Electronic Voting in the US Widespread Computer Problems Hit Election
The Governor of South Carolina experienced for himself how strict the electoral laws were on Tuesday morning. The Republican Marc Sandford appeared punctually at 10 a.m. at his polling station in Sullivan's Island near Charleston, in order to cast his vote in front of the press. However, even though everyone recognised him at the polling station, at first he wasn't able to vote.
Sandford didn't have his voting registration with him and could only offer his driving licence as proof of identity, so the polling official refused to let him vote. It was only when his aides rushed to pick up the registration card, that the candidate was also accepted as a voter. His spokesperson was nonchalant about the first glitch of the day. Sandford was happy that the rules were being observed, he said.
The episode from South Carolina is one of the funnier mishaps from Tuesday. Election organizers had far greater problems with the voting technology. A lot of money had been spent to ensure that more than a third of all electoral precincts were equipped with modern automated voting machines. 55 million Americans were affected by the change-over. These were supposed to prevent a repeat of the fiasco at the presidential elections in 2000 and 2004, when there was massive doubt about the election results.
Renewed doubts about technology
At the end of an exciting Election Day, with many closely fought races, these doubts about the technology reappeared. Even if no one was talking about electoral fraud, the spectre of 2004 once again haunted America. There were problems in dozens of electoral precincts when the computers malfunctioned, broke down, or didnt accept the votes correctly.
In some places there was nothing left to do but go back to the original paper voting ballot. In many other precincts the electoral managers decided to simply keep the polling stations open longer so that everyone could cast their votes. The dress rehearsal of the supposedly infallible machines, which had never actually had to withstand an election, was a complete flop.
Among the most heavily affected states was Illinois, for example. 223 polling stations in Kane County alone had to remain open for an hour longer, because the voting machines presented massive problems. Meanwhile, Doris Anne Sadler, the county clerk in Marion County, Indiana, admitted that there had been definite start-up problems in her state as well. It was obvious that the older election officials in particular had difficulties operating the new technology, she said.
Voting chaos in many states
There were similar problems in the states of Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Ohio, Georgia and North Carolina. It remains to be seen whether these were the only problems states, as many precincts may not have even reported difficulties. Nevertheless, on Election Night the US media were already giving a lot of coverage to the chaos.
The problems with the new machines more or less mirrored those everyday tortures that most normal computer users have with their own PC. In some cases, for example in Pittsburgh, the election workers were not even able to boot up the machines on the morning of the election. According to some analysts, the cards for activating the computers were probably incorrectly programmed.
Later in the day, election workers at other polling stations experienced some hair-raising hours, when there were problems with the printers and voting had to be halted. Observers said that the problems seemed to arise from a mixture of technical problems and incompetence. Many election workers were obviously not sufficiently trained to operate the computers.
But there were other problems with the new machines. In New Jersey, several voters described how the name of a candidate had already been clicked when they inserted their voting card. The suspicion arose that some voters may, therefore, have inadvertently voted for that candidate. The incident is now going to be officially investigated.
In other cases it was the display on the screen that provoked criticism. In Virginia -- in a particularly close-run and important race for the Senate -- the name of the Democratic candidate James H. Webb only appeared in abbreviated form on the first page. Although this problem had been known about for weeks, it still hadnt been solved by Election Day. There were reports of similar abbreviated names in other states.
Telephone manipulation claims to be investigated
Also in Virginia, officials are looking at a possible voter manipulation by telephone. Several voters reported receiving phone calls sending them to the wrong polling station or telling them that they were not registered to vote. Due to the fact that Republicans had used telephone technology aggressively during the election campaign, suspicion quickly fell on them. The FBI had already launched an investigation by Election Night, they said.
Apart from the technological problems, there was no evidence of any massive electoral fraud. One case was reported in Tennessee, where someone cast the vote of a man who had died in 2003. But there were no other reports of similar incidences.
Both parties competing for control of the House of Representatives and the Senate have entire legions of observers, lawyers and experts in place looking to discover possible errors or even manipulations. Late into the night, not one of them had made any accusations against their political opponents.
However, this Election Day won't be without consequences. There had already been reports about the glitches in the new technology before the election. Now the electoral managers have two years to fix them. During the presidential elections, incidents such as those that occurred on Tuesday will be taken far more seriously and could lead to lawsuits. Following these midterm elections, it would seem that a disaster like that of 2004 cannot be completely ruled out.
