LIBERADIO(!)

While Tennessee Republicans attempt to gut the Voter Confidence Act that was passed last year 92-3 in the State House and unanimously in the State Senate, Election Coordinator Mark Goins and Secretary of State Tre Hargett are trying hard to delay its implementation until 2012.

Citing three reasons – the impossible to enforce requirement that we purchase machines certified by the Election Assistance Commission to 2005 standards, the fear of buying outdated machines, and a fiscal impact to local governments not previously considered – both Coordinator Goins and Secretary Hargett are happy for Tennesseans in 93 out of 95 counties to go through yet another election voting on suspect DREs (electronic voting machines).

Each reason cited can be easily addressed and sorted if the Legislators who voted on the bill last year, the Governor who was very pleased to sign the thing, and the newly appointed constitutional officer and his election department staff, all had the desire to give the people of Tennessee what they want and deserve – free, fair, and verifiable elections.

Perhaps, though, the will is weak. Here are some suggestions:

1) The impossible to enforce requirement that we purchase machines certified by the Election Assistance Commission to 2005 standards. Written into the Tennessee Voter Confidence Act is the requirement that we purchase optical scan machines that have been certified by the EAC to 2005 standards. Unfortunately, the EAC is not the sharpest tool in the bureaucracy shed and have to this day only certified one machine. Worse, the EAC is proving toothless in its oversight of both machine and election day procedures and have also brought its own partisan agenda to what should be a non-partisan issue:

A federal panel responsible for conducting election research played down the findings of experts who concluded last year that there was little voter fraud around the nation, according to a review of the original report obtained by The New York Times.

Instead, the panel, the Election Assistance Commission, issued a report that said the pervasiveness of fraud was open to debate.

The revised version echoes complaints made by Republican politicians, who have long suggested that voter fraud is widespread and justifies the voter identification laws that have been passed in at least two dozen states.

Some legislators are looking to find the definitive certification process for optical scan machine vendors so that we can be assured that we are conforming to the law. An easier, and in light of the history of the EAC, smarter fix is to amend the Voter Confidence Act so that we are no longer bound to the ineffective and suspect standards of the EAC.

2) If we purchase optical scan machines in time for the 2010 elections, they could be rendered obsolete by a future requirement to purchase federally mandated equipment. Perhaps, but for the time being there is no federally mandated election system and no one can predict if there will be one by 2012. Plus, Tennessee is lucky to have millions of Help America Vote Act dollars left in its coffers to spend on the Voter Confidence Act and improving our election system. Most other states have already spent theirs HAVA money. So, if a mandate comes from the federal government for all states to standardize their election systems, it will have to come with additional dollars for implementation. Saving the money now is unwise, especially since with each election that passes our faith in the democratic process withers.

3) There is a large fiscal impact to local governments that was not previously considered. Secretary Hargett and Coordinator Goins say that the costs related to the change over to optical scan voting systems are too burdensome on local governments that run our elections. They are primarily referring to the cost of paper ballots, which each county government is responsible for printing. Contrary to how it is being presented, this issue was addressed during the original discussion of the Voter Confidence Act and the conclusion was that passing the Tennessee Voter Confidence Act would not add an additional cost burden to local governments. Recent astronomical cost estimates provided recently by Carter County election administrator, Tracy Harris, are also being reviewed:

Harris said the legislation may yet be repealed, but if not, the total cost to the county — if the state or federal government does not provide new voting machines — would be $363,673.80. She said the currently used electronic voting machines have had very few problems in last year’s elections, both locally and statewide.

First, how does she know the electronic voting machines had very few problems? (Remember, no one can access the source code of the machines, so no one really knows if the votes in Carter County are counted – let alone counted as cast. Second, the state, via the leftover federal HAVA dollars, will provide the money for the machines.

What’s most troublesome about the threats to both gut and delay implementation of the Voter Confidence Act is that with each potential problem handled, we are presented with yet another…and another…and another. It is clear that the desire of some elected and appointed officials to obstruct this incredibly important piece of legislation seems to be much stronger than their desire to implement it.