http://www.pressconnects.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060404/OPINION/604040309/1005
pressconnects.com
Greater Binghamton, NY
Tuesday April 4, 2006
OPINION
GUEST VIEWPOINT
By FRANK PENNISI
The United States Department of Justice has filed suit against New York state for failure to comply with the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) in two areas: failure to create a statewide computerized voter registration database, and failure to adopt voting systems that are fully accessible by disabled voters and are capable of generating a permanent paper record that can be manually audited.
Disability rights activists across New York have been advocating for accessible systems for several years now, but the state has steadfastly refused to act on our concerns and suggestions. Unfortunately, the lawsuit filed by DOJ is probably the only means of assuring that our state will come into compliance with the accessibility requirements of HAVA.
New York is dead last among the 50 states in HAVA compliance. Although new fully accessible voting machines are supposed to be in place in time for this September's primaries, New York has declined to choose a statewide accessible machine. Instead, legislation gave this responsibility to each of New York's 62 counties to each choose their preferred accessible machine from a list of those certified by the state as being accessible and meeting other state requirements.
This list of approved machines does not yet exist, however, and probably will not be available before June of this year, leaving less than three months for the counties to choose, order and receive the machines, as well as train election workers and voters in their correct usage. This is obviously not possible in such a limited period of time.
County boards of election are not at fault here. In fact, they are caught between a rock and a hard place. Most county boards have been ready and willing to move forward, but unfortunately they have not been able to.
Over the last few weeks we have learned that there is a proposal "on the table" that the state put in place a temporary measure to provide accessibility until fully accessible voting machines can be acquired and put into place. The two temporary measures being discussed are a phone-in voting system at each polling place and ballot markers for use with optical scan machines.
Neither of these systems meets accessibility requirements. All optical scan ballot markers we have tested require the insertion and removal of the ballot by hand, which eliminates anyone who has mobility or dexterity issues from being able to use the voting system independently. The phone-in system uses a regular telephone keypad with no tactile discernable controls, no print display, no switch input, and no audio level adjustment.
We are fearful that if either of these inaccessible solutions are approved for New York, even on an interim basis, that it may open the door for similar options nationwide, thus subverting the access requirements of HAVA for people with disabilities across the country.
Although we would have preferred to have our election process finally become accessible in 2006, we realize that this goal is simply not achievable. We would rather continue without access for one more year than see an inaccessible system put in place for 2006 and the waste of funding that would entail.
We would prefer that the Department of Justice ensure that New York institute a plan for achieving full access at the polls in 2007 rather than insist on an "accessible" system that very few people with disabilities will be able to use privately and independently. If such a system is indeed used this year, it could have negative repercussions nationwide.
Frank Pennisi is Program Services Coordinator for Southern Tier Independence Center
© 2006 Binghamton Press & Sun-Bulletin
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.