“One of the most mysterious, low-profile, covert, shadowy, questionable mechanisms of American democracy is the American vote count”
James and Ken Collier
Authors of "Votescam"
The United States election infrastructure is a decentralized system of over 10,000 jurisdictions that, in practice, relies on a highly consolidated pipeline of private vendors and data aggregators to report results. While the official “ground truth” for the vote tally integrity remains the paper ballot audit trail, the “unofficial” results viewed by the public on election night are the product of a multi-layered data pipeline involving three primary hardware vendors, a dominant foreign-owned Election Night Reporting (ENR) layer, and a single national data aggregator (The Associated Press) serving all major broadcast networks.
NOTE: Paper ballots DO NOT provide “ground truth” as to the integrity of an election, merely the integrity of the vote tally. The integrity of the physical paper ballot is critical. The integrity of a paper ballot is entirely dependent on the integrity of the ballot storage containers as well as the integrity of the voter registration roll and the front-end verification processes that occur before a ballot is ever scanned.
Critical takeaways include:
- Unofficial vs. Official Results: Media “calls” and election night tallies are statistical projections and unofficial data. Legal certification occurs days or weeks later following a formal canvass and audit process.
- Infrastructure Consolidation: Three companies (ES&S, Dominion, Hart InterCivic) provide 90% of voting equipment. The Associated Press has consolidated its role as the primary data source for all five major news networks for the 2026/2028 cycles.
- The ENR Vendor Layer: Private companies like Scytl (owned by the Irish/UK-based Paragon Group) manage the public-facing reporting websites for many states, acting as a critical but often opaque intermediary between county data and the public.
- Security and Foreign Links: Documented vulnerabilities include the use of cellular modems in 14,000+ tabulators, foreign-manufactured hardware components, and foreign ownership of key reporting infrastructure.
- Chain of Custody Asymmetry: Transparency is highest during the final legal stages (certification, Electoral College) and lowest during early, granular stages such as ballot printing, transport, and envelope processing.
The U.S. Vote Aggregation Chain of Custody
The path from a voter’s intent to a broadcasted result involves nine distinct stages, each with specific actors and data formats.
Stage | Process | Key Details |
|---|---|---|
1. The Voter & Ballot | Casting the vote | Includes in-person, early, mail/absentee, UOCAVA, and provisional ballots. |
2. Tabulation | Scanning the ballot | Dominated by ES&S (~60% market share), Dominion, and Hart InterCivic. |
3. Result Transport | Moving data to County | Three pathways: Physical media (USB/CF cards), Modem/Cellular transmission, or ePollbook reconciliation. |
4. County EMS | Centralized aggregation | The Election Management System (EMS) aggregates precinct data and runs quality checks. |
5. ENR Vendor Layer | Reporting infrastructure | Private vendors (e.g., Scytl/Clarity) host state/county results websites and provide data feeds. |
6. National Aggregators | National data collection | The AP reportedly uses 4,000 stringers and automated tools to provide a unified data feed. |
7. Decision Desks | Race projections | Networks (CNN, Fox, ABC, NBC, CBS) use AP data and statistical models to “call” races. |
8. Broadcast | Public display | Results flow from AP API to network graphics systems every few minutes. |
9. Official Certification | Legal finalization | Parallel legal track involving audits, canvassing, and gubernatorial certification. |
Technical Infrastructure and Vulnerabilities
The Tabulation Layer
Approximately 90% of U.S. voting equipment is supplied by three private entities:
- Election Systems & Software (ES&S): Owned by McCarthy Group (Private Equity).
- Dominion Voting Systems: Owned by Staple Street Capital.
- Hart InterCivic: Privately held in Austin, TX
Supply Chain Concerns: In 2020, CEOs of these firms acknowledged that machines contain foreign-made components, including from China, which cannot currently be manufactured in the U.S. ES&S also disclosed manufacturing operations in the Philippines.
The Modem Pathway
A significant security concern involves the use of cellular modems (4G/LTE) to transmit unofficial results. Despite vendor denials regarding internet connectivity, research confirms that at least 14,000 ES&S units in 11 states (including Michigan, Wisconsin, and Florida) use modems that route through commercial internet infrastructure. This creates a potential attack vector that does not require physical access to the machines.
The Election Night Reporting (ENR) Layer
ENR vendors sit between official government data and the media. Scytl (operating as Clarity Elections or SOE Software) is the dominant player, serving approximately 800 U.S. counties and 78 million voters.
- Ownership: Scytl, originally Spanish, was acquired by the Paragon Group (Ireland/UK) following a 2020 bankruptcy.
- Foreign Linkages: Documentation notes a connection between Scytl and Konnech (a firm that stored U.S. worker data in China) through a shared technical director, Luis Nabergoi-Puente.
National Data Aggregation and Media Projections
The reporting of results is highly centralized. The Associated Press (AP) is the only entity conducting independent nationwide vote-count collection. As of October 2025, ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox, and NBC have all signed agreements to use AP results data exclusively for the 2026 and 2028 cycles.
Media race calls are typically conveyed as statistical projections, not legal determinations.
- Data Inputs: Decision desks combine AP vote counts with voter behavior data from Edison Research/SSRS (The Voter Poll).
- Methodology: Models calculate “race spread” and “expected turnout.” Projections are made only when confidence thresholds are met.
- Status: All results remain “unofficial” until state certification, even when displays show “100% precincts reporting.”
Chain of Custody and Transparency Analysis
Chain of custody is defined as the process ensuring election materials are handled by authorized personnel at every step, creating an auditable link between the voter and the result.
Transaction Transparency Ratings
Transaction | Primary Records | Transparency Rating |
|---|---|---|
Ballot Printing & Delivery | Manifests, quantity logs | Low (Internal logs) |
Voter Casting/Ballot Return | Pollbooks, signature verification | Medium (Witnessed by watchers) |
Extraction from Envelopes | Bipartisan team sign-offs | Low (Restricted access) |
Tabulation (Scanning) | L&A test certificates, audit logs | Low (System configuration management and public L&A testing often lack critical infrastructure rigor) |
Unofficial Reporting | Website/Portal timestamps | Medium (Real-time public access but source data/transaction logs often not made public) |
Media Collection | Internal AP verification logs | Low (Proprietary logs) |
County/State Canvass | Minutes, RLA reports | High (Legally public meetings) |
Electoral College Vote | Certificates of Vote | High (Publicly inspectable) |
Congressional Count | Tellers’ tallies | High (Televised/Mandated) |
Key Observation: There is a structural asymmetry in transparency. The stages most vulnerable to error or tampering—such as bulk ballot handling and mail ballot processing—are the least transparent. The most transparent stages occur after tabulation is complete.
Security Findings and Documented Concerns
Foreign Actor Involvement:
- Scytl/Paragon: The reporting layer is managed by an Irish/UK-linked conglomerate.
- Chinese Intelligence: Declassified memos from March 2026 indicate that Chinese intelligence breached U.S. voter registration data in multiple states as early as February 2020.
Infrastructure Vulnerability: The ENR layer is the most opaque node. While it does not count votes, a “discrepancy attack” at this level could alter the public’s perception of the outcome by changing the data displayed on SOS websites and media feeds.
Paper as Ground Truth: Despite electronic vulnerabilities, 90%+ of jurisdictions utilize paper ballots. Legal certification is derived from the paper audit trail through:
- Post-Election Audits: Manual tallies or Risk-Limiting Audits (RLAs) that use statistical sampling to verify tabulator accuracy.
- The Canvass: A formal review of all ballots (mail, provisional, and cured) to reconcile any discrepancies documented on election night.
Conclusion
The vote tally chain of custody remains the most shadowy element of American elections. The public narrative promoted by the same actors that refused to air a Presidential address on the security of our elections seeks to divert attention away from further examination of the vote tally process. They attempt to give us a false sense of security regarding our elections by using phrases such as “just look at the ballots”, “our tabulators are air-gapped” or “those are merely the unofficial vote totals”. These narratives mask vulnerabilities due to a foreign supply chain, internet connections, and the integrity of the physical paper ballot.
Transparency remains the single most effective way to establish voter confidence in the election results. Yet the most vulnerable elements of the vote tally chain of custody remain shrouded in secrecy while the media is deeply intertwined in the shaping and sharing of “unofficial results” that shape public sentiment towards the election. Precinct-based vote tallies are subordinated to media reports of election results to the extent that in some cities such as Detroit, Michigan, a complete set of precinct-level results is never provided.
If America is to restore confidence in our election system, we must have complete transparency as to the precinct-level vote tally. The only way to accomplish this is via livestreamed hand counts of paper ballots.
Citations
- EAC Election Results, Canvass, and Certification — https://www.eac.gov/election-officials/election-results-canvass-and-certification
- EAC Guide to the Canvass — https://www.eac.gov/sites/default/files/electionofficials/postelection/Guide_to_the_Canvass_EAC.pdf
- NIST SP 1500-100r2 Election Results CDF — https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1500-100r2.pdf
- NBC News: How votes get counted on election night — https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/votes-get-counted-reported-election-night-nbc-news-gathers-checks-data-rcna174579
- PBS NewsHour: How AP counts the votes — https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/how-the-ap-counts-the-votes-on-election-night
- Bipartisan Policy Center: How Media Outlets Call Races — https://bipartisanpolicy.org/explainer/how-media-outlets-call-races-from-unofficial-election-results/
- Center for Election Innovation & Research — https://electioninnovation.org/research/how-election-results-coverage-really-works/
- Axios: AP election data agreement 2025 — https://www.axios.com/2025/10/15/ap-election-data-cbs-fox-cnn-nbc-abc
- NASS State Canvassing Timeframes — https://www.nass.org/node/2455
- ES&S Modem Transmission FAQs — https://www.essvote.com/faqs/transmission-of-unofficial-election-results-faqs/
- Vice Media: ES&S systems exposed online — https://www.vice.com/en/article/exclusive-critical-us-election-systems-have-been-left-exposed-online-despite-official-denials/
- NBC News: Voting systems connected to internet — https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/online-vulnerable-experts-find-nearly-three-dozen-u-s-voting-n1112436
- Politico: Wireless modems midterms risk — https://www.politico.com/news/2022/10/14/wireless-modems-could-endanger-midterms-00061769
- Congressional hearing Jan 2020 – voting machine vendors — https://finance.yahoo.com/news/voting-machine-vendors-scrutiny-congressional-224318201.html
- Poynter: How news organizations call election results — https://www.poynter.org/commentary/2024/how-news-organizations-call-election-results/
- Edison/SSRS Voter Poll announcement — https://www.edisonresearch.com/introducing-the-voter-poll-by-ssrs/
- AP Developer Elections API — https://developer.ap.org/ap-elections-api/docs/Elections_Response_Data_Elements.htm
- FVAP UOCAVA qualitative research — https://www.fvap.gov/uploads/FVAP/Reports/FVAP_QualitativeResearch_20150731_final.pdf
- Elections Group Observer Guide — https://electionsgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/ObserverGuide-ElectionResults-Template.pptx