I worked out a new voting system that,
combining the good points of paper voting with those of computing,
guarantees quick, honest and verifiable results.
Please read details at
www.ClearVoting.com
 a
|
electronic voting and Democracy
|
|
electronic voting and Democracy
News
2005-04-12
Dade County (Florida, USA) studies switch to paper ballots
Excerpt from an article by Noaki Schwartz
The Miami Herald, Miami, Florida, USA
VOTING MACHINES
Dade studies switch to paper ballots
Miami-Dade County officials are studying whether to replace an expensive,
controversial touch-screen voting system after a series of mishaps.
BY NOAKI SCHWARTZ
Three years after spending $24.5 million to install a controversial
touch-screen voting system, Miami-Dade County elections officials have been
asked to study scrapping the system in favor of paper-based balloting.
The request from County Manager George Burgess follows the recent
resignation of Elections Supervisor Constance Kaplan and the revelation that
hundreds of votes in recent elections hadn't been counted.
In a memo, Burgess asked new elections chief Lester Sola to assess whether
optical scanners, which count votes marked on ''bubble sheets,'' would
deliver more accurate results. Burgess also wants information on how much a
switch would cost -- and how much it might save in the long run.
County officials say the machines have more than tripled Election Day costs.
''It's a confluence of bad facts,'' said Lida Rodriguez-Taseff, head of the
Miami-Dade Election Reform Coalition and a longtime critic of the elections
department. ``You have lousy technology that doesn't inspire voter
confidence combined with outrageous costs for that lousy technology.''
Burgess' April 4 directive came just days after Kaplan resigned amid
revelations that a coding glitch in the county's iVotronic touch-screen
machines tossed out hundreds of votes in six recent elections.
''What I've noticed about this system from the very beginning is that there
are so many things that can happen and, therefore, maybe it's not the system
we should've gotten years ago,'' said Mayor Carlos Alvarez, who met with
Burgess and elections officials Monday to discuss the issue.
Any change would stir controversy after the county spent millions in 2002 to
become one of the larger clients of Election Systems & Software, which makes
iVotronic. But county officials say ensuring voter confidence is crucial.
''Sometimes lessons are expensive,'' said County Commissioner Katy Sorenson,
who said she will wait for the manager's report before weighing in on the
machines.
After the 2000 presidential election debacle, officials wanted ''the best,
most sophisticated technology,'' Sorenson recalled. At the time that meant
buying 7,200 iVotronics, a paperless machine that stores votes on hard
drives and discs -- despite concerns that there were no paper receipts.
In Broward County, Mayor Kristin Jacobs said she regrets that the county
also chose iVotronics over optical scan machines.
''I understand that we've invested a lot of money in the electronic
machines, but I would be more comfortable with optical scan because it gives
you the ease of computerization and a paper trail,'' she said. ``Hindsight
is 20-20. In retrospect I probably would have gone with optical scan but
we're beyond that now, and we've had minimal problems in Broward.''
Still, in the new machines' first major test, the 2002 primary was marred in
both counties by poorly trained pollworkers who struggled with the new
technology.
In 2004, officials in Broward and Miami-Dade considered a plan to add
printers to the touch-screen machines for the presidential election, but the
effort fizzled because the technology was not state-certified and would have
cost up to $1,200 per machine. In the end, those elections went smoothly,
but critics continued to demand a paper trail.
More recently the machines received another blow when the Miami-Dade
elections department revealed that a staffer's coding error had led to
hundreds of ballots being thrown out in last month's special referendum on
slots. Kaplan said the number of missing votes would not have affected the
election's outcome, but the same error was found in five other municipal
elections.
Amid the problems, the cost of the actual elections -- about one countywide
and 30 or so municipal races per year -- has increased. Sola said the Nov. 2
countywide election cost $6.6 million because of increased labor costs to
program the machines, set up the equipment and print backup ballots. He said
previous punchcard elections ran from $1 million to $2 million.
Those familiar with optical scanners, already used to count absentee
ballots, estimate that it would cost about $8 million to equip the county's
749 precincts with them.
In a statement, ES&S officials said they are very proud of the work they
have done ``to greatly enhance the county's voting process.''
''This is a partnership that we hope will continue well into the future,''
read the statement. ``Regarding the specific type of voting equipment
Miami-Dade County may decide is best for them and their voters, that
question is entirely up to the county to decide.''
Sola has until May 27 to report back to Burgess.
Herald staff writer Beth Reinhard contributed to this article.
C 2005 Herald.com and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.miami.com
The site is made of several .
You can change clicking on the
or pressing the access keys
1
and
2.
Some chapters are made of several .
You can change clicking on the
or pressing the access keys
3
and
4.
Access keys are described in the
Accessibility page.
Site Map is in this
Site Map page.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Licence.
You are free to copy, distribute, display and perform the work and to make derivative works
under the following conditions: 1) You must give credit to the original author (Emanuele Lombardi)
and cite the url http://www.electronic-vote.org ;
2) you may not use this work for commercial purposes;
3) If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under a
licence identical to this one.
__
__
__
This page complies with
W3C WCAG P3 but accessibility is a very difficult matter: if you find the site not easily accessible, please let me know
