County priming public on new voting machines

By Luis Monteagudo Jr.
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

In the dining room of a senior citizens complex, Emma Schlegel carefully eyed an election ballot displayed on a computer screen and touched the screen to cast a vote.

"Oh, OK," Schlegel said after voting. "I like that. I really enjoyed that."

The exercise was only a demonstration, but it persuaded the 62-year-old San Diego woman to decide to visit a polling place this week to vote on a machine instead of mailing in her absentee ballot.

On Tuesday, Schlegel and hundreds of thousands of voters will participate in the biggest change in county elections in more than two decades.

After 25 years of using paper punch-card ballots, the county of San Diego is switching to a touch-screen voting system at polling places.

The move was designed to address the concerns and criticisms of punch-card ballots that arose after the controversial recount in the 2000 presidential election in Florida. But it has created a furious controversy of its own.

Critics say the new machines are so technologically flawed that they could produce inaccurate results and be vulnerable to attacks from people trying to steal elections.

Elections officials in San Diego and around the state say the criticisms are off-base. They say the machines have layers of security to prevent attacks and will be rigorously tested before and after elections to ensure accurate results.

"Every election is important," said county Registrar of Voters Sally McPherson. "I do agree there will be a lot of scrutiny paid to this one."

The switch to the new system arose out of a combination of factors.

The biggest factor was the contentious 2000 presidential vote, when recounts in Florida raised criticisms about flawed punch-card ballots and their dangling chads.

The dispute spurred a national move to upgrade elections systems. In San Diego, the switch to voting machines was pushed along by an April 2001 lawsuit against the state by a coalition of groups seeking to end the use of punch-card ballots.

Five months later, the state ordered several counties, including San Diego, that were using a particular punch-card system to end their use of the discredited ballots.

San Diego County spent about $31 million to buy 10,200 Diebold AccuVote-TSx touch-screen machines. Diebold, an Ohio company that was founded in 1859 as a manufacturer of bank safes and vaults, also makes automated teller machines and provides technology and security services.

Diebold machines have also been ed for use in Georgia, Maryland and Ohio. The same model of machine used in San Diego County also will be used in Kern, San Joaquin and Solano counties in California next month.

San Diego County will use about 10,000 machines in 1,611 polling places. The remaining machines will be used as backups to replace faulty ones.

Getting comfortable

County officials have spent weeks introducing the technology to the public at community meetings, and have produced pamphlets and online demonstrations on using the machines.

But the public education campaign has been countered by continuing criticism about the trustworthiness of the machines.

The criticism has grown into a cottage industry over the past year, leading to Web sites on the issue, a book, university studies of the technology and even the creation of a local group, called SAVE-Democracy.

At the heart of the arguments is that the voting machines are computers and any computer is prone to breakdowns and hacking. David Dill, a computer science professor at Stanford University, founded a Web site and organization that have spread that message.

"As valuable as computers are, glitches are not uncommon," Dill wrote on his site. "All of us who use computers know this. Undoubtedly, software errors will cause problems in future elections, just as they have in past elections."

Dill and other critics point to examples of election problems around the country stemming from the use of the machines.

In Fairfax County, Va., last November, machines crashed, suffered software glitches and had trouble recording some votes. In a November 2002 election in Wake County, N.C., machines failed to count about 300 votes.

Supporters of the machines say critics fail to recall the problems with punch-card ballots, not only in the Florida 2000 election, but in other votes.

For example, a University of California Berkeley study of the November 2003 gubernatorial recall election found that voters in counties that used certain types of punch-card ballots were more likely to skip or miss the ballot question on whether to recall Gov. Gray Davis.

Supporters also say the touch-screen machines will eliminate so-called undervotes. Voters who have not voted in a particular race or measure will get a reminder from the machine. The voter can then make a choice, or choose not to vote on that race or measure.

At least three independent studies of the Diebold machines in the past year have pointed out flaws in the technology. The studies recommended security upgrades that could eliminate the flaws or lessen the chances of election problems. State and local elections officials have adopted many of those measures.

Close watch

County elections officials and Diebold representatives acknowledge that, as with every election, problems could occur with the machines.

The county is adding workers at polling places and will have a team of 130 troubleshooters roaming the region on election day to deal with any glitches. Diebold will also have about 200 technical experts in the county.

"We're going to be working toward a problem-free election, but we'll address any problems," said Diebold spokesman David Bear.

Some of the criticism of the machines has had political undertones.

At some meetings, critics said that the 2000 presidential election was stolen from Al Gore and that they fear hackers could break into the voting system and change results.

County elections officials say there are several safeguards to prevent election theft, including the fact that the machines are not connected to the Internet.

Also, seals are placed on key parts of each machine. If someone were to open a machine before it reaches its polling place, the broken seals would be noticeable to elections inspectors, who would then pull the machines out of service.

In addition, the machines have undergone testing at state and federal labs to ensure they meet election standards. The machines will also have undergone logic and accuracy tests in San Diego to make sure they are properly tabulating results.

After the elections, officials will perform a recount of 1 percent of the precincts. They also will check paper rosters from all the polling places against the ballots that were cast on the machines.

Put it on paper?

Still, the assurances have not prevented critics from demanding that the machines produce a paper trail to verify votes if questions arise about the accuracy of the results.

Critics would prefer that after voters cast their ballots, the machine would print a paper copy. Voters could then check the printed ballots, and if they are satisfied that the machine accurately recorded their votes, the copy would be given to poll workers and put in a locked box. The ballots could then be used in recounts.

That idea has gained momentum.

At least three bills have been introduced calling for voting machines to produce a paper record that voters can view at the polls.

One is from Sen. Barbara Boxer; another is from Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.; and a third is from Rep. Rush Holt, D-N.J., and Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla. All three bills are before committees.

California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley ordered that such paper ballots be made available for the 2006 election.

To some critics, that is too long to wait. They would like to see such a system in place by this November's election.

"I want to know that we've done everything we can to know that proper safeguards are in place," said Pamela Smith, chairwoman of SAVE-Democracy, the local group opposed to the machines.

A paper trail will be created for Tuesday's election.

Shelley has ordered all counties to print images of each ballot cast on voting machines after the election. The ballot images will be printed after the elections are over and would not be seen by voters at the polling places.

Meanwhile, critics are urging voters to use absentee ballots instead of the machines. San Diego County will give voters who don't feel comfortable using the machines the choice of casting paper ballots on election day. The ballots will be the same ones used for absentee voters and will be available only at the Registrar of Voters office in Kearny Mesa.