 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Touch-screen voting is best way
© St. Petersburg Times, Both political activists in both parties continue to spin and debate Florida's presidential election debacle last November, but there is one thing on which everyone can agree: The state's voting system is broken, and it must be fixed. Hillsborough County has the chance today to become a national model of election reform. By choosing a touch-screen voting system, the county would show that accuracy and accessibility are as important as the right to vote. Hillsborough Elections Supervisor Pam Iorio will recommend that the county purchase a touch-screen voting system. Her decision comes as Pinellas County considers whether to replace its punch-card ballot system with optical scanning or touch-screen voting. Hillsborough and other counties across the nation are buying new machines to replace voting equipment so flawed it should have been junked years ago. After careful study, Iorio, who is highly respected in her field, has decided that touch-screens, which operate like bank ATM's, are the most accurate, efficient and easiest to use. An alternative system, called optical scan, would be cheaper, and it's important to know the reason why. Under this method, a voter casts a ballot by filling-in the circle next to a candidate's name. A scanning machine reads and records the vote. Scanners may be fine for small and rural counties, but they pose increasing problems for large, urban counties such as Hillsborough. Touch-screens can handle an unlimited number of federal, state and local races without creating confusion on the ballot or shrinking the type size. They make it impossible to vote for more candidates than authorized in a single race. Touch-screens can easily translate the ballot into Spanish or any other widely-used language. They also can be set up with audio tracks and earphones to allow the blind and visually impaired to cast their vote with the same ease and privacy as other voters. Optical scanners cannot do these things. Touch-screens also could turn out to be cheaper in the long run. They do not require the reams of paper ballots -- $180,000 a pop, Iorio estimates -- to conduct a countywide election. Touch-screens suit counties such as Hillsborough that are growing and becoming more ethnically diverse. Touch-screens can accommodate new laws and ballot styles by using advances in computer software, whereas scanners will always be hamstrung by the limits of paper and pencil. Iorio is confident touch-screen devices are secure. Votes are stored on memory cards, and the machines could print a ballot, should the need arise. Iorio would also work with county attorneys and the state Division of Elections, which certifies voting machines, to ensure touch screens are reliable and tamper-free. But no system is flawless, and there could be unexpected problems with touch-screen technology. Hillsborough has already set aside up to $12-million for new equipment, which is what the touch screens would cost. So the money's there. And the state will provide $1.2-million, which shaves the cost for local taxpayers in making such a long-term investment. In Iorio's view, it makes no sense spending $3-million now on a system that was behind the curve years ago. The county should authorize Iorio to move ahead with a touch-screen voting system. We know the cost of cutting corners.
 © 2006 • All Rights Reserved • Tampa Bay Times
490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111 
|
From the Times Opinion page |
