The biggest issues? They were highlighted in the last hour, she said: the struggle with improper certification procedures and the federals government pushing DREs on the people when they are “not yet ready for prime time.”
Some counties have had four different electoral systems in the last ten years, she said. Rural counties and small towns have the worst time because some of them weren’t even wired for electricity. The election administrators lean heavily on the vendors, nervous about the new technology being thrust on them. HAVA’s deadlines were premature. The Election Assistance Committee it established isn’t doing its job.
New York was the only state to avoid the additional buying cycle by clinging stubbornly to its lever machines, which will not be replaced before 2009, except for provisions for voters with special needs.
Pinned down by Mary Ann for her position on DREs, McLaughlin said, “We’re agnostic.” They leave the decision to the individual counties. There should be reliable federal standards and testing programs, she said.
Study after study shows that DREs are fatally flawed, much worse than optical scanners.
“We need to show studies that do work,” she said.
“CVI stands for a system of separate and independent checks and balances. The voting system should have this,” said Mary Ann.
We need multiple choices, said McLaughlin. We need to upgrade the system. With DREs there is no independent, separate way to check their accuracy. “We would use all sorts of systems.” DREs give prompt results. All systems have vulnerabilities. County officials don’t have choices. . . . They have to use the resources they have. Congress is in a bind.
On the Holt Bill, she said that NACO is glad to be working with Holt’s office. They are neutral on the issue of supporting it. There are lots of questions from jurisdictions.
Will the counties opt in [to the Holt bill] if they know that money will come from the federal government?
>Definitely, said McLaughlin.
Ellen Theisen of voterunite.org called in to ask why all counties don’t just switch over to PB voting and junk their DREs. It seems so logical to go this inexpensive and transparent route.
The head of NACO replied that many counties have. The issue is the number of ballots involved; smaller communities are more likely to vote on paper than are larger, more urban ones. NACO does not support Holt’s HR 811, due to its unfunded mandates, among other reasons.
The brave and long time director of elections Ion Sancho called in from Leon County, Florida, to note that more people voted in Tuesday’s primary than in the last six primaries put together. He also remarked that nothing will occur at the national level; we must look to the counties. “Americans will lose credibility as did Florida,” he said.
McLaughlin agreed that the situation is unacceptable; all sorts of money is being spent. Her focus is to identify what works for everyone—and counties have been funding what the federal government should encompass.
Florida doesn’t require federal certification, said Sancho. It’s strictly voluntary. Federal certification systems failed to identify problems with the technology of the new voting machinery. “Citizens had to intercede,” he said.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
