Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

Computerized Voter Registration Databases Need a Major Overhaul

Political scientist Thad Hall says federal standards are required to prevent state electronic registration databases from disenfranchising people.

By Katherine Bourzac

Monday, October 16, 2006

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

What Americans should be most worried about this November, say elections experts like Thad Hall, a political scientist at the University of Utah, is not that someone might hack the Diebold machine they're using to vote--but that their names might disappear from the rolls entirely. According to him, the greatest risks of fraud or disenfranchisement concern voter registration.

Voters can get purged from the rolls because there are no federal electronic standards for maintaining registration databases. (Credit: Getty Images)

As Hall spells out in a report for the IBM Center for Business and Government, voter registration databases are difficult to maintain because there are no electronic standards for creating them. That makes it hard for elections officials to compare their databases with motor-vehicle registries and prison records--let alone other states' elections records.

Earlier this year, the state of Kentucky was sued by its attorney general for attempting to remove 8,000 voters from the rolls--without notifying them--based on a comparison of its database with those in Tennessee and South Carolina, in search of voters registered in multiple states. Hall says that if the state had not been sued, many voters would have been disenfranchised because of database errors.

Until 2002, when Congress passed the Help America Vote Act in response to mistakes made in administering the 2000 presidential election, the federal government had never spent any money on election administration.

Hall, co-author of Point, Click, and Vote: The Future of Internet Voting, explains why Congress should now go further and give the federal government the power to enforce electronic elections standards.

Technology Review: What requirements does the Help America Vote Act set for voter registration databases?

Thad Hall: It just requires there to be statewide voter registration databases. It does not define what such a database is, and it does not provide any standards for certifying these systems or providing for their interoperability. The idea behind it is straightforward: you want states to have common databases so that at least within a state you should be able to know if a person has moved, and you can keep the records within a state accurate. But without common formats it becomes difficult even to do that.

The problem we run into is that there are no standards for the way to format these data. There's no standard to handle something as simple as a hyphenated last name. What that means is you can't compare data lists, you can't transfer data among two databases very easily, because all the record formats are unique. That creates big problems. In California, for example, the Cal Voter File doesn't accept hyphenated or two-word last names like Benito Del Toro. If the California elections officials try and do a database comparison, or "match," with the Department of Motor Vehicles in California, his name kicks out because there are no standard data formats.

Comments

  • States Rights
    This also means that someone hacks one state,
    they have not hacked all states.
    We complain about the "monoculture" of windows,
    but will listen to this bozo wanting to create
    a federal system?!?!? Is there much more that
    you want D.C. to control?
    Let them define an XML schema, and go away.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    SirLanse
    10/16/2006
    Posts:40
    Avg Rating:
    4/5
    • Re: States Rights
      I agree... an XML communications standard is a major missing component here.  I know that Thad Hall has advocated for this in another IBM paper.

      But there is another significant issue, and that is that these state voter registration databases were built without any detailed design guidelines in place nationally.  Hence, in order to meet the deadlines of HAVA, election officials from each state were forced to address schema design and data migration issues simultaneously, without any precedent or model.  Now, while we're uncertain just how well designed these schemas are, we are certain that data normalization & accuracy remains a big issue.

      In any event, I also agree that we don't need the FED's to enter the arena to address the issues currently faced.  Some best practices, a communication standard, and regular external independent reviews (audits) of these voter registration databases will go a long way toward improving the situation.
      Rate this comment: 12345

      stevensteven...
      10/16/2006
      Posts:1
  • Not a solution
    There is minimal complexity in interfacing a database of reasonable design with external agencies.  The design and function of CalVoter2 does not meet Federal expectations, which is one reason the system is slated for replacement.

    The problem with state-wide voter registration databases is the inconsistent source of the information.  As stated, incorrect information is often provided by the voters themselves - sometimes by accident (transposing numbers from their drivers license or SSN) or intentionally (particularly in the case of birth dates).

    I've been involved in the implementation of 6 statewide systems.  The structures behind each of those systems varies based on local standards and requirements, as well as historic parameters (what has traditionally been stored on varying county systems).

    The Feds have no idea what's necessary.  These requirements are driven from the bottom up (local jurisdictions who have been running elections for years to state officials working to enforce state and federal standards).  Having the Feds trying to dictate standards from their lofty perch can only make things worse.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    Jvarner75
    10/16/2006
    Posts:1
    • Re: Not a solution
      I agree with a number of Jvarner's statements. I am the chief election official in a small town and it seems to me there is an undertone to Bourzac's message that the problem with state voters databases starts with the record keepers (does she mean me?) I am pretty fed up with the belief that electronic technology and federal standards will make voting problem free and some how much better and more reliable than it is now. Is this demonstrable or do I have to accept it on faith?  As far as I am concerned, HAVA is a knee-jerk reaction to voting problems spotlighted during Florida-2000. And, what's the rush to digitize elections?  Go slow, let the technology prove itself, rather than pushing the uninitiated (voters) toward the cliff without a safety net?
      Rate this comment: 12345

      clearbell
      10/17/2006
      Posts:1
  • Why centralized?
    To overcome the typical issues with centralized databases, why not a mobile personal voter card?
    The benefits of a biometric enabled Smart Card  Solution is obvious. Portable easy to update if you just relocate and the identification by a personal trait. Only a tracking number is required on the card to justify that you are enlisted somewhere in the States as an elligible voter.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    rdujardin
    10/17/2006
    Posts:1

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement
Technology Review July/August 2009

Current Issue

Search Me
Inside the launch of Stephen Wolfram’s new “computational knowledge engine.”
•  Subscribe
Save 41%
•  Table of Contents
•  MIT News
Advertisement

Follow us on Twitter

Twitter

Get Technology Review updates via the web, cellphone, or Instant Messager – Follow techreview on Twitter!

Advertisement
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address

Advertisement
TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES

More Technology News from Forbes

Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2009 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.