http://www.theithacajournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051108/NEWS01/511080323/1002
Nov 8, 2005
By JAY GALLAGHER
Gannett News Service
ALBANY — The state could be on the verge of making a
historic mistake by failing to give counties a chance to buy voting machines
that count paper ballots and forcing them instead to buy electronic machines, a
group of lawmakers, union members and activists said Monday.
“We want our vote to count as we cast it. That's a guarantee
electronic machines simply can't provide,” Bo Lipari, head of a group known as
New Yorkers for Verified Voting, told a group of about 50 people outside the
state capitol.
“This should be a choice for the people of New York state,”
said Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton, D-Ithaca. “I'm afraid counties won't have a
choice.”
At issue is the kind of machines the state should use to
replace the lever devices that are scheduled to be replaced next year. The
lever machines are considered outmoded because they are difficult for some
handicapped people to use.
The two main types of potential replacements are electronic
machines, which work like bank ATMs, and optical scanners, which read paper
ballots filled out by voters. The electronic machines cost about $8,000 each
and the scanners $5,500. The state now has about 22,000 lever machines.
The federal government ordered voting systems modernized
after the 2000 presidential-election fiasco in Florida. New York is eligible
for about $220 million in federal money to replace machines.
But while new systems are already in place in most other
states, the New York Legislature couldn't decide last year what kinds of
machines to recommend, and passed a measure that counties be given the choice.
But as the deadline draws near, there is a chance that only
electronic machines will be presented to the state Board of Elections to be
certified. Critics claim that's because the voting-machine companies, which
make both kinds of machines, want to sell only the more expensive ones. And
there's no mandate to force them to offer optical scanners.
“If the private companies choose our machines for us, it
will be a dark day for democracy in New York,” Lifton said.
She and other supporters of the optical-scan machines want
the Board of Elections to make sure that counties will have a choice of which
kind of machines to buy.
But Board of Elections spokesman Lee Daghlian said it's
beyond the power of the board to require that the optical scanners be
available.
“Some folks want to force us to certify an optical-scan
machine. We don't believe we can do that,” he said. “If the Legislature wanted
that to happen, they would have put that in the law.”
But he said state regulations do require that any machine
chosen have a paper trail so that votes can be verified.
The electronic machines do have such a paper trail, said
Jonathan Freedman of Sequoia Voting Systems, one of the companies that wants to
sell machines in New York.
“Sequoia strongly believes that the (electronic system) are
the better machines,” he said, adding that Sequoia may not ask the elections
board to OK their optical-scan machine as well.
But Jessiaca Wisneski of Citizen Action, an activist group,
said it's essential that the elections board give counties a chance to buy
optical-scan machines.
“Any other choice besides optical scanners will be a choice
for the voting-machine companies bent on maximizing their profits at the
expense of New York's voters and taxpayers,” she said.
Here's the likely schedule for decisions about new voting machines, according to the state Board of Elections:
# Before end of year: Adopt regulations for new machines.
# Early January: Start certification and testing process for
machines that companies offer.
# By March 31, 2006: Companies offer machines for sale to
counties.
# September 2006: New machines are in place for primary
elections.
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.