Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883

Voting machines prompt confusion

Jim Drinkard USA Today

Election officials across the nation are scrambling to meet a Jan. 1 deadline to replace outmoded voting machines with equipment that is supposed to be more accurate. But a controversy over the reliability of computerized voting machines continues to cloud their decisions.

“The people who are trying to get this done at the local level are just running blind,” said Keith Cunningham, president of the Ohio Association of Election Officials. “I hope there’s not a ‘train wreck,’ but that term is being used quietly in conversations among election officials.”

There is a consensus among state and local election officials that any machine that relies on computer technology should have some kind of independent backup that voters can use to make sure their votes were recorded correctly and that could be used to verify results if a recount is needed, said Doug Chapin, director of electionline.org, a non-profit organization that monitors election policy.

But election officials are hearing conflicting advice from experts about what kind of backup is best. And a new report from a technical standards committee, which could be delivered as early as today to the federal Election Assistance Commission, takes no position on whether a widely favored option – a paper printout – is advisable.

Adding to the confusion is a Massachusetts Institute of Technology study that found problems with paper backup for electronic voting machines.

In the study, 36 “voters” used electronic machines to pick candidates and were asked to double-check their ballots using a paper printout. Then they were asked to go through a similar exercise in which their vote choices were played back by a computer voice. Errors were interspersed in the ballots. Only 8 percent of those using the paper backup caught the errors, compared with 85 percent using the audio system.

The 2002 Help America Vote Act has provided $2.3 billion to help states replace antiquated punch-card and lever voting machines by Jan. 1. Punch cards were blamed for many of the problems in the disputed 2000 presidential election in Florida, giving rise to the term “hanging chad.”