratic parties had dozens of trained, experienced field staff on the ground in Iowa for six months leading up to the Nov. 7 election.  Will Vote Hope have that kind of organization or funding?

If they hope to meet their 500,000-vote benchmark, they will have to do even better than both of Iowa’s state parties combined, because primary elections introduce even more challenges than general elections.  In particular, voter targeting requires expensive voter identification programs to determine individual voters’ candidate preferences.  While in a general election, state parties can rely primarily on a voter’s party registration (a matter of public record, available for little to no money) to determine whom to target for absentee ballots, primary elections do not afford campaigns and other groups that convenience.  To know who supports Obama, Vote Hope will have to ask voters directly — likely over the phone.  If each successful call costs between 5 cents and 15 cents, and they need to reach at least 2,000,000 voters to find 500,000 willing to vote absentee for Obama (the number of Obama supporters willing to vote absentee will be a small subset of Obama supporters in general), then they could be forced to spend $150,000 before the real work of getting ballot requests processed and ballots returned even begins.

Ironically, the best tool available for this type of political work was developed right here in Iowa, and Vote Hope plans to use it to “beat” us.  Their About page explains that they are “contracting with California VoterConnect so that pledges made on our website, through traditional organizing methods like canvasses and phone banks, and at our events, will be matched with the voter file so we can work to turn [pledges of support for Sen. Obama] into votes.”  The voter file they mention is the Voter Activation Network (in Iowa lingo, “the VAN”), which VoterConnect used with success in 2006 and will likely continue using.

Developed in 2002 for the Iowa re-election efforts of Sen. Tom Harkin and former Gov. Tom Vilsack (official VAN history), the VAN has been used by the Iowa Democratic Party Coordinated Campaign ever since.  And after the success it achieved in Iowa, the VAN spread to other states.  It is now the country’s premier Democratic voter file.

But the VAN is no silver bullet, and Vote Hope will not escape the need for solid organization or funding simply by having access to it.

All things considered, then, will Vote Hope’s project be worth the time, money and effort?  If they reach their goal, it will certainly go a long way toward winning the California primary for Barack Obama.  And, if Obama has a weak showing at the Iowa Caucuses, a press release from Vote Hope claiming that 500,000 absentee votes have already been cast in California may help keep his campaign alive — if there is enough evidence that the claim is true.

But the results of the California primary will not be announced until Feb. 5, and even then many absentee votes will not have been counted.  The media will still latch onto Iowa and New Hampshire, and a press release claiming something that no one will be able to prove for weeks isn’t likely to get much play.

(And, of course, there’s this elephant in the room.)

Although Vote Hope aims to support Obama, campaign finance rules prohibit them from coordinating with Obama’s official campaign.  Neither Vote Hope nor Obama’s Iowa campaign immediately responded to requests for comment.