Super Tuesday came a week early for me yesterday.  I decided to take advantage of the early voting period in Tennessee so as to free up my schedule for reporting next week on the real Super-Duper Tuesday.  Actually, I think I voted yesterday, but I really can’t be sure, because I used an electronic voting machine with no paper trail.  Over the past several years we have learned that these machines are prone to error and can be easily tampered with to manipulate votes.  Sorry to be a downer just as the election is heating up, but suspect voting machines are the kryptonite to next Tuesday’s Superpowers.  I know I felt a little deflated yesterday to simply push a button on a machine and walk away.  I needed to see a formal-looking piece of paper placed in formal-looking box, dip my finger in purple dye, or just have something more substantial to show for the act at the very heart of our democracy.  A fleeting hope that a plastic machine aligns it’s ones and zeros properly doesn’t leave me awestruck about the power of the democratic system.  Adding insult to injury, I didn’t even get one of those dinky “I Voted” stickers to wear on my jacket.

An ominous sign?

"These are not wild-eyed conspiracy theorists asking these questions and making these allegations.  These are mainstream media sources pondering the security and reliability of voting machines, ranging from the New York Times to the Fox News Channel."

When I arrived at the polling station (the Sumner County Election Commission’s office), the friendly staff verified my identification, asked which party primary I would be voting in, and had me sign a form before going into the voting chambers.  I asked if they used electronic voting machines and was told, yes.  I then asked an employee if I could vote on a paper ballot (realizing the unlikelihood) and, after checking with a supervisor, this worker told me that was not an option.  I then proceeded to the voting booths where the poll worker inserted her card to activate the machine and gave me brief but clear instructions regarding which buttons to push.  I asked her if I could get a paper receipt printed when I was done (again, knowing the answer), and was politely told no.  So I pushed my buttons and walked away from the machine with an annoying feeling of nagging uncertainty. 

Electronic voting machines with no paper trail

For anyone unaware of the problems with electronic voting machines, I assure you, I am no paranoid conspiracy theorist (well, not always).  In fact, the very machine I used today (the MicroVote Infinity) reportedly locked up and lost votes in this very County in 2005 (the votes were reportedly recovered by a technician the day after the election.)  A much more disturbing situation was reported in Jasper County, South Carolina in 2004 when the same machine created “phantom votes” by calculating several hundred more votes than voters.  There are numerous other accusations of MicroVote machine problems, including other claims  of “phantom voters” and undercounts.  I wonder, however, about undocumented errors that might have gone completely unnoticed by poll workers or election officials.  The most disturbing concern, however, regards the deliberate manipulation of election machines.

A study done at Princeton University illustrated the ease and stealth with which a Diebold brand voting machine could be manipulated to produce whatever outcome a malicious person desired while leaving no trace of wrongdoing (click here for video).  Those familiar with electronic voting issues know that machine manufacturer Diebold has become infamous for irregularities, problems, and even suspect motives.  In fact, they recently changed the name of their voting machine division to Premier Election Systems after trying unsuccessfully to sell it for a year. 

The former CEO of Diebold, Walter O’Dell, was a loyal and active George W. Bush supporter while running the company.  In the summer of 2003, before the 2004 Presidential election, O’Dell was raising money for Bush in the battleground state of Ohio and wrote a letter to several big-money Ohio campaign donors which said, “I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year.”  The ensuing problems with Ohio’s voting irregularities led some to ask, did Diebold play a part in rigging the vote for Bush?

Again, these are not wild-eyed conspiracy theorists asking these questions and making these allegations.  These are mainstream media sources pondering the security and reliability of voting machines, ranging from the New York Times linked above to the Fox News Channel.  The latter even invited the people who conducted the Princeton Study to perform their Diebold test on air.  Confidence is so low in electronic voting (regarding Diebold especially) that allegations are starting to fly that Hillary Clinton is the newest beneficiary of alleged Diebold chicanery.  Regardless of the credibility of those claims, it goes to show how little faith voters have in our current election system, which is reason enough to eliminate paperless machines.

As for my little polling station here in Sumner County, Tennessee, I asked an employee of the Election Commission yesterday what they thought about the paperless machines used in their office.  This individual asked to remain anonymous due to the differences of opinion within local government.  They said that the low cost and ease of use of the paperless machines made them more desirable than the more expensive optical scan cards.  When asked about the accuracy of the machines, this person mentioned that touch-screens were the more problematic machines, which they did not use.  I was also told they had never had a problem with the current machines (at the time I asked the question I was unaware of the reported machine which had locked up and lost votes in 2005).  The employee also felt that hand counting by humans is more susceptible to error and mischief.   When asked whether paper receipts would make a recount more accurate if suspicions of mischief or technical problems arose, the employee seemed to concede they would with a nod of the head and a shrug of the shoulders.  They then repeated their feelings about the ease of use and cost-effectiveness of the current machines.

It remains to be seen whether Tennessee will move to replace paperless machines for the general election in November.  Movements are afoot to push legislators to make quick changes before then, but no decisions have been finalized either way.  No matter what, many Tennesseans are stuck with paperless machines next Tuesday making a day still worthy of great excitement and anticipation, a little less Super in Tennessee.