[Dean's World] Casey Tompkins: My experience in Ohio voting

[notify at powerblogs.com]

Posted by Casey Tompkins:
My experience in Ohio voting
http://www.deanesmay.com/posts/1162950974.shtml


   This is Casey Tompkins (AKA "the contributer who rarely does")
   reporting on my own experiences with the new Ohio electronic voting
   system:

   Just got back from errands and voting; I live in John Boehner's
   district in Ohio.

   I was surprised to see so many cars there at just before six o'clock.
   The sole "activist" (in favor of a local county levy to increase
   mental-health funding) out front told me it had been busy all day.

   It turns out one of the reasons was the new voting machines. Yep, I
   finally got to vote electronically. My personal preference is for
   paper ballots, but this system seemed to work well.

   First I had to provide identification, something new for Ohio. The
   nice ladies at the polling station told me the requirement wasn't
   restricted "official" IDs such as state of Ohio ID, or even a photo ID
   such as a driver's license.. All that is required is a valid document
   with your correct name and address on it. One woman brought in her
   checkbook, and the the nice ladies told me a phone bill and/or
   electric bill were equally acceptable.

   This impresses me as a healthy compromise which helps eliminate vote
   fraud while not placing an undue burden on citizens.

   Since this was the first time using electronic voting machines, folks
   (understandably) took a bit longer to make sure they got everything
   right. I know I made a point of double-checking everything.

   Another time-sponge was the fact that the "ballot" was 14 pages long.
   Yep. 14 pages. There were some Ohio constitutional amendments
   (proposed raise of the minimum wage), as well as local and county
   amendments which took up most of that space. Whoops, almost forgot to
   mention the idiotic proposed state amendment to further ban smoking in
   "public" areas. Feh. I read through that one twice, to make sure I
   voted correctly (I'm agin it. {g}).

   The process went as follows: I gave them proof I was really me, signed
   the register (which included a scan of my signature from the last
   election), and waited in line.

   When my turn came, I got some sort of smartcard to activate the
   machine. I inserted the card as instructed, and was puzzled by the
   lack of activity on the screen. Just before I decided to ask for help,
   I saw small notice next to the card receptacle which instructed me to
   push the card in until it "clicked." Ah, that was it! Can't say if
   that was bad ergonomics, or me just staring at the screen and nothing
   else. Heh.

   The screen itself was (didn't think to measure it at the time) roughly
   18" high and about 12" wide. Easy to read; nice and big. To my mind
   the instructions were pretty clear. Touch the box next the person you
   wish to vote for, or the box yes/no, depending on your choice for a
   referendum. The instructions pointed out there was a help button at
   the bottom of the screen, as well as "forward" and "back" buttons
   (with arrows). There were also options to change the contrast and type
   size to aid visually-challenged voters.

   Voting itself was straightforward, and closely followed the earlier
   punch ballots I've used in previous Ohio elections. Just touch the box
   next to the name of the man or woman for whom you are voting. A
   feature I liked was that the Republican and Democratic candidates were
   clearly labled as such; I don't know if that's common across the
   country, but it helps avoid confusion similiar to that apparently
   suffered by some voters in Florida back in 2000. Just look for the
   Democrat or the Republican, and press the appropriate box. Simple.

   As I said, there were very large and easy-to-read "forward" and "back"
   buttons at the bottom of the screen. I was immediately reminded of a
   web browser. In fact, I used them several times, as I find "legal"
   language rather obscure, so I prefer to go over proposed amendments
   very carefully to ensure I understand just what a "yes" or "no" vote
   does.

   Overall, the ability to navigate the ballot seemed -to me- more than
   adequate, and the options to validate your vote worked well. Once I
   finished my ballot, my selections were presented in pages (or screens,
   if you prefer); three if I recall. The instructions told me to
   carefully review each page, and go back (via the "back" button) if I
   had made any mistakes. Once I was satisfied with that page, I pressed
   a "commit" button (don't recall the actual word), and a hard copy of
   that page was printed on a log which resembled a grocery-store
   receipt, except that I couldn't access it. I could, however, read it
   quite nicely through a window. For example, my vote for governer
   showed Ken Blackwell [X], and so on.

   Once I approved that page of choices, I went to the next; again I saw
   a summary on the screen of my votes, pressed "commit," then saw the
   hardcopy log of my vote, which allowed me to double-check the result.

   After I went through three pages (or screens) to review I was
   presented with a screen saying, basically, "Ok, once you press this
   button your vote will be logged. If you want to make ANY changes, do
   so now!" So I pressed the final button, and Bob's your uncle.

   One suggestion I would offer is ejecting the smartcard from the holder
   once the voter has pressed the final "I'm done" button, as additional
   feedback that voting has been completed. It would provide a useful
   ergonomic signal.

   After that I removed the smartcard and returned it to the registrars,
   then bothered the nice ladies with more questions. When I asked what
   would happen if I had pressed "commit," then realized I had been an
   idiot and mucked up my ballot, they told me a voter had three chances
   to "re-do" their ballot, if I understood them correctly. I'm not sure
   if that meant I had three chances at that final "commit," or three
   chances to go back and fix things at the final review stage. Since (as
   I mentioned above) they were still busy at the time I didn't want to
   waste any more of their time.

   All in all I found the system to provide more than adequate options to
   both review and correct my choices, especially the viewable hard copy
   as a paper-trail backup. Then again -full disclosure- I'm a college
   grad and a techno-geek. On the gripping hand my own preference is for
   paper ballots with X's as advocated by the Instapundit. I believe
   that's the most effective route if your highest priority is
   eliminating voter fraud and confusion. I don't the extra day it would
   take counting the ballots; isn't that a trivial price to pay?

   A closing note: when I queried the nice ladies at the polls, they said
   our precinct was busier than in 2004. Hmm...

   This article was originally posted on the [1]. 

References

   1. http://www.thegantry.net/archives/000277.html