Ensuring accurate count

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD  24 September 2004

Americans will have to hold their breaths and hope for minimal voting problems on Nov. 2. Four years after the Florida voting fiasco, our ability to ensure a smooth, accurate election count leaves much to be desired.

No election can be conducted without potential for error or fraud. Around the country, many areas have made considerable progress. Include the spread of electronic touch screen voting machines, now used in Snohomish County, as part of the advance.

New problems arise, though, as we move forward. Touch screen voting must have a paper trail, so recounts can be conducted. Secretary of State Sam Reed wisely has ordered paper records for the 2006 election. Congress has so far failed to follow suit on the federal level.

A host of other ideas has arisen, including having large stacks of paper ballots available at all polling places in case of machine problems. A bipartisan federal commission working on technical issues needs more money, immediately and for future years.

Secrecy ought to disappear from the systems for testing software in voting machines. Australia has moved to open-source software for its voting machines, an idea that could remove some of the controversies in this country however much voting machine manufacturers might scream. There must also be a serious look at the legitimate questions raised about the political ties between voting-machine manufacturers and Republicans.

Unfortunately, voters in some areas this year will again use punch card ballots like those that produced Florida's hanging chad troubles in 2000. A report from The Century Foundation warns that African American votes likely will be undercounted once more in those locales.

When Reed announced new rules for Washington's elections, he referred to "a healthy debate" over safeguarding elections. The discussion can lead to gradual improvements.

But Americans are about to vote in another presidential election with an array of voting systems and widely varying levels of reliability. That means voters and elections officials must do their best with what they have and hope for clear, accurate results.