Ballot politics
All New Yorkers should have a say in deciding on a modern-age voting system
 

First published: Thursday, March 11, 2004
The 2000 presidential election exposed Florida's antiquated ballot system and prompted federal reform legislation to improve voter access in every state in the union. But in New York, reform may yet fall victim to old-style partisan politics, favoritism and back-room deals.

On the surface, New York is complying with the federal reform effort known as the Help America Vote Act. One positive outcome is likely to be some form of computerized balloting to replace the aging voting machines that are often hard to read and sometimes difficult to operate. Putting the ballot on a monitor perhaps one that resembles a desktop screen or a bank ATM machine would bring the process into the modern age.

But there are drawbacks. Any electronic system would be vulnerable to hackers a hazard faced by businesses and consumers alike.

Fortunately, reform measures in the Assembly and Senate include provisions for a so-called paper trail of votes, to ensure that electronic ballots can be audited and verified. That will guard against any attempt by hackers to manipulate an election's outcome. Moreover, any system should include voice-activated operation to ensure full access for disabled voters.

Regrettably, neither the Assembly nor the Senate addresses another crucial issue the state's archaic full-face ballot requirement. That may have made sense in an era of large paper ballots or voting machines, but to compress all possible candidates' names on a small monitor screen, along with possible ballot issues, is a modern-day challenge. If the field is crowded, names and bond issues might be difficult to read. That difficulty would be compounded if several different languages must be used. A more modern, and equitable, approach would be to use an ATM-like screen, where the ballot could be accessed by clicking on successive pages.

These technological issues shouldn't cloud the partisan politics that hangs over the whole reform process. For example, Gov. Pataki bypassed the Democratic director of the state Board of Elections and designated the board deputy, a Republican, as head of a task force charged with recommending reforms. Moreover, the panel had no one to represent minority interests the very groups that have so often been shortchanged at the voting booth. Finally, lobbyists with ties to leading Republicans are vying for the lucrative contract to provide whatever voting machines the Legislature approves.

It's time for openness. The legislative leaders should agree to conference committees on ballot reform and conduct public forums on the issue. And openness should apply to the contract for balloting machines as well. That is the only way to ensure that, whatever system is finally adopted, every vote will count not just those with an inside track.