ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



The shape of elections to come

Posted: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 6:49 PM by Alan Boyle


AP file
Mary Lou Matusik stacks up absentee ballots for counting at the Lake
County Government Center in Crown Point, Ind., on Election Day.

Registering to vote online ... coping with masses of mail-in ballots ... voting during an "Election Week" rather than a single Election Day: These are all features that came into play during this year's historic balloting, and they point to the next step in the evolution of the electoral process.

On the day after Election Day, experts on voting technology were quick to explain what went right and what went wrong this time around - and whether it's possible to fix our clunky voting system.

The good news is that the meltdown many observers expected didn't happen, even though it looks as if this year's voter participation will break records. The total votes cast are projected to top 133 million, and depending on how many additional absentee and provisional ballots are counted in the days ahead, turnout could exceed the 63.8 percent figure recorded in 1960.

"Overall, the election ran smoothly in many places, with huge voter turnout," Wendy Weiser, director of voting rights and elections at the Brennan Center for Justice, said in a polling postmortem. "An unprecedented number of Americans voted, many for the first time, and that is great news. But while a lot of people voted, a lot of people also had problems at the polls."

Those problems could have generated controversies to rival those of the 2004 election, or even the 2000 debacle - if the presidential election had been closer. This year, Barack Obama's electoral-vote margin was comfortable enough that the glitches didn't make a difference. But make no mistake: There were glitches.

In fact, Charles Stewart III, who heads the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's political science department and is a leader of the Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project, has seen some evidence this year that "we've been backsliding a bit" in terms of the accuracy of election returns.

Long lines at polling places were the most obvious problems - and that's a function of the high turnout as well as longer and longer ballots. Some election officials anticipated that it would take just three minutes to fill out an optical-scan ballot, but Caltech researcher Michael Alvarez said his study of voting patterns in Albuquerque, N.M., yielded an average figure of 10 or 15 minutes per voter. (In Ohio, one election official clocked a voter at 21 minutes and 26 seconds. "I'm a careful reader," the voter told him.)

This year's biggest legal controversies focused not on ballot glitches but on voter registration, highlighted by allegations of widespread voter fraud.

"These concerns wax and wane as a function of how close the election is, and how concerned the left is that the right is going to win," said Stewart, who had an essay about the election system's stumbles published last week in the Los Angeles Times.

If left-leaning Democrats think that right-leaning Republicans are going to win, they put the focus on voter suppression and call for measures to make voting easier, Stewart said. (Example: motor-voter registration.) If Republicans think that Democrats are going to win, they put the focus on voter fraud and call for measures to make voting harder. (Example: Florida's "no match, no vote" restrictions.)

Stewart said this was the year for the Republicans to complain. "They're almost guaranteed to cause more problems in 2010 and 2012," he said.

So what can be done to streamline the voting process while preserving the integrity of the voting process? We're already seeing some efforts to move in that direction, and there may be more changes on the way:

MORE EARLY VOTING:
About a third of all voters cast their ballots before Election Day, thanks to absentee and early-voting schemes. The experts agreed that was one of the big factors behind the absence of Election Day meltdowns. "More places will adopt early voting because it seems to take the pressure off," said Rick Hasen, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles who specializes in election law.

As time goes on, people will think of the voting process as taking place over an extended election period rather than a single Election Day. The flip side of that paradigm shift is that all the results may not be known on Election Night, as anyone following the Senate races in Minnesota and Alaska has already found out.

MORE MAIL-IN VOTING:
In states where voting by mail is becoming the norm, such as Oregon and Washington, the very idea of going to a polling place is becoming a fading memory. Alvarez said juggling multiple methods - vote-by-mail as well as in-person early voting and day-of-election voting - puts added strain on election officials. That could increase the pressure to go to an exclusively vote-by-mail system.

MORE OPTICAL-SCAN VOTING:
The prevalence of electronic voting systems grew between 2000 and 2006, but this year e-voting was actually on the decline. Historically, optical-scan paper ballots register fewer errors. MIT computer science professor Ron Rivest also noted that it's much easier to scale up an opti-scan system to deal with heavier turnout or voting-machine failures.

Rivest is working on a system called "Scantegrity" to make opti-scan ballots even more reliable and verifiable. Another, lower-tech way to reduce opti-scan errors is to give voters clear instructions on how to mark their ballot, Alvarez said.

Cutting-edge voting technologies have been put far on the back burner for now. But in the longer run, "we're certainly going to see a lot of push for Internet voting and cellphone voting," Rivest said.

CLEARER POLICIES FOR PROVISIONAL BALLOTS:
The federal Help America Vote Act, also known as HAVA, required election officials to make provisional ballots available to voters who run into polling-place problems - for example, not having proper ID. If you cast a provisional ballot, your vote isn't counted on Election Night - instead, it's held back until election officials determine whether or not you're actually eligible to vote.

That escape valve helped smooth out rough spots in Tuesday's voting process, but the federal legislation doesn't provide clear rules for counting (or not counting) the ballots. As a result, some states have stricter standards than others.

Hasen said Congress' priorities for election reform should include setting uniform guidelines for counting provisional ballots and helping states standardize the voter registration databases mandated by the HAVA legislation.

NO-FUSS REGISTRATION:
Hasen would like to see the federal government take the voter registration process out of the hands of the states. "The next president should propose legislation to have the Census Bureau, when it conducts the 2010 census, also register all eligible voters who wish to be registered for future federal elections," he said in a news release from the Institute for Public Accuracy. Election officials would be allowed to change registration information based on postal change-of-address forms.

"This change would eliminate most voter registration fraud," Hasen said.

Two states - Arizona and Washington state - already offer voter registration services online. In fact, my daughter used Washington's online system this year to update her own registration.

"California is soon going to be moving in that direction as well," Alvarez said. "I think it's going to be important to watch those processes really closely as pilot projects for what other states might do in the near term."

CHANGES YOU CAN BELIEVE IN?
What are the prospects for actually changing the system? Hasen admits that a radical electoral overhaul might not be in the cards, but he sees a fresh opportunity for evolutionary change.

"President Obama, who taught election law, likely has an interest in electoral reform," Hasen said.

Will Republicans go along with the idea? If more standardized registration systems can address the voter-fraud issue as well as the ease-of-voting issue, Congress and the White House just might come up with changes that everyone can believe in. 

"It's going to be very interesting to see what happens in the next six to nine months," Alvarez said.

To track research into voting systems and election law, check out the Election Updates blog, the Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project, Hasen's Election Law Blog, Ohio State University's Election Law @ Moritz Web site and ElectionLine.org at the Pew Center on the States. Click through our "Voting Tech" interactive to learn more about how different ballot methods work. And be sure to include msnbc.com's Decision '08 Dashboard among your favorites.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

After watching "Hacking Democracy" how about voting machines and scanners that can't register negative numbers. Voting is only addition, its either a nothing or a plus. By leaving in the ability to subtract, they leave in the ability for tampering.
Hasen did not do his homework when he suggested using the 2010 census employees to do voter registration. Any personally identifiable information collected by the census bureau is protected by US Code Title 13 and a felony to disclose. Only because of this oath of confidentiality is it possible to collect this Constitutionally required information from citizens that cherish their privacy.
Additionally, because of the enormous hurdles to count every person in the US, the 2010 census process has already begun.  
I don't understand why we as a nation do not have a standardized method of voting in this country.  I voted using an optical scan while my boss, who lives in a neiboring city, had the option to use a punch card or a touch screen.  That's three differnt ways to vote within the same county.  Is there any doubt why we experience so much cunfusion.  There should be one standardized method for voting.  Make election day a national holiday to circumvent high voter turnout, keep it low tech to avoid unexpected proplems and announce the winner three days after the election so every vote can be officially counted.
Maybe you could learn something from Australia.
As a clerk for a polling place in Worcester, MA, I can tell you that a main cause of voting delays and slow processing has nothing to do with the balloting devices as such. The problem is using senior citizens who cannot hear or read well, paper voter lists that seem designed to be impossible to use in an efficient manner - no index tabs, tabs the workers have to put on, and only 26-letter tabs for lists that may contain more than one street with the same first letter, one street may contain several buildings and units which are not sorted in the list, and several other problems. These seniors also have problems processing foreign accents and languages, without help from interpreters, who themselves may have accents that the poll workers cannot understand.

The smart voters hand the poll workers identity cards, usually a driver's license, but they also are hard for poll workers to read, differ in style depending on whether it is an adult license, a learner's license, a separate liquor purchase ID, etc.

We need an electronic voter ID system that can use the existing IDs to check voters off or divert the problem cases to the clerk and warden. The actual voting part is quite short compared to the time it takes to verify the voter is entitled to vote, and in most states, you have to check in and check out using the same process. It makes no sense to continue these 18th century procedures.  
How about using the North Dakota system?  That is no voter registration, you just come to the poll, show ID and are given an ballot.
I'm not sure that so-called high-tech voting is all that good an idea.  If the touch screen voting susceptibility to hacking is any indication, voters seem to have a lot more confidence in low tech methods.  There was really nothing wrong with the punch ballots except for those damned hanging chads.  We don't need "cutting edge" voting technology; what we *really* need is "cutting edge" hole punching technology.  (And you can assume that's a pun if you want to.)
Here in Arizona, we are allowed to register and make changes if need be, online.  I chose the early mail in ballot.  For my family, it saved time and money.
I have to say, I too, like the first poster here, was worried about the electronic systems being unsecure.
It looks as if the "watch dogs" did their jobs this time.
It's not consitutional for the Feds to control the election process, plain and simple.

As far electronic voting systems go, a government (Federal or state) or NGO should just put out a prize for the development of a Open source publically developed and maintained electronic voting system that would create a set of open standards that any electroic voting system used in the Us would be required to adhear to. From there let the free market decide.

Personally I'd like to see a more permanat voting infrasturcture setup for the country with permant dedicated structures with all the supporting infrastructure setup to support. Kinda like the postal system where instead of a post office you have a vote office.
The desired change most talked about in the different circles I run in this election was the elimination of the Electoral College.  Nobody seams to know what it's for.  The conclusion generally is that it was applicable in times of slower communication.  Most of the people I talked with thought the vote should be decided on election day by popular vote, as the tech exists to instantly report ballots.
Several thoughts.
Personally, I think we should keep the college but would like to see states go with the Nebraska (and one other state) method, or something similar.  This system would cast a vote by district plus 2 winner take all votes.  It's much more representative of popular vote and, I think, original intent.
States should also pass legislation that dictates how electoral votes are to be cast.  At the very least voiding unfaithful votes.  I don't see why the electors should have a choice in voting at all.  They are elected as representatives in a very specific voting process.  Their only voting responsibility is for the election of President and Vice President.  A vote that reflects the constituency should be mandatory.
There's no reason voters can't preregister.  So away with provisional ballots.  Register early, verify your registration and know where to vote.  If you don't care enough to ensure your vote will be counted then I doubt you're informed enough to cast a vote that really matters.
Absentee ballots should be cast with a deadline that gives enough time to have them assembled and verified by the open of the polls.  Enough scanners should be available at a central location to ensure that they are scanned in by close of polls.  That way they aren't counted early, which would risk swaying the still undecided, but they are in at the end of the day and the whole vote can be tallied.
A biometric section would speed things at the polls.  By all means scan my thumbprint when I register and have a database of voters' thumbprints at each polling place with all those who are elligible to vote in that place.  It would be elective, not mandatory, so no thief, rapist or murderer would have to put themselves at risk of arrest to vote.  But it stands to speed things up while ensuring against voter fraud.
Of course, two larger problems remain.  Getting people to vote at all, and getting people to be informed in their vote.  We're getting better at turnout.  The "careful reader" in the story is a joke.  The last thing I do before I go to vote is sit in a coffee shop with all my materials and go over things one last time.  That's the last place I'm a careful reader, in the booth I can be a careful copier, which is much faster.  It's a matter of respect for that line of people waiting, and how much good is a vote on Prop 202 that was decided in the booth after a careful reading.  Most of that crap is written in a technical legal English that comes off as convoluted double-speak to the average American.  If you're just reading it in the booth it's little more than a coin flip.
Beyond the voting process there are other important issues.  Finance, lobbying, etc.
David W wrote (11/7, 2318), "It's not constitutional for the Feds to control the election process, plain and simple."
This is correct.  However, the constitution was written at a time when strong state government and weak central government was a major, or "governing", concern.  After the Civil War the character of the nation changed to an identity as Americans from Virginia or Pennsylvania instead of Virginians or Pennsylvanians who are Americans.  This is reflected in the 14th amendment, but that doesn't change much of the rest of the constitution.  It is, perhaps, time to revisit much of the constitution, as much of it is now outdated.  And it would be much better to take a new look at the hot issues of today and rewrite the constitution by amendment than to wait for the courts to (unconstitutionally) reinterpret the meaning of the constitution in light of current popular opinion.  Yes, I just said it would be better to change the constitution the way the constitution says to do it instead of the way President Elect Obama says to do it.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1654910

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google