|
Push For Voting Changes
May Not Cure All Ills
April 22, 2004
THE
WALL STREET JOURNAL
By Elizabeth Weinstein
Four years after the muddled 2000 election, the nation's voting
systems are undergoing an expensive overhaul. But there is no guarantee that
pregnant chads and other problems have been eliminated.
Though 42 states plan to use new voting machines in at least
some areas, many voters will be pulling levers or punching paper ballots just as
they did four years ago. The federal government tried to spur changes with the
2002 Help America Vote Act, or HAVA. But delays in distributing its $3.9 billion
in funds, among other problems, have election watchers worried.
Major steps have been taken, notably in Florida, Maryland and
Georgia, which have rid themselves entirely of punch cards since 2000.
Touch-screen machines will November.
But new voting systems, while fixing old problems, bring the
risk of new types of glitches. With polls forecasting a tight race between
President Bush and likely Democratic nominee John Kerry, both parties are
bracing for fresh battles over ballot counting this November. "Everybody
fights the last war, so people will be more on edge," says a senior Bush
adviser.
Warns Doug Chapin, director of the nonpartisan election-reform
group Electionline.org, "It's not the potential for problems but the
potential for scrutiny that's going to be the big difference. It's like forest
fires -- the woods aren't necessarily drier, but more people have matches."
HAVA includes two steps intended to limit problems. For the
2004 election, states must provide provisional ballots for voters who believe
they are registered but aren't on the rolls. They also must set up hotlines and
Web sites to let voters check whether their ballots have been counted.
In the 2000 election, thousands of Florida voters were
disenfranchised after a private company confused a list of convicted felons --
who are barred from voting -- with registered voters with the same name.
Additionally, poll workers in every state now will be required
to demand identification from first-time voters who registered by mail but
didn't provide identification with their registration form. That rule stemmed
from a congressional compromise between Republicans, who have traditionally
favored requiring state-issued identification, and Democrats, who argue that
verification requirements disproportionately disenfranchise the poor, elderly,
minorities and immigrants, who are less likely to have the necessary
identification.
Though some states are bitterly divided on voter identification
and other changes, election experts say neither party should gain an advantage.
"It's a wash," says Mr. Chapin. "[HAVA] is intended to be
neutral, and I see no evidence that either side thinks it will favor them."
If anything, more protections for voters, such as provisional
ballots and new technology, could encourage higher voter turnout, something both
parties are pushing for nationwide.
In the long term, the new law requires each state to create its
own uniform voter-registration database. Compliance with the costly rule, which
requires municipalities with disparate or nonexistent registration rosters to
integrate them into a statewide database, will take time. So far only nine
states -- including 2004 swing states Minnesota and West Virginia -- have nearly
or fully met the database requirement. The rest have until January 2006, a
deadline postponed from Jan. 1, 2004.
So far, Washington has been slow to release the money states
need to replace or update voting machines and registration databases. Though
HAVA was signed into law in 2002, the Election Assistance Commission set up to
distribute the funds wasn't confirmed until December 2003, nearly 10 months
behind schedule. While it scrambled to set up shop, an initial $650 million in
funds was released by the U.S. General Services Administration. Half of that
money was used to help states replace or upgrade antiquated punch-card and lever
machines. The other half was appropriated to states based on their populations.
A spokesman said the commission could start distributing more
funds as early as mid-May. But Kimball Brace, president of Election Data
Services, a political-consulting firm based in Washington, says that is too
late. "What that means for counties and states is that they're still behind
the eight ball," he says. "If counties were going to make changes for
November, they should have had those plans well, well under way."
For many states -- starting with Florida, the epicenter of
balloting problems in 2000 -- the primary goal has been overhauling outmoded
voting technology. Florida initially tackled the balloting-overhaul project on
its own, spending $24 million in state money to help counties buy optical-scan
and touch-screen systems. It recouped about $11.7 million of that money in
federal payouts.
But questions about the security of electronic machines have
caused some states to slam the brakes on updating their technologies. In the
2002 primary race for Florida governor, electronic voting machines were shut
down improperly, leaving some votes uncounted on election night. During the
Florida presidential primary in March, some electronic ballots were improperly
coded, forcing election workers to recount ballots by hand.
Another bone of contention is whether touch-screen machines can
be hacked. Last year, a study conducted by researchers at Johns Hopkins and Rice
universities said touch screens made by Diebold Election Systems, a subsidiary
of Diebold
Inc., were vulnerable to hackers. In Ohio, where Diebold has its headquarters,
lawmakers halted a voting-machine overhaul project, saying they need time to
study security issues. Diebold has signed contracts to provide new systems to 43
Ohio counties.
Diebold, whose touch screens are found in nearly 40 states,
rejects the claim. At a recent committee hearing on ballot security, Diebold's
marketing director, Mark Radke, told lawmakers that his company's track record
should speak for itself. "The numbers from the March Super Tuesday election
tell a compelling story -- zero security-related problems at the more than
55,000 Diebold touch-screen voting stations deployed across the country,"
Mr. Radke said.
To safeguard against human and technical error, some lawmakers
are pushing paper trails as backups for electronic machines.
Last year, Rep. Rush Holt (D., N.J.) introduced the Voter
Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act, a bill that would amend HAVA by
requiring voting systems produce a paper record that could be verified by
voters. In March, Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D., N.Y.) and Bob Graham (D.,
Fla.) filed their own $150 million bill.
"If we have huge problems again, people will fundamentally
lose confidence in our democracy and in their vote...This legislation is good
insurance against that risk," Sen. Clinton said in a statement.
Some states aren't waiting for the federal government to act.
Nevada's secretary of state, Dean Heller, made his state the first to install
printers at all electronic touch-screen machines by November. California plans
to do the same by July 2006.
|
