Category Archives: Voting

Peoria voter error makes Time Magazine story

Time Magazine Nov 2006Peoria is getting some national press, but not in a flattering way. A story in the most recent issue of Time Magazine begins with this anecdote:

A woman walked into a polling place in Peoria, Ill. last week and proceeded to use one of the new electronic voting machines set up for early voting. She logged on, went through each contest and seemed to be making her choices. After reviewing each race, the machine checked to see if she was satisfied with her selections and wanted to move on. Each time, she pressed YES, and the machine progressed to the next race. When she was done, a waving American flag appeared on the screen, indicating that her votes had been cast and recorded.

But there was a problem. The woman had not made any choices at all. She had only browsed. Now when she told the election judges she was ready to do it again–but this time actually vote–they told her it was too late. Pressing the last button, they said, is like dropping your ballot in an old-fashioned ballot box. There’s no getting it back.

What does that story lead you to believe? When I first read it, it sounded like a voting machine malfunction to me. However, I called the county elections office and talked to John Ramsey. He explained that it was voter error. Apparently the woman misunderstood the instructions; there is no “browse” mode, so to speak, nor a “trial run” at the ballot. You choose your candidates and at the end, you are presented with a chance to review your choices. If you made a mistake and want to change one of your choices, you can go back and make changes. However, once you press the “Cast Ballot” button, your vote is cast and there is no turning back.

Time Magazine concludes:

In one week, more than 80 million Americans will go to the polls, and a record number of them–90%–will either cast their vote on a computer or have it tabulated that way. When that many people collide with that many high-tech devices, there are going to be problems. Some will be machine malfunctions. Some could come from sabotage by poll workers or voters themselves. But in a venture this large, trouble is most likely to come from just plain human error, a fact often overlooked in an environment as charged and conspiratorial as America is in today.

Time mentions Peoria one more time in the article, in this paragraph:

Perhaps the biggest fallacy in this debate is the notion that elections were perfect before Congress decided to hold them on computers. They weren’t. “Stuffing the ballot box” is not an expression from the world of fiction. The problem with overvoting punch cards existed for decades before the dateline PALM BEACH COUNTY became a household term. Peoria County clerk JoAnn Thomas says she routinely tossed out several hundred twice-punched ballots every year. That represents roughly 1% of all registered voters in her jurisdiction.

I called Ms. Thomas to ask her about the article. She hadn’t seen it yet, as it just came out online today. She explained that what the author (Michael Duffy) is describing is a woman who came in and accidentally cast a blank ballot. The voter had not marked any candidates, yet still pressed “Cast Ballot” at the end, apparently thinking that a blank ballot doesn’t count. But it does.

Technically, this is called “undervoting.” Many people undervote to a degree; for instance, if someone just wants to vote for President, but chooses not to vote in any of the other races. However, there is nothing to prohibit someone from casting a completely blank ballot — one where they haven’t voted in any race at all — like the woman in the Time Magazine story.

While the new voting machines allow you to undervote (as did all prior voting methods, Thomas points out), it will not let you “overvote.” For example, you can’t mark Aaron Schock and Bill Spears on your ballot — the voting machine will only let you vote for one. That’s what Duffy was referring to when he said Thomas had thrown out hundreds of “twice-punched” ballots in the past. On the old ballots, if you overvoted, your vote for that race wasn’t counted at all. Now, you’re prevented from overvoting in the first place, so that’s no longer a problem.

The state requires a random sampling of precincts to be audited each election to make sure the voting machine vote total on the hard drive matches the total printed out on the paper receipts. Thomas confirmed that so far there had been no voting machine malfunctions, and the audits have come back perfect.

As long as I had her on the phone, I asked a couple other questions not directly related to the article. I found out that roughly 1,500 people in the county (not including the city) had already voted under the county’s early-voting initiative. She thought it was about the same number in the city, so she estimated that about 3,000 people had already voted in this election. She also confirmed that early voting costs more money and requires a fair amount of staff time to administer, but she won’t know totals until after the election.

I also found out that, contrary to popular belief, you don’t have to know how to spell a write-in candidate’s name exactly to have your vote count. As long as election judges can determine the voter’s intent, and as long as the name is an official write-in candidate (i.e., they’ve filed their paperwork), the vote counts. I’d still recommend knowing how to spell the write-in candidate’s name, just so there’s no confusion. Votes for Mickey Mouse or Elvis Presley aren’t counted, by the way.

Maybe we should just revoke voting rights

On the Peoria County website there’s an article titled “County Clerk’s Office Encourages Early Voting” (October 9):

The Peoria County Clerk’s Office is ready for the 2006 General Election. It has to be; early voting begins October 16, 2006. While Election Day is Tuesday, November 7, registered voters can begin voting at one of several locations throughout Peoria County as early as next week. The final day to vote early is Thursday, November 2. Persons who have not registered by October 10 and wish to vote in this year’s General Election may do so through Tuesday, October 24. Those living in Peoria County outside the City of Peoria may register during Grace Period Registration at the Peoria County Courthouse. Persons registering during the grace period, however, must also cast their ballot at the time of registration.

Prior to this year’s Primary Election, the Illinois State Legislator and Governor Blagojevich passed a law that allows voters to vote early without having to provide a reason. Although early voters are not required to state a reason, they are required to present photo identification prior to voting. Early voting grants more people an opportunity to vote; the County Clerk’s Office grants more voting opportunities by establishing satellite locations for early voters who live in Peoria County but outside the city of Peoria. An early voting schedule for the General Election follows.

I guess my question is, why? There were already procedures in place to allow for absentee voting. Why the need for reason-free early voting? Apparently it’s an attempt to get more voter turnout. Here’s what a 2004 Washington Post article had to say:

The number of states that offer no-excuse early voting has nearly tripled in the past eight years, fueled in part by the demand for election changes that followed the deadlocked 2000 presidential race. Early voting is transforming the way campaigns do business, and because this presidential race is so closely contested, it could have a significant impact on the outcome.

In some battleground states, voting will commence nearly six weeks before Election Day. For the Bush and Kerry campaigns, that means an earlier start to television, radio and mail advertising, adding to the campaign’s overall cost.

[…] Supporters tout early voting as a way to reverse declining voter turnout. In 2000, only about a third of those registered to vote cast ballots, with more than 50 million opting not to exercise their constitutional right.

In states that offer early voting, the record shows that the convenience has had a modest impact on turnout. It does not turn nonregistered voters into voters, studies show. What it does do, said Michael W. Traugott, a University of Michigan political science professor who has studied the impact of early voting in Oregon, is persuade voters who might miss the odd election to vote more regularly.

I think it would be fair to say that the goal is to woo a lazy electorate to the polls. And I think that’s a waste of time and money. I understand the cynicism many feel toward our electoral system; I understand how some people don’t feel their vote counts due to gerrymandering and other abuses. Nevertheless, it is still a right that only a small percentage of us exercise (less than 40% in non-presidential elections), and that’s a travesty.

Probably the only way people are ever going to get off their collective butts and go to the polls is if the threat arises to take that right away. One would hope that would be enough to motivate people. If it’s not, then I suppose such an apathetic nation as that deserves tyranny.

Arizona bribe doesn’t address real question

I was listening to the Dennis Prager show today (hat tip to B.J.), and there was an interesting discussion regarding voting.

As you may or may not know, there’s a ballot proposition in Arizona that, if passed, would offer $1 million to a lucky Arizonan in each and every election. The idea is to increase voter turnout. It’s kind of like a lottery, except you don’t have to buy a ticket; you just have to vote. This is almost universally assailed as a terrible idea, yet some are saying the proposition is likely to pass.

Most things I’ve read regarding this issue focus in on the fact that we need more informed voters rather than more voters in general, and that citizenship in a free society is its own reward. All true. But there’s a more fundamental flaw in this “solution.”

It doesn’t solve the real issue. The reason most people give for not voting is that they believe their votes don’t matter — that the outcome is predetermined. There are a number of factors that support this thinking: gerrymandering, a two-party system that systematically excludes third-party candidates from public debates, campaign financing inequities, etc. These are things that need to be addressed — not merely voter turnout.