Casting their vote for electronic ballots

In preparation for a $5 million purchase, Connecticut samples computerized machines

Monday, November 10, 2003

BY KEVIN COUGHLIN
Star-Ledger Staff

A paper record does not guarantee happy voters.

One Connecticut town learned that lesson last week, when voters tested an electronic voting machine, made by a New Jersey firm, that spits out paper receipts.

Critics of computerized machines insist paper proof is the only way voters can confirm their electronic ballots were recorded accurately, a claim disputed by many in the industry.

Avante International Technology Inc. of Princeton Junction won some rave reviews from four Connecticut towns that tried its $3,500 Vote-Trakker machines, which briefly display printouts under glass.

But when a Southington woman insisted the paper results differed from her electronic tally, she was told it was too late for a do-over.

"I called the registrar, who said once the vote is cast, it is cast as is," said poll worker Nancy Flis. Other election officials then voted on the same machine, Flis said, and saw no discrepancies between their electronic votes and the printouts.

"We can't account for human errors," Avante's Tony Bandiero said.

A visually impaired elderly woman struggled with the Vote-Trakker's robotic audio, said Amy Lasbury, a Southington voter who spent 25 minutes helping the woman. A few voters complained about confusing beep tones and commands on the touch screens.

In one Wilton precinct, voting was delayed a few minutes by a malfunction in a laptop computer that authenticated "smart" cards needed to activate the Vote-Trakkers, said Peggy Reeves, the town's registrar of voters. "All the voters waited patiently," she said, and everything else went pretty smoothly.

"It's a terrific little compact thing," said Southington Registrar Robert Sherman, who envisions the suitcase-sized device being used in senior centers.

"They worked out wonderful," said Ellen Dupont, Griswold's town clerk.

Electronic machines from Diebold Inc., Sequoia Voting Systems and Daneher Controls were tried elsewhere in Connecticut.

The University of Connecticut is compiling a voter survey for the state, which plans to spend at least $5 million in federal grants to replace aging mechanical voting machines. Mechanical machines caused problems in at least three Connecticut towns on Tuesday.

Avante's was the only tested machine that showed voters a printout. While few Southington voters mentioned that feature, some noted security concerns about computerized voting.

"Surely, a computer expert could manipulate somehow what's happening but not so easily as other forms of voting," said Josephine Theriault, 73.

"Given the record of computers, and information in general, in my mind there's a great possibility (chicanery) could happen," said Frank Romajos, 66.

Engineer Stephen Kramer, 46, said he wished printouts were part of the Sequoia machine he tried in Cromwell. Paper, said Kramer, "just makes everyone feel better."