Opinion: Forgotten promise of election help

Assurances of state and federal help with the cost of replacing Florida's faulty punch-card voting machines have evaporated quicker than the lead in the 2000 presidential contest. The Legislature had promised $16-million this year, but when the House revealed its budget recently, it contained no money for voting machines or other election improvements. Meanwhile, in the U.S. Senate, a bill that would pay states $6,000 per precinct to update their voting machines has been hung up on a partisan political disagreement.

The situation was quite different a year ago, when memories of a near constitutional crisis were still fresh. The presidency turned on a handful of flawed ballots, and Florida's embarrassment led legislators to act quickly and decisively. They cleaned up election law and promised $32-million over two years, most of it for counties to replace punch cards with optical scanners or touch screens. And they made the first $16-million payment to counties.

It is not clear what caused the Florida House to forget its promise. True, in a tight budget year, the Legislature has ignored many of its obligations. Perhaps the House Republican leadership is using the voting machine money as a bargaining chip with the Senate. By doing so, however, it is hanging the counties out to dry. Pinellas County, for example, borrowed $14-million for touch screen technology, and state money would cover nearly 10 percent of that cost.

Congress vowed to act, as well. A bill that looked promising would have paid states $6,000 per precinct to modernize their voting equipment, which would have meant about $2-million for Pinellas County. But the bill got tripped up in the Senate last month by an amendment that split support along party lines. The amendment, sponsored by Democratic Sens. Charles Schumer, N.Y., and Ron Wyden, Ore., would let first-time voters cast a ballot without having to produce identification.

Republicans say that would encourage fraud, and they have a point. Democrats argue that requiring a photo ID or other identifying document (such as a utility bill) at the polls for newly registered voters would discourage the poor and naturalized citizens from exercising their right to vote. That really isn't such a burden for a new voter, however, especially when the potential for fraud is real. Democrats should not let the amendment stop needed election reform.

The war against terrorism has understandable shifted national attention away from the 2000 presidential election debacle. But that doesn't make it less important. To the contrary. What could be more important than strengthening the mechanism of democracy as we fight to uphold its values?

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright