Bandera voters say nay to new machines
By Jessica Hawley - Bandera Bulletin    31 August 2005

Hemingway wrote with only a pencil while living in Paris, scratching short stories onto a small notepad, preserving his observations and thoughts forever on paper. Striving for that same simple permanency, some Bandera County voters have cried nay to the prospect of new electronic voting machines.

Accusing the county commissioners of making a "closed-door, smoke-filled-room decision," Sylvia Colburn said that the agreement to enter into a contract with Hart InterCivic was political, not based on tested science or fact. She said that if Hart allowed scientists to test the data card, they would prove how easily the system could be tampered with. She said that the security of the machine's internal device was at risk and the information stored could be scrambled, interrupted or rigged.

Colburn also told commissioners during their regular meeting on Aug. 25 that the thermal printout the eSlate machines reportedly generate is not permanent, which she said is in violation of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) mandate. She said that the machines do not produce a viable paper trail of cast ballots, which would be needed in the event of a recount.

Commissioners unanimously approved last month the purchase of new electronic voting machines distributed by Hart to be used in November's election. The handicapped-accessible machines will purportedly keep the county in compliance with HAVA. According to the Federal Election Committee, each state and jurisdiction is required to replace outdated voting systems and equip every polling place with handicapped accessibility by Jan. 1, 2006.

"We have no capacity to do handicapped voting at this point," Bandera County Judge Richard Evans said. "We're going to have to do something to address that."

Evans asked Colburn if she had any documentation reflecting a Hart failure, problem or malfunction. Houston's Harris County has used the eSlate system for five years with no reported problems. But she argued that without a paper trail, an accurate recount would be impossible to perform.

Representing the Bandera County River and Groundwater Authority District, Susan Queen told the court that a permanent record with manual audit capacity was preferred.

"As you know, we've been hammered every election. We're always accused of doing something wrong," Queen said. "We would like to say that we're in favor of a paper trail."

Speaking as a Democrat and experienced election judge, Doris Miller asked for the court's due and diligent consideration before rushing into possession of electronic voting equipment that, she felt, has yet to be proven reliable.

"A paper ballot system is a good system," Miller said.

Miller also requested separate primaries so that the ballots were not commingled.

After crunching some numbers, commissioners surmised that separate primaries would cost the county $31,850. The judge questioned why so much concern surrounded the primaries as opposed to early voting, which is when the majority of the county's votes are tallied.

"Are we only honest when we're early voting and when the election comes we have this gross dishonesty to worry about?" Evans asked. "If the intent is there, I would submit that any system can be bugged."

Although he concurred that a paper trail is needed, Precinct 3 Commissioner Richard Keese motioned to purchase 40 eSlate machines and enough equipment to be able to provide separate primaries. He said that as a commissioner, he strives to see that the public has a fair election, if not a perfect one.

"I still think in the future that we ought to have one primary," Keese said. "But, we're not there yet."

The motion passed unanimously, with the caveat that each party is responsible for leasing additional machines if necessary.