Introduction: Show Your Work

“Show your work,” was the reviewer’s most meaningful comment on a guide I’d written in the early 2000s about a game called, Diplomacy. In Diplomacy’s rulebook it is stated, paraphrasing: If you can break any rule in this rulebook and get away with it, go right ahead. It is an irony, to me, that gathering around the table as a teenager to tell (and see through) lies of my allies and opponents might somehow have prepared me in part for the most difficult work, so far, of my life.

Through the last five years, “show your work” is essentially what I was aiming for with Minnesota elections, except the election system has developed to a place where it truly cannot show its work. This book will reveal how this conclusion was arrived at but also focus on the reader’s participation in the kind of election system he or she would like to have.

We could start this book by asking some basic questions: How much should verification, transparency, and accuracy be valued in elections? What about security? And timeliness of results? Or the capability to remedy mistakes? To what extent should the rules be flexible, including the statutes as well as the administrative rules which the Minnesota secretary of state may add on? What is the relationship between Federal and State rules for elections and what happens if the rules for each are in conflict and yet candidates are all on the same ballot? The questions that began this paragraph are okay except that they require detailed definitions, definitions which many cannot agree on. The latter questions, about different rules for different types of elections, could come to pass if there are federal changes that are not accepted locally.

There are other kinds of questions, such as: Would it be outside the Minnesota Constitution or the rules governing how statutes are written and applied to prevent someone like me, who thinks we should have a bigger discussion about all this, from voting?; Why not pass a law to use artificial intelligence programs to decide who is fit and unfit to cast a ballot?; Then, couldn’t a program be run within the voter rolls on election day to remove votes from those who have lost favor with the government? (Can the reader tell that the writer is not amused by the overall quite negative influence of government in his and his family’s life?)

The line of questioning in the preceding paragraph—bringing in AI to weed out dissenters—leads to a utopia of which I wish not to be a part. Instead, suppose there is an alternative… Is it possible to design an election system where every voter wins?

Elections have been describe as an input/output system, with inputs being 1) registered voters, 2) ballots, and 3) vote counts; and the output being 1) the reported results. Narrowing the scope to these four areas allows a succinct introduction into surveying the current system, before embarking to create a new version.

When each step of an election can be checked, or even audited (possibly in real time), then one part of our governance system increases in value: the elected roles. Audit well enough, correct mistakes quickly enough, and then every voter wins. (The quickest way to enable more complete audits is to simplify the overall process - at minimum this removes workload from administrators post election receiving data requests from citizen auditors.) Then, even with increased confidence in that elected part of that entity referred to as ‘government’, there is still the remainder of it over which the citizen must be watchful.

Today, in Minnesota, it is clear that various parts of the government have either failed to identify, or failed to remediate, or arguably even facilitated fraud of different sorts. At the most lenient, there was too much load on the system and (so far) $9 billion has been wasted by the government itself (in Minnesota). Who knows what a thorough audit of all of Minnesota’s government will find. There are estimates at the federal level in the trillions and that is before looking at black budget or off-book projects.

This book is not going to engage directly with those areas. But it is reasonable to ask, What can we do in the face of the duration and scale of the present abuses of government programs (which seem facilitated by some within the government)? Beginning with an auditable election system is one starting point.

The Impact of Elections

Consider the impact of elections… Executive branch roles like an elected governor in Minnesota not only appoints about 20 commissioners to the major state departments but also appoints upwards of 500 government positions. The secretary of state appoints key roles like the director of elections and the liaison to the legislature. Elected roles in the judicial branch are not always heavily contested but that could change. And of course, the 67 senators and 134 representatives comprising the Minnesota Legislature who (sometimes write and) vote on bills can in the case of election acts change the very rules of the election game. Because of their function to vote on rule changes to the process itself, there is an advantage in ensuring those candidates who actually won their elections take the seats. Right now, we live near the worst case scenario: we cannot say for certain in many cases, especially in lower-turnout local elections, such as for city council or town board. This could quite simply be addressed with a heightened focus and rigor in auditing or by creating a new version of elections.

Of course, elections in Minnesota have seemingly almost always (if not always) been hotly contested and also continuously evolving as a system. Beginning with the very first gubernatorial election in October 1857, which, after claims of voter registration fraud and other issues, was only sorted out seven months later despite questions remaining unanswered. The recent two or three decades have brought significant changes, such as electronic centralized voter rolls, electronic tabulation and reporting software, and absentee voting (by mail); these changes will be highlighted in the writing to come. But, for emphasis, this book is disinterested in the particulars of unique elected officers and their party affiliation; instead, this book aims to explore the ideas, feasibility, and actual implementation surrounding the overall election system and, in particular, election audits. One quite simple way to improve auditability is to simplify the overall process. We will have this discussion. Let’s start with where we are now…

The Input/Output System and the Six Phases

In Minnesota, this writer, a five-year citizen auditor, sees serious issues with every step of the input/output system (voter registration, ballots, vote counts, and reported results) that will be referred to in this book as the election system; maybe this conclusion will also be the reader’s conclusion, or perhaps not. Every step has been called into question through personal experience interacting with the system. It is not too late to reverse course where certain ideas have led to a decrease in confidence in the overall government entity, ideas such as the major push for electronic machines and software which are difficult to audit or no-excuse absentee ballots that go through the mail.

This book will go through each phase (6) of an election: voter registration, absentee ballots, election day, election night, reporting, and audits. Within that framework, the rules of the game, the Minnesota election laws/rules, a 500-page PDF document comprising chapters 200-212 of the Minnesota Statutes (and others relevant to elections), will be frequently referenced. (In Minnesota, in addition to the statutes, the secretary of state may add rules: the 500-page PDF as of 2025 includes about 368 pages of statutes and an additional 132 pages of administratie rules.)

It may seem, based on reading the current 500-page document, noticing the trend within the Minnesota Legislature, and hearing the claims of the Minnesota Secretary of State, that there’s no clear path (anytime soon) to even reviewing or auditing the digital records of our most recent elections, let alone more pivotal changes. Therefore, with ballots and records likely not retained from previous elections, it’s becoming difficult to even say, for sure, what happened, not only in a recent election but in ANY election occurring prior to 22 months ago (this is the federal preservation of records duration under 52 USC § 20701, with penalties outlined in § 20702).

Meanwhile, the workload for election administrators is probably at an all-time high: even with iPads that check voters in; even with the electronic tabulators to count/tally votes and the modems which transmit results embedded in those tabulators (modems which, when used in 2020 and 2022, were uncertified); even with software which aggregates reporting. There is still so much work to do prior to the 46 days of absentee voting, and during those 46 days, and then election day, election night, and post election. Electronics were sold with the promise of efficiency and efficacy but they haven’t delivered. Ask your city clerk, county elections manager, county auditor, if they have less work or more relative to 15 or 20 years ago. Maybe the way Taiwan does elections, tech-free, on a single day, could give Americans, and Minnesotans, a model to borrow or at minimum, from which to learn.

This Book’s Focus: Every Voter Wins

My focus as a citizen auditor has shifted. Early on, a catalog of violations was developed; then there was a shift to pointing out obvious areas for improvement that are also sustainable; lately, the focus has been on sparking conversation toward an elevated system aligning with the principle, “Every voter wins”. It’s hard to say this enough: I really don’t care which politican wins any given election. (We don’t need more politicians.) Some of the violations and immediate areas for update will be sprinkled throughout the book but it is probably better if the reader thinks independently to develop an informed opinion; then, with this background and individual thought, a larger conversation where we all participate in the reality we’d like to see can emerge naturally.

Previous books, beginning with [S]elections in Minnesota, then Auditing Minnesota: The 2022 SOS Campaign, and then Simon’s Sensors: The Secret of the iPads (excerpted in the Appendices), were early tries at exploring the synthesis this writing offers. I am grateful to readers who purchased or read them and especially those who gave their reflections, which furthered my thinking.

As a friend has said, the stories of these times will be told around the campfire, as all stories are, passed down from generation to generation. Please bear that in mind as what is shared in this book comes merely from my experience and does not intend to be authoritative. It is a way to put my observations, recollections, and occasional insights into readers’ hands and minds.

It is intended, as a lofty but achievable goal, to start a statewide conversation at the legislative level, at the county and city level, and at the dinner table.

Think and verify everything for oneself (to the extent possible). It is sometimes hard but often refreshing to discover one has been quite wrong about something, if only to take responsibility for any harm done and to prepare to learn the next thing one is wrong about or about which consideration was barely afforded any level of attention. It is quite trivial to be tricked when one hasn’t given a thing the appropriate attention.

The recent years have been interesting and I anticipate the interestingness will continue.

Will you watch it all ‘happen to you’ or participate in the unfolding?

Erik van Mechelen

March 2026