Voter Confidence

There are two major issues affecting the public's confidence in modern elections. Republicans and Democrats are split on these issues.

The first is voting machines. After the problems with punch-card ballots in Florida's recount politicians promised to upgrade so that this would never happen again. Things get complicated from there.

In the run-up to the 2004 election the president of Diebold expressed support for reelecting President Bush. Unfortunately he used the phrase "do whatever it takes". He meant financial support but liberals were convinced that he was announcing voting machine fraud. When Kerry lost after an early lead in exit polls, many in the left were convinced that it was because of voting machine fraud. This leaked over from far-left blogs to (sort-of) mainstream news when Keith Olberman started reporting on it. This distrust continues. When Hillary unexpectedly won New Hampshire the immediate reaction from the far left was that voting machine fraud must be involved. Dennis Kucinich has asked for a recount because of this.

Because of these allegations, requirements for voting machines keep changing. Purchase of new machines was put on hold for a time until paper audit trails could be added. Now these are being rejected because potentially a machine could be programmed to record a vote to one candidate while printing a different name. Ohio's Secretary of State proposed junking the State's brand new touch screen voting machines. Instead she wants voters to fill out optical mark cards. These would be read at the precinct and verified then sent to a central location for the official count. Details are not clear but the verification process might involve abandoning the secret ballot. As I wrote in my last couple of entries, this would help the Democrats. Many people are closet Republicans who vote Democrat if their vote was public.

Even with the touch screen machines, secret ballots are no longer secret in precincts with a single voting machine. All you have to do is match the order that people voted against the paper audit trail.

Despite all of the allegations, there are no proven cases of voter machine fraud. While it is possible to hack a voting machine, it is also possible to alter optical mark ballots. The solution is to establish controls so that no one has sufficient access to alter the vote.

The other big issue is voter identification. This time the right is sure that unauthorized people are being allowed to vote. Their solution is to demand identification. The left is having a fit over this, insisting that the ID requirement is nothing but an attempt to keep poor and elderly from voting. The fee for a state id card is characterized as a poll tax. Here is an example.

The left points out that there are very few documented cases of voter fraud. The right counters with the fact that no one is actively looking for it. Reports of a van full of people going from precinct to precinct where the occupants register and vote are never investigated. There is very little to keep illegal immigrants from voting and some activists insist that they should be allowed to.

Ironically, the star witness for the left turned into exhibit number one for the right. Faye Buis-Ewing was initially refused the right to vote in Indiana because her only picture ID was a Florida driver's license. She testified that it took her four hours to get an acceptable ID. The trouble is that she was not entitled to vote. She registered to vote in Florida when she got her driver's license which disqualified her from voting in Indiana.

While activists on both sides claim to take the moral high ground, there is some cynical calculation going on, also. For decades Democrats have figured that the way to win elections was to get as many non-voters to the polls as possible. While some Democrats believe in expanding democracy, most are more concerned with winning elections. Republicans worry about Democratic voter fraud of decades ago and see this push as a possible continuation of the same thing. They also wonder how anyone can legally exist in modern society without a picture ID.

I side with the Republicans on both issues. I have not heard any evidence of voting machine fraud. To the contrary, none of the claims are remotely credible. At the same time, it seems reasonable to be as diligent about identifying registered voters as for giving someone a library card (Ohio has similar requirements).