Reprinted with permission from THE NEWS-TIMES, 09-16-2005: Connecticut's voting machines are prone to error, and lack accessibility for disabled and non-English speaking voters.

Because of that finding by a federal panel, the state's 3,500 lever machines could be junked before the 2006 election. They would have to be replaced with new machines that cost between $5,000 and $20,000 each. State officials are scrambling to find out if the ruling by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission is binding. Many don't want to change from the old machines, which have worked fine so far, said Danbury Republican Registrar of Voters Mary Ann Doran. "These machines do not break down and are dependable," Doran said in defense of the lever machines. "We've had no floating chads. We've had no power outages. These work."

Connecticut is spending $33 million in federal money to buy new electronic voting machines. The state plans to ensure each polling place in the state has one electronic machine accessible to disabled people, with a Spanish ballot available and a paper voting receipt to ensure accuracy. The 769 new voting machines are supposed to be available in time for the 2006 election.

The new mandates from the federal election panel were issued under the auspices of the 2002 federal Help America Vote Act, or HAVA, passed in light of the debacle of the 2000 presidential race, when a massive malfunction of the counting process in Florida put the outcome of the George W. Bush-Al Gore race into question for two months. The commission was established to implement rules to guarantee voting would be fair and accessible throughout the country.

"The state looks to the EAC to give us guidance in meeting HAVA and they have given us none," said Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz Thursday. "The $33 million is enough to provide one machine per polling place. We don't know if it will be enough to replace the 3,500 lever machines."

Lever voting machines were not banned in the federal law. The new ruling is an advisory decision from the commission in response to a question from election officials in Pennsylvania.

"Disability advocates are ready to say good riddance to the lever voting machines," said Danbury resident Chris Kuell, vice president of the state's chapter of the National Federation of the Blind. "They are not accessible," Kuell said. "The United States has 54 million disabled people. People who are visually impaired, are in a wheelchair, or have problems with motor skills can think and vote, but they can't operate these machines."

Kuell said he was satisfied that Connecticut is at least getting one specific machine per precinct that is accessible, but hopes for the day when every district has more than one.

"California, Nevada, Kentucky and Texas have used electronic voting machines for years," Kuell said. "More states are going to have more accessible machines. This country's government is based on accurate voting and the right to vote."

Though the commission's rulings do not have the force of legislative decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that administrative commissions carry deferential weight when courts interpret laws. EAC spokeswoman Jeanie Layson said it's up to the U.S. Department of Justice to decide whether to enforce the ruling. A U.S. Justice Department spokesman on voting matters reached Thursday said he would research the decision, but did not call back and could not be reached later for comment.

The EAC decision faulted lever machines for not having a permanent paper record for "audit capacity" of votes. Also, the machines do not have a documented test to show they have an error rate of less than one in 500,000. Further, the machines are not accessible to the handicapped, and have no alternate language accessibility.

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said the commission's opinion is only advisory and not binding on any state. "The authority to decide whether, when, and how to enforce the statute belongs to the Department of Justice," Blumenthal said. "Regarding the central issue - what constitutes an adequate paper trail or audit capacity under the statute - we believe that the DOJ will carefully and objectively consider the Secretary of the State's position, and accept good-faith compliance with the law."

Many local officials hope Blumenthal is right. "I would like to know how they are going to implement this," said Brookfield Republican Registrar Karen Nindorf. "Who's going to pay for all this? The federal government is good at mandating things and not funding them. This is amazing to me."

Doran, the Danbury registrar, has a problem with forcing cities and towns to have ballots in an alternate language. "Every voter should read English," Doran said. "How can you be an intelligent voter if you cannot read English? All the campaign literature is in English." Under federal law, if a city or town has more than 1 percent of the population that predominantly speaks another language, it must provide a ballot in that language at each polling place. Seven municipalities in Connecticut, including Danbury, must provide ballots in Spanish.

Doran said local officials still do not know for certain what machines the federal government will and won't accept, so it would be tough to know the cost of replacing 42 voting machines. Newtown has 25 voting machines, one for every 900 people. But with electronic machines, traffic is expected to move slower, as many voters are unfamiliar with the machines. That could mean the town would have to buy 75 machines to replace its lever machines, and that would cost about $300,000, said Newtown First Selectman Herb Rosenthal, the president of the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities. Rosenthal, town clerks and registrars of voters will meet with Bysiewicz at 10 a.m. Wednesday to determine how the ruling might affect towns. "I don't see how we could comply with that now," said Rosenthal. "It's unclear who's going to pay for this. If the federal government tries to force this, I hope the state will try to get an injunction. We've never had a problem with voting as far as I'm concerned and now the federal government says the machines are no good."

EDITOR'S NOTE: Since this article has been written, changes have occurred in the procurement of new electronic voting machines. It was learned that Danaher, a company in Simsbury, CT, which was one of the three vendors represented in the demonstrations of the new voting machines, misled the Secretary of State's office about federal certification of their machine. Please refer to Chris Kuell's letter to Secretary of State, Susan Bysiewicz.

For more information, E-mail us at: info@nfbct.org