The FL-13 fiasco has highlighted a problem associated with electronic touch screen voting machines—systemic unintentional undervotes. We need to stop blaming the victims and see this as a Voters’ Rights Issue. It is important that this concern becomes part of the discussion concerning election reform.
More over the fold.
The St. Petersburg Times has an article today related to the FL-13 mess. It mentions that after the 2000 election scandal Florida created a bipartisan committee to correct the problem.
Among the recommendations: Counties should not rush into buying largely unproven touch screen voting machines, and instead use time-tested "optical scan" systems in which voters mark their choice on a paper ballot by filling in a bubble much like a standardized test.
Besides not having a paper trail, the committee noted that “they have a record of producing more ‘undervotes’ - where voters cast no vote - than other technology.” The article continues:
County leaders brushed off the report, saying touch screens were reliable and voter-friendly and would save money on paper ballot printing. In a bonanza for some high-powered lobbyists and voting machine corporations, local governments spent tens of millions of dollars on touch screen systems.
The FL-13 mess is a direct consequence of this push to supposed economic savings at the cost of electoral chaos. For those interested, the Sarasota Herald Tribune has complete coverage of the FL-13 controversy on their website. I have also written a previous diary about FL-13.
But, that is not the end of the problem. As Paul Krugman pointed out:
The same electronic ballot design flaw implicated in more than 18,300 Sarasota nonvotes might have caused problems for South Florida voters in two well-publicized Cabinet races.
Both Broward and Miami-Dade counties recorded more than 34,000 nonvotes in their elections for attorney general and chief financial officer, according to election results from each county's Supervisor of Elections office.
The problem was worse in precincts with many older voters.
This is the point: Whatever the cause of systemic unintentional undervotes, be it ballot design or machine malfunction, they disenfranchise voters and thwart democracy.
It is wrong to casually dismiss these systemic unintentional undervotes as the responsibility of the voter. Most hospitals have developed procedures that require surgeons to mark a patient’s limb for amputation the night prior to the operation in order to eliminate horrible mistakes. This type of a procedure or standard is how to properly address a systemic problem.
In the same way, it is incumbent upon any government that wishes to promote electoral participation and insure fair elections to provide standards for ballot design and voting machine equipment that minimize the occurrence of unintentional undervoting.
Let’s make sure this get’s done. No More Undervotes!