Opinion Voter verification: County Council right to reject contract
News Journal Online. 08 June 2005.

A majority of the Volusia County Council took a tough, brave stance Monday on behalf of disabled voters who deserve a self-verified paper record of their ballot, just as other voters now have.

In a 4-3 vote, the council rejected a contract for $782,185 to buy touch-screen machines for the disabled that held only promises of that basic democratic right. The machines manufactured by Diebold Elections Systems do not provide paper receipts even though the firm says it is working on that feature.

In a democracy, though, the right should come before the promise. Only with a direct, self-verifiable receipt of ballots can voters be assured their votes are correctly recorded.

Further, without paper receipts, an audit of any election could prove only that the number of voters equals the number of ballots. That's not enough. Paper receipts are essential in case machines malfunction. Several cases have been documented over the past year in which touch-screen voting machines lost ballots or misrecorded ballots.

The council's vote also temporarily blocks an expanded use of the machines for all voters. During the special council meeting, Elections Supervisor Ann McFall revealed that she intended to use the touch-screen machines for early voting sites, except at the election division's main office in DeLand. Voters in all but the one early-voting site could not opt to use the more reliable optical scan ballots. In earlier presentations, McFall maintained that optical scan voting would be available and touchscreen machines would be an option, even for the disabled.

The council rejected the contract knowing it could face lawsuits or fines for not complying with state election officials' interpretation of Florida law. At the same time, advocacy groups for voter-verification of ballots had threatened suits if the contract was approved.

That said, the state's interpretation of law needs to be clarified. The state is claiming that county election supervisors must have special systems in place for the disabled by July 1. The state also contends that the counties can use only state-certified voting machines.

Questions about the state's position are reasonable. It has certified only one voting system for the disabled, Diebold's. The choice of one system doesn't provide for the good-government principle of competitive bidding. Also, there are challenges to the state's deadline because the July 1 date is referred to only in a footnote to the elections law, which is a reference to a provision passed in a general appropriations act. The federal elections law requires a system for the disabled be in place by Jan. 1, 2006. Florida is the only state with the early deadline.

The federal date gives the county more time to look into competitive systems an issue that Council Chairman Frank Bruno is looking into. Bruno, who voted against the contract along with Dwight Lewis, Art Giles and Carl Persis, has

vowed to work with state and local officials in order to avoid going to court. That is admirable but pressure is heavy for all Florida counties to conform to the state position.

Election officials in Florida especially those who endured the 2000 presidential election should be aware of the value of fair, verifiable, secure balloting. Touch-screen machines, whether specifically for the disabled or for all voters, may be a viable alternative at some point, but without a voter-verified paper receipt of individual ballots, they don't meet that basic democratic test.