Voting officials challenged to provide paper backup
Published in the Asbury Park Press 08/2/05
BY JEFFREY T. ZAINO

    
In early July, acting Gov. Codey signed a law mandating that all electronic voting machines in New Jersey provide paper receipts by 2008.

There are sound arguments on both sides of the voter-verifiable paper trail debate. The League of Women Voters and Leadership Conference of Civil Rights, for instance, have contended that a paper trail requirement will lead to disenfranchisement of people with disabilities and non-English speakers. On the other hand, many respected computer scientists and elected officials, including Rep. Rush Holt, D-N.J., have argued that it will will prevent election fraud and allow for ballot recounts.

Regardless of where you stand on this issue, the timing of the law creates enormous challenges for New Jersey.

In order to meet the law's requirements, county election officials must have voting systems in place by 2008 that provide a paper receipt. This is not enough time for election officials to implement the changes. The problem is that the New Jersey law creates a conflict with the federal Help America Vote Act. HAVA, signed Oct. 29, 2002 by President Bush, creates numerous mandates that need to be met by 2006 in order for the state to maintain federal funding, one being the replacement of old voting systems with new ones.

Many New Jersey counties, in their efforts to meet HAVA requirements, did purchase new voting systems prior to the passage of the paper backup law. As a result, none of the machines purchased are designed to provide paper receipts and therefore must be retrofitted with printers by 2008.

Retrofitting thousands of voting machines is not likely to be an easy task. Voting machine companies are still developing the technology required to perform a retrofit.

Some New Jersey legislators have argued that this law and similar legislation being passed in other states will prod voting machine companies into developing the technology. They are correct to the extent that these companies are working hard to meet state and federal mandates. But there is no guarantee the machines will be ready in time for the next election.

Assuming the technology can be developed in time, there are additional concerns such as cost, storing the equipment and difficulties related to practical issues such as fixing paper jams and replacing ink cartridges once the new machines are in operation.

Private election providers, such as the American Arbitration Association, which oversee elections each year for the nation's unions, associations and colleges, have had great success with electronic voting systems, dating to the 1990s, with and without the paper backups. The problems that did occur in the private sector were, for the most part, practical problems involving ink cartridges and paper jams.

Once the machines are retrofitted, they must be tested and certified. This is a time-consuming but necessary process. The certification process, however, could generate additional election disputes. In early 2004, for instance, a group of activists in California filed a lawsuit aimed at prohibiting the use of Diebold voting machines because it was alleged that the company used software during the 2003 election that had not been certified as required by law.

Retrofitting machines requires adding new software that must be certified in order to ensure the integrity of a voting machine.

The important tasks of retrofitting and certifying machines by 2008 are monumental ? a process that cannot and should not be rushed.

Finally, as New Jersey prepares for the 2006 election, additional poll worker training must occur to address the introduction of new voting systems and HAVA mandates. Given the new paper-backup requirement, re-training must occur in advance of the 2008 election as well. An election with paper verification requires new standards, procedures and troubleshooting.

As is the case in the almost 20 other states that have recently passed similar legislation, New Jersey faces new challenges that may require extending the deadline for the mandated paper receipts beyond the 2008 election.