Letter to the editor

A letter to the editor on Dec. 19, 2000, claimed that the reason most voting systems were not automated was that "the companies providing the paper ballots were making too much money (and probably sharing it with those in a position to change the system)."

I happen to be responsible for the largest voting system in the state of Washington (King County) with over a third of the state's voting population. We have not chosen to fully automate our elections systems because we have yet to find a system that was reliable enough not to warrant a paper trail to back it up. We have one of the most sophisticated [optical scan] systems produced, but even it needs to have a backup.

At the last election, we had four required recounts—one being the race for our U.S. senator—and one requested recount. The recounts went without a hitch, and the reliability was enhanced by the fact that any questions of reliability could be answered by examining the ballots themselves if necessary.

I can also assure you that my ethics board would be all over me like a blanket if it was found that I so much as accepted a cup of coffee from one of our vendors. Because credibility is my stock in trade, I would not accept one, never mind a financial kickback, even if there was no ethics board.

I have no doubt that some time in the future, a completely automated and reliable voting system will be available, along the lines of Internet voting. I am supportive because it would greatly reduce the cost of running the elections and be a big savings to the taxpayers who ultimately are paying for it.

Let's work together toward that goal rather than making groundless accusations about why we haven't already adopted a system that is somewhat flawed.

Name withheld upon request

WRITE US

We welcome your comments. To send a letter to the editor, use this form.

Please check out the archive of Letters to the Editor for fellow readers' comments.


Featured

  • Defense
    Ryan D. McCarthy being sworn in as Army Secretary Oct. 10, 2019. (Photo credit: Sgt. Dana Clarke/U.S. Army)

    Army wants to spend nearly $1B on cloud, data by 2025

    Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy said lack of funding or a potential delay in the JEDI cloud bid "strikes to the heart of our concern."

  • Congress
    Rep. Jim Langevin (D-R.I.) at the Hack the Capitol conference Sept. 20, 2018

    Jim Langevin's view from the Hill

    As chairman of of the Intelligence and Emerging Threats and Capabilities subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committe and a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rhode Island Democrat Jim Langevin is one of the most influential voices on cybersecurity in Congress.

Stay Connected

FCW INSIDER

Sign up for our newsletter.

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.