As if we didn't already have enough to worry about, it appears that concerns about the security and accuracy of voting have moved beyond tin-foil-hat-territory squarely into the mainstream. According to
Electionline.org, in its
Election Preview 2006 (.pdf), ten states - Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Indiana, Maryland, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Washington - are labeled "states to watch" due to myriad issues ranging from voter registration snafus to problems with new voting technology.
In addition, Georgia, Missouri, and Montana "just missed the list," due in each case to new election laws that may create confusion at the polls. Georgia's and Missouri's laws face court challenges that might render them null and void even before Election Day, while Montana's introduction of Election Day voter registration could increase voter turnout markedly ... or it could simply gum up the works even more.
As important as the 2006 election is to America's future, and as close as some of the most critical races are likely to be, we still must remember that the very act of voting itself remains a major question mark.
Amy Goldstein
writes about this in today's
Washington Post:
The report cautions that the Nov. 7 elections, which will determine which political party controls the House and Senate, promise "to bring more of what voters have come to expect since the 2000 elections -- a divided body politic, an election system in flux and the possibility -- if not certainty -- of problems at polls nationwide."
****
The report of the clearinghouse, sponsored by the Pew Charitable Trusts, is the latest of several warnings in recent weeks and months by organizations and scholars who say that electoral problems persist in spite of six years of efforts by the federal government and states to correct voting flaws. The flaws gripped the public's attention after the close 2000 presidential election, which led to recounts in Florida and the intervention of the Supreme Court.
The full report (.pdf, as above) essentially is crack for the political junkie, with maps and charts aplenty along with state-by-state analysis of each state's voting system, voter registration process, identification requirements at the polling places, and any issues or problems related to the voting process.
With nearly every state using electronic voting systems at least to some extent - Diebold alone will have machines in thirty states - I simply refuse to believe that the elections are totally tamper-proof. If anything (and I admit I have no technological expertise), I would think that computerized balloting is easier to alter than paper ballots, although even having the proverbial "paper trail" likely is no guarantee of a completely fair election.
The United Nations sends teams of election observers all over the world, generally to Third World countries. I no longer think it hyperbole to suggest that perhaps the observers ought to take a long, hard look at American elections.
(Cross-posted to Blast Off!)