Voting irregularities could confound a tight election

By JAMES ROSEN Knoxville News Sentinel
September 4, 2004

It could happen again, but it might not be in Florida this time.

Almost four years after the 2000 recount debacle filled the streets with protesters, snarled the court system and delayed the election outcome for five weeks, Americans once more find themselves in a deadlocked presidential campaign as the contest enters the stretch run.

The tight national race between President Bush and Sen. John Kerry, along with current dead heats in several of the largest battleground states, raises an unnerving prospect:

In order to determine the next president, election officials in one or more of those swing states might have to recount ballots after polls close Nov. 2.

And despite federally funded improvements in voting technology and the tightening of state election laws around the country - mainly in response to the Florida mess of 2000 - it could take days or even weeks to complete a recount in some of the states where the White House is now a toss-up.

While election officials in the battleground states say they are prepared to perform recounts if necessary, most acknowledge that it likely wouldn't be easy or quick.

Scarcely eight weeks before Election Day, national polls put the White House race even, with neither Bush nor Kerry commanding the 270 Electoral College votes needed to win.

Most important, recent surveys show the contest tied in Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio, three large states with a combined 68 Electoral College votes. If the national tally is close Nov. 2, a razor-thin margin in any one of them could compel a recount that would throw the final outcome into doubt.

Bush and Kerry are also running neck and neck in several less populous states, among them Tennessee, Colorado and Nevada.

Some key swing states are still scrambling to fine-tune their election-recount procedures. The Iowa Legislature passed a law in April requiring election officials there to rewrite administrative rules defining what constitutes a vote, some of which address how ballots would be tallied in a recount. The public comment period on the new rules ended less than two weeks ago.

Under pressure to try to prevent a repeat of the Florida fiasco, Congress in 2002 passed the Help America Vote Act, which gives the states $2 billion to buy new equipment, train poll workers, educate voters and take other steps to revamp their elections. Beyond funding new equipment, the federal law requires states to develop uniform standards for determining voters' intent. That change is aimed at avoiding the Florida recount spectacle of county election commissioners arguing over whether hanging chads or dimpled ballots should be counted.

Because of widespread confusion in 2000 at polls in Florida, Missouri and elsewhere, the new law also mandates that every state allow provisional balloting in cases where a voter is not on registration rolls or can't prove his or her identity. Such ballots are held aside and counted later - sometimes many days later - if registration or identity can be confirmed.

The influx of provisional ballots in November could complicate and delay election recounts, since some states give their election boards two weeks or longer to determine their validity.

To help clarify registration status and reduce the number of provisional ballots, the election-reform law requires each state to have one centralized, electronic roll of voters. But the deadline is Jan. 1, 2006, and many states won't be ready on Election Day this year.

A number of states have gone beyond the federal law's requirements, making other changes in their election laws, some dealing directly with recounts.

Florida, for instance, no longer allows candidates to request a recount, as then-Vice President Al Gore did in 2000 after an automatic recount - required under state law because the original margin was so tiny - placed Bush ahead. Bush or Kerry, though, would still be permitted this year to challenge the Florida outcome in court.

Florida is also among a number of states that have eliminated or severely limited the punch-card voting machines that caused so much chaos in the Sunshine State four years ago. They have been replaced by electronic and optical-scan systems that, though designed to decrease human error, are largely untested, especially under the rigors and intense scrutiny of a tight presidential election.

With half of the 100 million-plus voters in November expected to use electronic touch screens, the old doubts about punch-card reliability have been replaced by new questions about computer reliability. Very few of the electronic machines produce paper backups, making some experts wonder how recounts would be conducted in the event of computer glitches.

At the same time, loosened absentee voting regulations have caused a huge increase in the use of such remote voting. That could delay recounts this year since some states allow absentee ballots to arrive after Election Day, especially those sent from overseas.

Some states have banned recount requests by voters or interest groups. Others have clarified the deadlines and other rules for absentee voting, especially those cast abroad. The post-Election Day arrival of thousands of ballots from soldiers serving overseas, many without postmarks, sparked a slew of lawsuits in the Florida recount.

Among the 18 or so swing states that most analysts believe will decide the election, only a handful have automatic recount provisions.