Election officials must decide by January 1 which electronic voting system is least likely to cause problems next November.
The mid-term elections of 2006 are still 11 months away, but they've already generated a controversy -- not over politics, but about what technology should be used to count all the votes.
After the voting fiascoes during the 2000 presidential election, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act, which offered a total of $3.2 billion to the states to improve their vote-counting processes, most notably to replace the punch card systems that were exposed as so flawed during the recounting in Florida. States that took the money must use replacement systems in all elections after January 1, 2006. Yet widespread rancor persists over which new system is best.
The trend away from punch cards and other mechanical voting systems and toward electronic voting was underway even before the passage of the Help America Vote Act. And since 2000, the number of machines that record votes directly into memory without printing a paper record, sometimes called "direct-recording" machines, has more than doubled, largely replacing punch-card systems, according to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, an independent federal agency set up by the act to improve the election process.
It sounds like an obvious way to improve the democratic process. Yet the ascendance of direct-recording voting machines hasn't brought accolades from everyone. “They’re not auditable,” says Rebecca Mercuri, a software consultant in Mercer County, NJ, whose PhD dissertation at the University of Pennsylvania was on electronic vote tabulation systems. She argues that there's no way for voters to know whether the machines have faithfully recorded their votes. And if election monitors don’t trust the tally that the machine prints out at the end of the day, they can't do a manual recount -- just print it out again. “That’s a reprint, not a recount,” Mercuri points out.
This well-publicized problem with e-voting machines has led to more than just complaints from experts. "Without the capacity for meaningful audits, [direct recording machines] are unfit for use in actual elections,” says Matt Zimmerman, a staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco. On December 8, the EFF brought suit against both the Board of Elections and Office of Information Technology in North Carolina for certifying electronic voting machines from three vendors without examining the machines’ source code, as required by the state’s election law.
This fall, the U.S. Government Accountability Office summarized its own investigation of electronic voting, in a 107-page report with the rambling, but revealing title “Federal Efforts to Improve Security and Reliability of Electronic Voting Systems Are Under Way, But Key Activities Need to Be Completed.” Existing federal election standards are vague and not even mandatory, the GAO says. And, unfortunately, the agency added, any new standards issued by the Election Assistance Commission will not come in time to help with the 2006 election.
Experts say that when it comes to voting machines, usability issues should be as much of a concern as security.
Guest (Owen N. Martinez)
Besides being more susceptible to tampering, electronic voting may scare a lot of voters that are not used to high technology, particularly minorities. I would recommend a mixed system, that will maintain a paper trail for good auditing of the election results, plus easy electronic voting, only after giving special training to voters about using high-tech voting machines.
Guest (R. Mercuri)
I found it interesting that the author chose to round down the Optical Scanner voting statistic from 39.8 (in the table) to 30% (in the article). Where I went to school, 39.8 rounds to 40%, but maybe thats not the way they do things at MIT. -) As it turns out, around 60% of voters used some form of paper ballots in the 2004 election, a percentage that has remained fairly constant since the 1980s.
Guest (R. Mercuri)
I found it interesting that the author chose to round down the Optical Scanner voting statistic from 39.8 (in the table) to 30% (in the article). Where I went to school, 39.8 rounds to 40%, but maybe thats not the way they do things at MIT. -) As it turns out, around 60% of voters used some form of paper ballots in the 2004 election, a percentage that has remained fairly constant since the 1980s.
Guest (Jack R)
I was suprised to discover that the idea of voting over the Web has not been included in a list of electronic voting options. It would seem that the technology to verify oneself against a federal and state database could be made available with current technology. Based on ones registration, the available voting list could be displayed. After submitting ones vote, the results could be checked and any questions answered before the final tally is made.
Guest (Owen N. Martinez)
Besides being more susceptible to tampering, electronic voting may scare a lot of voters that are not used to high technology, particularly minorities. I would recommend a mixed system, that will maintain a paper trail for good auditing of the election results, plus easy electronic voting, only after giving special training to voters about using high-tech voting machines.
Guest (R. Mercuri)
I found it interesting that the author chose to round down the Optical Scanner voting statistic from 39.8 (in the table) to 30% (in the article). Where I went to school, 39.8 rounds to 40%, but maybe thats not the way they do things at MIT. -) As it turns out, around 60% of voters used some form of paper ballots in the 2004 election, a percentage that has remained fairly constant since the 1980s.
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:
On Twitter
Become a Fan on Facebook
Subscribe to the Feed
Guest (Jack R)
Voting over the Web
I was suprised to discover that the idea of voting over the Web has not been included in a list of electronic voting options. It would seem that the technology to verify oneself against a federal and state database could be made available with current technology. Based on ones registration, the available voting list could be displayed. After submitting ones vote, the results could be checked and any questions answered before the final tally is made.
Reply