November 2, 2010
This morning I voted in New York State. In past years we have used the traditional, if somewhat old and clunky, pull-the-lever system of casting a ballot. Today I experienced the modern method of Electronic Voting.
An election worker greeted me at the polling entrance and asked my voting district. He directed me to a table, where I was asked to give my name and sign the voting roll – no identification required. It never ceases to amaze me that to empower those individuals who will have life-changing authority over my family and my neighbor’s family, all I need to do is sign on a dotted line – no ID is required.
One of the election workers handed me an 18 inch wide paper ballot, a cardboard folder (he said “so no one can see who you voted for”) and a pen, and directed me to a writing stand to fill out my ballot. A second worker pointed to an electronic voting machine where I would insert my completed paper ballot. It seemed odd that I should vote twice – once on paper and then electronically.
New York is the last state to comply with the Federal Help America Vote Act, which directed states to adopt more simple voting systems in order to avoid confusion such as the butterfly ballot mayhem which led to the contested Florida vote in the 2000 Presidential election.
Unfortunately, the New York paper ballot is so convoluted that it is bound to lead to its own confusion and chaos. In addition to the candidates for federal and statewide office, the New York ballot is filled with line items for candidates for delegates to a convention selecting judicial candidates. State law also requires that each candidate be listed by party twice, along with that party’s political symbol. In New York City all of this is printed in English, Spanish, Chinese and Korean. The result is a very confusing ballot.
I studied the paper ballot, squinting to make out the letters, circles and squiggles. I filled out the ballot to the best of my reading and comprehension ability, and stuck it in the folder designed to preserve the confidentiality of my voting selections. I was then directed to remove the ballot from the folder (so much for confidentiality) and insert it into the electronic scanning device. An electronic message popped up alerting me that my ballot had been scanned successfully.
It seems to me that this voting system combines the worst of two methods – all of the confusing verbiage and potentially erroneous markings of the paper ballot with the potential electronic failure and manipulation of the electronic ballot reader. The electronic voting machines cost about $7,200 each, and replace the lever machines which have worked just fine in New York for 80 years. Unfortunately, the federal government has demanded that these lever machines be replaced in order to avoid voter confusion.
My prediction is that there will be reports of mass voter confusion at New York’s polling places, with a public outcry to replace the new Electronic Voting devices with yet another voting system. The result will be another huge contract entered into by a state that can ill afford to waste more taxpayer funds.