[an error occurred while processing this directive]

REVISITING THE U.S. VOTING SYSTEM: A RESEARCH INVENTORY

November 27-28, 2006

Convened by the American Association for the Advancement of Science

Todd Rokita

AAAS WORKSHOP ON RESEARCH & THE US VOTING SYSTEM

Since the passage of the Help America Vote Act of 2002, there have been significant changes in the way Americans vote and election administrators run elections. In fact, these changes amount to a greater level of progress than the country has seen since the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

From the implementation of statewide voter registration databases, provisional ballots, and polling place improvements, to the use of electronic voting equipment that includes machines accessible for the disabled, there is no doubt that elections are much different than they were four years ago. At the forefront of the implementation of HAVA’s initiatives are a group of state and local election administrators working closely together. In Indiana, this team includes the Secretary of State, Indiana Election Commission, Indiana Election Division, Circuit Court Clerks, County Election Boards, County Voter Registration Boards, and poll workers. This team is not only working to ensure the processes behind the election run smoothly, but to also reassure each voter the their vote will count.

America’s great experiment with democracy has withstood 230 years of elections that have been both controversial and indisputable, fair and inequitable, but in this more than two century history there has never been a perfect election. Election are ultimately run by the humans that manage them, and we all make mistakes. This does not make us doubt the ideals of our government, but pushes us to improve the process each election.

Recent controversial elections have tested this perseverance, but the passage of HAVA has ushered in a new age of voting systems and cautious optimism. Electronic voting systems replaced the older lever-operated and much-maligned punch card systems used in elections during most Americans’ lifetimes. The new types of electronic voting equipment generally in use include optical scan voting systems and direct record electronic (DRE) voting systems. These DRE voting systems have tested public confidence in election results due to the nature of the machines and their reliance on software and firmware code that the voter can’t see. This is an issue I believe research could address by safely educating the voter’s knowledge base of each machine’s vote tallying mechanisms.

My first question is this: should voting system firmware and software be proprietary information, or should they be available for public inspection? In the past, many states such as Indiana, have not required release of the proprietary information by the vendor, but have instead required that the system source code material be escrowed. Although this ensures the election will continue and protects the state in the event of vendor bankruptcy, this approach does not provide the same level of confidence to voters. Furthermore, an actual bankruptcy could still result in delay in obtaining the escrowed material from the agent.

Another change in how elections are conducted is a result of the 21^st Century lifestyle. In the past, Americans tended to work, learn, and play in a rather small community. Following World War II and the rapid technological advancements that have taken place, this community has expanded to include longer commutes, more distant schools, and simply more to do. Americans now live in a more mobile society. Technology has made it less efficient to conduct elections centered in neighborhoods.

In order to fit the typical Hoosier’s lifestyle, Indiana has researched, and will implement Vote Centers on a trial basis for the 2007 Municipal Elections as one of the first states east of the Mississippi to do so. First developed by Scott Doyle and used in Larimer County, Colorado, the Vote Centers concept can significantly improve access to voting. Instead of a large number of small precinct-based polling locations, a fewer number, but larger Vote Centers will take their place. Registered voters may vote at any location in their county. This allows voters to vote according to their lifestyles. They can vote on their way to work, before picking up their children from daycare or school, during lunch, or even while picking up bread and milk. In a society where more of us are commuting longer distances to work and other events, this concept just makes sense.

Technology allows election administrators to create electronic poll books that prevent voters from casting more than one ballot in each election. The same technology employed through electronic voting systems allows election administrators to employ less voting equipment, yet make all ballots available at each location (some DRE machines can hold many different ballot styles). Coupled with early voting procedures and the need for less poll workers, Vote Centers can make elections more cost effective and efficient.

Are Vote Centers the way all future elections will be conducted? It seems to reason that this concept, if successful, will catch on in other jurisdictions across the nation, and could supplant precinct-based voting as the primary voting procedure during this new century.

And lastly, should voting machines ultimately interface directly with HAVA required SVRS? Could this simplify vote tabulation, increase the ability to track provisional ballots, further secure against vote fraud, and significantly mitigate human error?