Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Optical-scan machines worked better at polls, analysis finds

FORT LAUDERDALE - Optical-scan machines outperformed touch screens in the general election, although both had a similar error rate, a newspaper reported Sunday.

The touch screen voting machines performed better in the Nov. 2 presidential election than they did in the March presidential preference primary, according to a South Florida Sun-Sentinel analysis. But the touch screen machines were outmatched by older voting devices that use pencil and paper ballots.

The evaluation was based on undervotes cast on each system. Undervotes are instances in which the voter skipped the presidential race or a choice was not tallied for reasons including machine and software error.

Overvotes occur when more than one choice was recorded for a single-candidate race.

Of 2.7-million votes on touch screens reviewed, 11,824 ballots had no vote registered for president, resulting in an error rate of 0.44 percent.

Of 2.3-million votes on optical-scan machines, 6,731 ballots were not recorded or flawed, leading to an error rate of 0.29 percent.

In the March primary, optical-scan machines had an error rate of 0.12 percent, and the touch screen machines had a 1.09 percent rate of undervotes, the newspaper found.

The presidential race was chosen for study because it appears as the first race on the ballot and is considered the least likely race in which voters would purposely not cast a ballot.

The study did not examine votes cast absentee or those cast during the early voting period.

A spokeswoman for Florida Secretary of State Glenda Hood said the difference between the two voting systems was not significant, noting both obtained an error rate of less than 0.5 percent in the newspaper's analysis.

Fifteen of Florida's 67 counties used touch screen voting machines, including most of the heavily populated ones.

[Last modified January 17, 2005, 01:05:20]