RE: Rock and a hard place

[Paul Walmsley <paul@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003, kellen carey wrote:

>  That is, Boulder County could buy an optical scanning device (or other
> appropriate ballot tabulating machine) capable of tabulating both
> hand-marked absentee ballots and hand-marked (or machine-marked)
> ballots.
>
>  Then, if and when the computer security industry agrees on specs and
> technical standards, sometime down the road, BC takes it from there.  
> NIST, at HAVA request, has barely begun to address this complex issue.
>
>  I've read too many articles, including the Guardian article earlier
> this week, to feel remotely comfortable approving any system not based
> on a voter verifiable paper ballot.  No independent recount, it's not a
> fair election, period.
>
>  The core issue with these electronic voting systems is security, but
> the Committee isn't competent to judge that issue.

Hi Kellen,

I agree with your concerns about the DRE machines under consideration. But
it looks like the county will have to buy at least one DRE machine for
each precinct for the 2004 election, or risk getting sued by the federal
government.[1] This is because HAVA mandates that people with disabilities
must be able to vote with a method that "provides the same opportunity for
access and participation (including privacy and independence) as for other
voters."

[ HAVA leaves the door open for non-DRE methods for supporting individuals
with disabilities -- does anyone know if appropriate non-DRE methods
exist?  (that is, non-DRE methods of voting that comply with the access
provisions of HAVA.) ]

Boulder County is going to have to buy some kind of optical scan system
anyway for absentee and mail ballots.  It seems that the best situation, 
given the present circumstances, would be to buy the fewest number of DREs 
possible -- one per precinct -- and then to use optical scan ballots for 
most voters.

...

What would be really nice is if the DRE machines just printed out an
voter-verifiable optical-scan paper ballot, which could then be counted in
the same manner as non-DRE ballots.  The main problem with this, it seems,
is that visually-impaired voters could not check the paper ballot the same
way that sighted voters could.  But this seems like a problem that could
be solved with a device which reads the optical-scan ballot at the
precinct, and then reads the votes back to the voter via headphones.  I
wonder why none of the vendors seem to offer such a device?  For that
matter, I wonder why the whole concept of voter-verifiable optical-scan
ballots seems to be such an unusual idea that many vendors react with
surprise and irritation to it?

>  Finally, what are all various voting system options open to Boulder
> County?  Is there a study that lists the various options and their
> advantages and disadvantages?  If there isn't shouldn't there be one, if
> not by Boulder County then by the State, or some other competent
> authority?

You might find these links from the Federal Election Commission useful:

* <http://www.fec.gov/elections.html> -- scroll down until you see "The 
Administrative Structure of U.S. Elections"

* The 2002 FEC Voting System Standards --
<http://www.fec.gov/pages/vssfinal/vss.html>


- Paul

[1] Section 301.a.3 of HAVA.