Not everyone a big fan of mail voting

Rebecca Nappirebecca Nappi
The Spokesman-Review
July 16, 2005

Marshall Mitchell clearly remembers the first time he voted. It was 1972. He was 20. His father and mother drove him to their Brent, Ala., polling site. Marshall, who used a wheelchair because of a diving accident, waited in the van while his dad brought a ballot to him.

His dad watched him mark the ballot. He didn't say anything about Marshall's choices, but Marshall wonders what might have happened if they had been at home together at the kitchen table, with more time to fill out the ballot. Marshall was still a young man back then. His father was strong-willed. Would Marshall have felt uncomfortable, maybe even intimidated, and changed some of his votes?

 
Marshall pondered this thought after reading that Spokane County Auditor Vicky Dalton will recommend that the county switch to a vote-by-mail system.

A federal law will require voting devices for people with disabilities at every polling site next year. The machines and their maintenance could ultimately cost into the millions. Sending the ballots out by mail is the cheapest way to meet the federal requirements, Dalton says.

Marshall, a column regular and coordinator of Disability Studies at Washington State University, has mixed feelings about the proposed change.

On the plus side, mail-in ballots fit the goal of "universal design" touted by disability advocates. Universal design happens when architects and planners "design buildings, structures, systems and programs ? anything we need to function in the world ? in a way that makes it accessible to everyone in every circumstance," Marshall said.

He gave an example. Architects design a building with beautiful steps leading to a grand entrance. Then, to meet accessibility requirements, they add on a ramp for wheelchair users. This addition is seen as a financial and aesthetic burden. A universal-design architect would eliminate the steps entirely and create an elegant level entrance, accessible to all.

The mail-in voting system has the potential to benefit everyone. But Marshall was quite fond of the voting-machine prototype he tried out during his tenure on the Governor's Committee on Disabilities Issues and Employment.

"They have a touch screen and you can roll right up to them. You vote by touching the screen. You then get the message: 'Did you mean to vote for?' Once you are done, it gives you a printout of how you voted. The votes are stored electronically."

He believes that these machines, if used by everyone, would fulfill the universal-design goal and eliminate voter-fraud concerns. But they are expensive. Idaho's accessible machines will cost close to $5.5 million. A federal grant will pay for them, but Idaho voting officials are grumbling about the potential maintenance costs.

Which leads Marshall toward another worry. Will people with disabilities receive some backlash over the added expense?

"The financial impact is the No. 1 argument against complying with laws requiring accommodations for people with disabilities," Marshall said. "It's just a smoke screen."

Twenty years ago, when public transportation systems were forced to accommodate people with disabilities, editorials in conservative publications warned that these requirements would ultimately bankrupt public transportation for everyone. It not only survived the change, but the change opened up the world for people with disabilities, allowing them to travel for work, play and participation in civic life.

Marshall and I agree: This voting-by-mail change is inevitable for Spokane County. The advantages outweigh the disadvantages. Dalton's recommendation calls for three or four ballot -in centers, as well as 15 accessible machines that voting officials could transport where needed.

But we'll lose forever that we're-Americans-doing-our-civic- duty- together feel that nestled into the smaller polling places. And some of us will really miss it.