Problems plague voting

By RAY MARTINEZ IIIand AVIEL D. RUBIN
LONG ISLAND NEWSDAY
After another general election in which technical and human errors at polling places affected the voting process for many Americans, a renewed focus on improving the mechanics of elections is clearly in order.
A national voter hotline received more than 40,000 calls, with registration and machine-related problems ranking among the top concerns. In Denver, the intermittent collapse of new technology designed to verify the registration status of voters caused routine waits of more than two hours and the disenfranchisement of thousands of eligible voters who could not wait to cast ballots.
In Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana, judges intervened to extend voting hours in a number of local jurisdictions because of delays caused by the election workers' unfamiliarity with procedures and the technology itself.
Although significant efforts have been made in the past several years to improve elections, serious questions remain.
The 2002 Help America Vote Act was supposed to be the answer. In the wake of the 2000 presidential election, Congress passed the law to modernize the process and provide much-needed federal funds to state and local governments. With at least one recent national exit poll showing high voter confidence in the accuracy of election results, officials should be praised for making improvements. But, as the evidence suggests, the difficulties that continue to plague the process require immediate attention.
Four important steps should be taken.
Full funding
First, the time has come for Congress to fully fund the new law. Unanticipated costs associated with implementing this important act have caused a severe financial burden for state and local jurisdictions. And maintenance and trouble-shooting costs associated with electronic voting systems have come at a steep price -- a cost often paid by state and local tax dollars with no help from the federal government.
Second, some congressional races -- in such states as Florida, Ohio and North Carolina -- were undecided long after the election because of razor-thin margins. Many touch-screen voting systems in use throughout the country provide no voter verification of the recording of votes and no independent audit or recount capabilities.
To resolve the lingering doubts surrounding the use of certain electronic voting machines, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission should amend its recently adopted national voting system standards to require as a mandatory condition of federal voting system certification that all electronic systems produce independent verification of ballots cast and counted. And it should do so in time for the 2008 election cycle.
Third, the incoming Congress should place meaningful election reform on its agenda. Although the decentralized nature of the election system remains one of its abiding strengths, Congress should consider certain improvements. For example, establishing uniform data transfer standards could serve to protect voting rights by making it easier for states to exchange voter eligibility or registration information.
Finally, election officials should commit themselves to improving their collection of data and to undertaking rigorous, consistent and transparent audits after every election.
Martinez III, former vice chair of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, is a policy adviser to the Pew Center on the States. Rubin, a computer science professor at Johns Hopkins University, is author of "Brave New Ballot: The Battle to Safeguard Democracy in the Age of Electronic Voting." Distributed by the Los Angeles Times-Washington Post News Service.