Overall Question About Us Interviews, Facts, etc. Help Save Democracy Home
Search TrueVoteMD

 

 

 

 
 

Think You Voted in Maryland? Think Again

Sunday, March 7, 2004
From The Washington Post

Getting elections right is Job No. 1 in a democracy. Maryland's new touch-screen system fails that test. The state is using machines that officials know will fail, and the burden is on the voter to correct those failures.

During the voting process I scrolled through the five screens on the ballot, ticked my choices and pressed the fateful "cast my vote" box. As I walked out I saw a campaign sign for Barbara Mikulski and said to myself, "Hey, I didn't vote in the Senate race. In fact, I never saw that race on the screen." I went back in and raised this with several election judges and officials. All but one looked at me as if I were crazy and, in gentle terms, noted that I must have missed the race on the screen. This was certainly possible, and it would have raised a different problem, namely that people have differing abilities to distinguish portions of a visual field -- a disadvantage of paperless, touch-screen voting. But that was not Tuesday's problem. I persevered long enough to persuade the technician on duty to check my machine. The technician confirmed that the machine was not presenting whole election contests. At this point I demanded to vote again. But the senior election judge on site said, "Once you've pressed 'cast my vote,' that's it. You can't vote again." I pointed out that I had been denied the right to vote because I was never presented with the ballot for that race, and she said, "Well, you should have complained before you pressed the button." In other words, it's up to the voter to account for all the races and to make sure the machine doesn't malfunction.

I fussed enough that an official called the administrator of the Montgomery County Board of Elections. I reviewed the facts with her, and she said, "Once you've pressed 'cast my vote,' that's it. You can't vote again." (It must be a script.) I repeated my argument that I had not voted because the county had not presented me with a valid, complete ballot. The administrator put me on hold, spoke to somebody, and, lo and behold, I was told that I could fill out a "provisional" paper ballot and that the board of elections would decide within 10 days whether to count it. So, after investing an hour and a half at the polls, I came away with the satisfaction that maybe my ballot would be counted, and maybe it wouldn't. The most amazing thing about this experience was something the administrator said to me. When I explained that a race had been dropped, she asked whether I had pressed the magnification button. I said that I had not even seen and fortunately did not need a magnification button. She said, "The reason I ask is that we know that this sometimes happens when you press the magnification button." So the election officials know that the machine will malfunction. Now, in a larger sense, that's not exactly headline news. Computers and computer screens malfunction -- it happens to all of us at home and at work on a regular basis. But then why would we entrust our elections to patently flawed machinery with no paper backup? To Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. and all of our county executives: Get in a room and fix this problem. The stakes are too high to fail anymore. -- Jeffrey F. Liss is a lawyer who lives in Chevy Chase.

© 2004 The Washington Post Company

 
Please Help TrueVoteMD Protect your Vote

Take Action Today to Make Sure Your Vote Counts!

1. Find Your State Legislators
2. Send a Letter to the House Ways & Means Committee
3. Send a Letter to the Senate Education, Health & Environmental Affairs Committee
4. Tell Others
5. Send a Letter to the Editor
6. Support Federal Election Law Reform
7. Add a banner to your website
 

Breaking News

• Sept. 23, 2004 'A Massive Experiment' in Voting in The Washington Post
• Sept. 20, 2004 The Magic Voting Touch, an Editorial in The Washington Post
• Aug. 27, 2004 After Your Vote Vanishes, an Editorial in The Washington Post
• Aug. 26, 2004 Voting machine safeguards in question in The Baltimore Sun
• Aug. 25, 2004 Md. Machines Seek Vote of Confidence in The Washington Post
How They Could Steal The Election This Time: The Nation Magazine's exhaustive examination of the potential problems with DRE voting systems, including Diebold in Maryland
The Washington Post on TrueVote MD!
Blackwell Halts Deployment of Diebold Voting Machines for 2004
Gov. Ehrlich appoints new member to election board
E-voting regulators often join other side when leaving office
Women Voters Drop Paperless Vote Support
The Disability Lobby and Voting New York Times editorial
•Scans of the Hack the Vote article from the April issue of Vanity Fair magazine.
•Think You Voted in Maryland? Think Again
Takoma Park supports legislation to require modifications to new voting machines purchased by the State of Maryland to create a verifiable paper trail
Diebold "basically had no interest in putting actual security in this system," said Paul Franceus, one of the consultants. "It's not like they did it wrong. It's like they didn't bother."
MD Senate report finds security risks, recommends paper
Diebold gives paper trail for FREE to San Diego County!!

More news.

 

© 2003 Campaign for Fresh Air and Clean Politics. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy
Designed by Grand Junction Design.