FairVote's Position on Proprietary Software and Paper Trails

FairVote-The Center for Voting and Democracy works to ensure that every vote counts and all voters are represented.  Toward these ends, we advocate instant runoff voting, proportional representation and public-interest redistricting.  These reforms encourage a greater variety of candidates to run for office, allow voters to vote for their preferred candidate without fear of assisting their least favorite candidate, minimize wasted votes, and boost competition.  FairVote therefore encourages all jurisdiction to ensure that new voting equipment be able to accommodate instant runoff voting and proportional representation.  This can easily be accomplished by requiring that voting equipment be able to handle ranked ballots and cumulative voting as referred to in the FEC's new voting system standards.

It would be unfortunate if new equipment ended up preventing the adoption of fairer voting systems.

At the same time, it is essential to minimize:

  1. Fraud and the perception of fraud,
  2. Errors in counting ballots, and
  3. Errors in casting ballots. 

The chief means for avoiding fraud is transparency; it is essential to make all aspects of the election process as public as possible, from the certification of voting equipment to pre- and post-election logic and accuracy testing to the counting and canvassing of ballots.

Modern voting equipment tends to meet very high standards for vote counting errors, with error rates typically less than 1 in 10,000 or 1 in 100,000 under test conditions. The key then becomes the detection and correction of errors after Election Night.

FairVote believes that the following steps would help alleviate the concerns some have expressed that electronic voting equipment is more susceptible to fraud and errors than non-electronic equipment:

  • The use of open-source software.
  • The availability of non-open-source software to public inspection and testing.
  • The storage of both an electronic record and a voter-verifiable paper record of each ballot cast.

The preservation of both electronic and paper records permits the detection and correction of ballot tampering after voters cast their ballots.  The paper records ensure voters that their ballots were cast as intended and permits an independent audit of any software and computerized equipment used in the election.

Finally, all voting equipment should give voters warnings about undervotes and overvotes and allow voters to review and correct their ballots before casting them.

If voting equipment and software meet the standards described above, the U.S. will have fairer elections that people trust.

Recent Articles
October 19th 2009
A better election system
Lowell Sun

Election expert Doug Amy explains how choice voting can "inject new blood" into the elections of Lowell (MA), and give voters a greater incentive to participate.

October 16th 2009
Haven't Detroit voters spoken enough?
Livingston Daily

In Detroit, there have been three mayors in the past two years and the current one has come under scrutiny. Perhaps a system like instant runoff voting will help bring political stability to motor city.

August 21st 2009
Black candidate for Euclid school board to test new voting system
Cleveland Plain Dealer

Limited voting, a form of proportional voting, will be used in Euclid (OH), in the hopes of allowing better representation of minorities.

July 2nd 2009
Reforming Albany
New York Times

FairVote's Rob Richie responds in a letter to the editor making the case for proportional voting systems to bring substantive reform to New York's legislature.