Kissing the Chad Goodbye

In their zeal to avoid another vote-counting fiasco like Florida’s last year, some federal reformers are talking about adopting a uniform national voting system. This federalization would not only usurp a long-held state power, it would not even guarantee an accurate vote count. The U.S. Constitution gives the states responsibility for conducting elections, and that’s where it should stay.

There certainly is a legitimate federal role in suggesting valid reforms that seek goals common to all states: that as many qualified voters as possible actually cast ballots, that the ballots be promptly and accurately counted and that the system be secure from tampering or massive accidental breakdown.

Congress or a federal reform commission is welcome to propose general guidelines to the states for voting systems that take advantage of modern technology. And states and counties would welcome federal assistance in replacing antiquated voting machines. But it’s not necessary, or advisable, that every precinct in the United States use identical voting machines.

In Florida, there was one major culprit, the punch-card voting equipment that produces the infamous chad. Six California counties, including Los Angeles, use this sort of punch-card machine. It should be replaced as soon as a practical alternative machine is agreed upon and the money is found to pay for it--perhaps as much as $100 million in L.A. County alone.

But the problems in Florida were not all caused by the voting machines themselves, as has been pointed out by Doug Lewis, executive director of the Election Center in Houston. Think of the infamous butterfly ballot in Palm Beach County--a pure design error. There is also the question of what ballots get counted. As ways to avert that problem, Lewis sees three simple changes in law: clearly defining what constitutes a vote, specifying that in a recount the machines first count all votes that can be clearly read and only the rest be hand-counted, and withholding certification of the vote until all recounts are concluded. Present law in California already covers these points.

The chad problem, however, will be eliminated only by adoption of a new system. Los Angeles County is testing a touch-screen voting machine similar to the one fully used in Riverside County for the last election and declared a success.

In Sacramento, Secretary of State Bill Jones and Assembly Speaker Bob Hertzberg (D-Sherman Oaks) have proposed a $230-million appropriation to help counties buy new voting equipment. Gov. Gray Davis put $40 million in his budget for a pilot project, but Jones was correct when he said last week, “We don’t need pilot programs.”

The full amount should be approved by the Legislature. Jones’ office certifies voting machines for use in California, giving the counties a selection among several. The proven touch-screen machine is on the list. Even now, new and less expensive models are coming on the market. In California, there is no need to wait for more proof.