Peoria 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.
CJ I think you should sent this article to Rush Limbaugh. He’s been talking about voting machines this week. What better way to get the word out that Time Magazine is in error, and what the real scoop is.
I’ll say this, when I received my nice flier in the mail about how easy these electronic machines would be, my first thought was “oh man, how do they expect nice little old ladies to figure this thing out?”
I guarantee you this- someone will lose a tight election and blame ‘voter confusion at the ballot box’.
Okay, I voted early and I was one of two people there at the time. The women (who I’m pretty sure were volunteers) sitting there to help me had scads of time to explain the machine to me.
Now, I’m a computer geek of a low degree. But the voting machine is a bit funky to me, so I looked through the directions before voting. The ladies gave me the quick run through. At no time was I under the impression there was a “browse” function!
And if you are at least reading what it says to you on the screen, you should realize you are actually voting.
Of course, the national magazine would dig up the one spacey early voter.
It’s too bad that write-ins are so difficult here. Where I went to college, Optimus Prime comes out near (or at) the top of most student-body elections. 🙂
Oh, and if you want read something scary about USian electronic voting machines… try .
How to steal an election:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061028-8098.html
Thanks, Steve. That’s the URL I was trying to post, but for some reason C.J.’s blog always omits my hyperlinks. :/ I wish there was a ‘preview’ button…
THIS IS JUSTANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE OF HOW OUR LIBERAL, DO-GOODER LEGISLATORS HAVE SCREWED UP THE SYSTEM OF VOTING. THIS ELECTION PROCESS WILL TAKE TWICE AS MUCH TIME TO VOTE, THE POLLING PLACES WILL NOT BE ABLE TO CLOSE ON TIME, CAUSING RIOTS AND CONFUSION. LET’S GO BACK TO THE GOOD OLD DAYS OF VOTING AND NOT BE SO DAMNED CONCERNED WITH THE NEWS PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO PUT THE RESULTS ON THE TEN O’CLOCK NEWS. PROGRESS MY FANNY.
Great, now everyone will remember Peoria, as the idiot voters who could not get it right. People, need to read directions. Well, as close as elections were previously…Attorneys have already been hired. There is going to be another huge debacle regarding electoral voting.
On CNN there was a computer expert who hacked the machine live on television (realtime) and we continue to use the same software derived from the original structure from the same company!
No offense, to Ms. Thomas-That first line was a joke.