Problems few, objections many

BY CARA HOST   Observer-Reporter    19 May 2005

WAYNESBURG ? The switch from electronic voting to paper ballots on Tuesday prompted few significant problems.

"I think it went very well considering we had to deal with that last minute change," said Frances Pratt, Greene County's director of elections.

Last month, the Department of State outlawed the UniLect Patriot voting machines that were previously used in Greene, Mercer and Beaver counties. Those counties were forced to adopt a paper-based, optical scan system for Tuesday's primary because the UniLect machines failed two examinations.

Even though workers used two scanners to mechanically count votes Tuesday night, the process took about an hour longer than the UniLect system, Pratt said. Results also were released to the public slowly and sporadically.

The state decertified the UniLect machines in part because of the comparatively high undervote percentage experienced by the three counties that used the system. However, Pratt said, the paper ballots have prompted a new problem, overvoting.

Undervoting occurs when a voter fails to make a ion, either by choice or by mistake, for a certain office. Overvoting occurs when a voter s too many candidates for a certain office. When it happens, all of the voter's ions for that race are voided, at least in most cases.

This problem was nonexistent under the UniLect system, because the touch-screen machines would not allow voters to make too many ions.

However, the overvote rate in Tuesday's primary was between 1 and 2 percent, according to Scott Kelley, the county's information technology director. When the machine encountered an apparent overvote on a ballot, a resolution board, made up of Gene Lee, the county's chief clerk, and Farley Toothman, county solicitor, would decide how to count that ballot.

All ballots cast during the election were tabulated Tuesday except for four damaged ballots and about 10 absentee ballots that came in from military personnel overseas and were on forms that could not be read by the scanner. These ballots have to be counted manually, Pratt said.

Despite a few minor problems, Kelley said the optical scan system worked well and produced accurate results.

"It's an OK system. It's just not on the level that (the UniLect system) was," he said. "If we would have gone from our old (hand-count) system to this one, we would be ecstatic, but we know there's better technology out there.

"I guess it would be like if I took your cell phone away and tried to give you one of those old bag phones to replace it," he said.

Some voters apparently agreed. Election workers at some of the polling places collected informal and anonymous comments on the paper balloting system. A few voters wrote that they preferred the paper system, but most clamored for the return of the touch-screen machines.

"Next year, do we need chisel(s) and hammers?" wrote one voter from Morgan Township.

Unlike the UniLect system, write-in votes are not easily counted under the optical-scan method. Therefore, a committee formed by representatives from each party will convene today to begin reviewing and tallying the write-in votes, Pratt said.

The regular canvass of the vote will begin Friday. The canvass could take several days to complete, she said.