Voting machine critics continue to request receipts

Jack Gurney    Pelican Press   22 May 2005

A segment of local voters will remain unhappy with Sarasota County's paperless touch-screen voting machines until they can see tangible evidence their ballots have been accurately recorded by computers, and printed copies are available for recounts.

How many of these voters shun public forums and hold their frustration in check is impossible to measure, but a vocal handful continue to gather and articulate their concerns when various organizations provide them an opportunity.

The Sarasota/Manatee Chapter of Common Cause hosted such a gathering earlier this week at the Selby Public Library in downtown Sarasota, and a crowd of about 50 filled an upstairs conference room to quiz Elections Supervisor Kathy Dent.

"We held the meeting because there is a paranoia out there about these machines," said Chapter President Mitchell Zavon. "Common Cause has worked to get big money out of elections since it was founded. It has been a tough fight for the last 30 years."

Some of the big money is for manufacturers such as Elections Systems and Software, which sold 1,615 paperless machines to Sarasota County for $4.7 million in 2001. As has been reported, they came without printers that produce a paper ballot copy for votes to review.

If they did, voters could confirm their accuracy, then hand the ballot copies over to elections officials so they could be secured in sealed containers and available if a recount is required. The ES&S system precludes a true manual recount.

Dent has steadfastly insisted the ES&S machines can produce a "paper trail" of votes recorded on the machines for recount purposes, but concedes it is not a ballot copy each voter can scan for accuracy and turn over to local elections officials for safe storage.

"There is no such thing as a perfect election," she said. "So long as there are human beings involved there never will be. The state is not in control of what I do here. The federal government is not in control of what I do here. We test every machine."

'Absolutely corruptible'

When asked why she recommended paperless touch-screen machines to Sarasota County in 2001 after Manatee County bought optical scanners that produce a paper ballot printout in 1997, Dent said the ES&S equipment was more advanced and capable of being upgraded.

"I made the decision based on what I thought was the best equipment after looking at three systems," she said. "Our machines can be d for the blind and visually impaired before the next election, and record ballots for Spanish-speaking voters."

Rosemarie Myerson, a Longboat Key resident who has invested hundreds of hours comparing the Sarasota County and Manatee County voting systems, insists the ES&S machines are more expensive to operate and flawed because they can't produce a paper ballot receipt.

"These machines are absolutely corruptible," she said. "People who run elections with them should know they can be audited. There should be a capability, after every election, to audit 10 percent of the paper ballots and check for accuracy. Why not change to optical scanners?"

Even if the Sarasota County commission agreed with Myerson and wanted to make such a change, it would be hard pressed to trade in the ES&S machines when they have been used for less than half their shelf life, which Dent estimated was "about 10 to 12 years."

Retrofit

It has been suggested that Sarasota County could retrofit each of its 1,615 machines with printers that produce a paper ballot copy for voters to review and elections officials to seal in boxes in the event a recount is required.

Florida's elections law automatically requires a manual recount when the margin of victory in a political race or ballot question is one quarter of a percent or less, or when there is a proper and timely request for a manual recount.

Last year, Nevada conducted elections with Sequoia touch-screen machines which are similar to those owned by Sarasota County that were retrofitted with printers. The state spent about $800 for each printer and attached them to 2,600 machines in 16 counties.

Dent suggested it would cost between $600 and $1,000 to retrofit each of ES&S machines, but she pointed out, "There is no federal push to require verifiable paper receipts in all 50 states, and Florida does not require paper receipts."

Last fall, before the Nov. 2 general election, U.S. District Judge James Cohn stated a "preferable voting system" should include verifiable receipts for voters to review, but he ruled the federal courts do not have the authority to mandate such a system.