County looking at new voting equipment to hold 2006 'big ballot'

By Bill Dries   Memphis Commerical Appeal
April 16, 2005

Shelby County is about to spend nearly $5 million on new voting machines to handle a huge August 2006 ballot.

Every eight years, judicial positions and county offices such as District Attorney General combine with other county, state and federal races to make the so-called big ballot.

  
There were 122 positions on the ballot in 1998, and with more contested races expected in 2006, it's too much for Shelby County's Shouptronic voting machines to handle.

"If we have a challenged race in every position that is on the ballot, our equipment will not accommodate that," said Election Commission Chairman Greg Duckett.

Officials estimate a new voting system will cost $4.9 million, which has been set aside in the budget. The purchase comes at a time when county government is $1.7 billion in debt.

The commission considered modifying all the voting machines to accommodate larger ballots, but the cost is essentially the same as buying new ones.

And when the 20-year-old machines break down, there is no outside technical support. Already the commission has had to buy used Shouptronics from other counties for spare parts.

If a new system isn't completely in place by the big ballot, officials are considering using combinations of new and old machines, paper ballots and touch-screen machines.

About 30 percent of the cost of a new system could be shouldered by the federal government as part of the Help America Vote Act.

Passed by Congress in the wake of the 2000 presidential election controversy, the act helps do away with outdated voter technology. Some Tennessee counties could receive as much as 70 percent of the cost of a new system, but Shelby County will get less money because it has newer equipment.

"Shelby County in essence became penalized . . . because the priority in funding goes to those counties that have punch cards or lever machines," Duckett said.

Commissioners hope to have a new system in place by the May 2006 county primary. Choices include optical scanning machines that read marked paper ballots, and touch-screen machines similar to what the Election Commission has used at some early-voting sites. Vendors of state-approved systems will compete.

How to verify votes is also an issue.

A proposal in the Tennessee legislature would require voting machines purchased after June to be able to make a printout of a voter's choices if paper ballots aren't used. The printouts would not go to voters, but would be kept for recounts or random accuracy checks.

But former election commissioner Myra Stiles thinks voters should get a printout, too.

"The voter actually becomes part of the audit process," Stiles explained at a recent election reform forum at LeMoyne-Owen College. "Now there is no voter-verifiable audit paper trail. Once the votes are cast and counted, there's really no recourse."

Giving voters a printout "brings nothing to the party," countered Election Commissioner Richard Holden. He questioned whether most voters would want the receipt or would want polling officials to handle a written copy of how they voted.

Local Elections Administrator James Johnson said printing a receipt is possible now, but it would be several feet long and slow the voting process.

"What we have to do," Johnson said, "is make sure that the voting public is at ease in the process and that the integrity of the process is there for everybody."