MN elections officials running into problems with compatibility of new voting equipment
By Charley Shaw
Staff Writer
With terms like ES&S and TSX, discussions at the state Capitol about new-fangled voting machines can sound like Star Wars movie fans talking about droids. And just as technology often failed to smooth out the wrinkles of life in the epic space movies, county and state elections officials are running into problems with the compatibility of their new equipment.
A group of elections officials brought their plight to the Senate Elections Committee on Tuesday. Kevin Corbid, Washington County's Elections Department director, recounted recent history in which his county purchased optical scanners made by Diebold Election Systems. Washington and three other Twin Cities suburban counties are saying they are now being squeezed by the state's adaptation of the federal Help America Vote Act (HAVA). Congress, which passed the law in 2002, requires each polling place to use "assistive voting machines" that allow disabled voters to cast their ballots in privacy.
State legislators put HAVA on the books in 2005, and Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer announced a contract for counties to buy the Automark machines made by Elections Systems & Software (ES&S). The equipment uses puff tubes and screens with large type to accommodate voters with disabilities. Minnesota has 83 counties that are utilizing the new Automark equipment and vote-counting machines made by ES&S. The state's HAVA bill allows assistive voting equipment to be used in combination with optical scan counting machines.
But only the ES&S vote-counting equipment has been certified, which poses a potentially expensive problem for counties such as Washington that bought optical scanners from Diebold. "Counties that in the past purchased vote counters from Diebold are in a difficult position," Corbid said. "We are facing the potential of purchasing Automark ballot markers for our assistive voting devices, but they are not compatible with our vote-counting equipment. This means we need to either replace our entire voting systems, basically wasting the investment in our current equipment, or use the two incompatible pieces of equipment. It can be done, and we will do this if needed, but we think we need to explore all other options."
The other three counties are Anoka, Dakota and Ramsey. They have about 500 precincts among them, Corbid said. It could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars for each of the counties to replace the machines.
Deputy Secretary of State Alberto Quintela said he finds it hard to believe the equipment isn't compatible. "This option is workable. The option is do-able now," Quintela told the committee. A significant difference between the Diebold and ES&S vote counters has state officials concerned. Diebold's AccuVote-TSX touchscreen system doesn't create an optical scan of the ballot, but rather creates a paper record, similar in appearance to a grocery store receipt, of the vote cast.
In the meantime, Corbid suggested the state grant experimental certification for Diebold or that the Legislature make a change in state law so that an optical scan of the ballots isn't required. Elections Committee Chairman Chuck Wiger, DFL-North St. Paul, asked the Secretary of State's Office to work with the counties as they continue to search for remedies. Quintela and Corbid both noted a solution needs to be reached because this year's elections are nearing. "Let me say the timing is difficult. Even if the Legislature is interested in relaxing the state requirements to allow additional vendors into the Minnesota marketplace, the timing is very tight," Corbid said.
http://www.legal-ledger.com/viewStory.cfm?recID=154014