Trusting machines risky, especially at the polls

This editorial was originally published in The Columbia Flier on November 26, 2003.

WITH automated teller machines old hat and self-checkout stations at supermarkets and discount stores increasingly common, you'd think touch-screen voting would seem as right as rain.

But some private citizens and public officials are wary of the newfangled contraptions Howard County and most of the rest of the state will be using in next year's elections.
The most common complaint about the new system is that it does not produce paper copies of individual ballots against which the computerized tallies can be checked.

County elections chief Robert Antonetti has expressed confidence in the security and utility of the new system. But the critics' skepticism is a healthy one, not so much because of the bugs revealed during a mock election held last week – such flaws are inevitable with any new system, whether electronic or mechanical, and these appear reparable – but because of the importance of eternal vigilance in the realm of vote-counting.

As Ronald Reagan was fond of saying, “Trust, but verify.”

Del. Sharon Montgomery of Montgomery County is proposing legislation that would require the touch-screen system to produce a piece of paper listing the voter's choices, which the voter would then confirm before the document is placed in a locked box.

Despite Antonetti’s assurances, our distaste for needless redundancy and our desire to save trees, we're not convinced Montgomery’s idea is a bad one. Until officials can make a better case that the new system is as tamper-proof as possible without paper receipts, they should err on the side of caution.

Meanwhile, voters who may be anxious about operating this new system can rest easy. Prior to the March 2 primary, the county plans to demonstrate their use at various places, including supermarkets and senior centers.

Copyright © 2003, The Columbia Flier