President Bush signed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) into law in 2002 with the promise of an improved voting process that would guarantee every registered voter the ability to vote independently and confidentially. For Americans with disabilities, HAVA meant the opportunity to have accessible polling sites, accessible voting machines and accessible ballots. Disturbingly, very little progress has been made in implementing these or any HAVA provisions, in large part because of debate on issues like voter verification systems and the security of electronic voting. It is up to people with disabilities and their advocates to get the focus of HAVA implementation back on addressing the systemic and physical barrier issues that have historically denied people with disabilities their constitutional right to vote. HAVA implementation must move forward now or people with disabilities will continue to be denied their right to vote.
Under HAVA, states are being provided federal monies to update their voting process, including the ability to purchase accessible voting machines and remove the systemic and physical barriers that have denied people with disabilities their constitutional right to vote. At least one accessible voting machine, which must be fully accessible for people with visual impairments as well, is required in each polling place by January 1, 2006. Another major requirement is that a voter be able to verify his or her vote, meaning that prior to a vote being cast and counted, a voter is given the chance to change his or her ballot choice.
The issue of voter verification systems and the security of electronic voting have been at the forefront of the current debate on electronic voting. Scientists from Johns Hopkins and Rice University reported that Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting system touch screen machines are susceptible to tampering. (DRE machines have been the most popular voting machines tested, due to their user-friendly capability and full accessibility for people with disabilities.) Their concerns are that hackers could enter the system, change votes and compromise the integrity of elections. Machine manufacturers have disputed this claim and there have been proposals on ways to improve security. The mere thought of election tampering, however, goes right to the root of what HAVA is supposed to avoid.
In response to this growing debate, legislation has been introduced in both houses of Congress to amend HAVA to require a voter-verified permanent record or hard copy. The voting receipt would allow voters to verify that their vote was cast and registered by the voting machine. For voters with visual impairments, the machine would have the audio capability to read aloud the vote that was cast. This legislation has been touted as a way for voters, especially those with disabilities, to be able to vote independently and confidentially.
Must Access be Sacrificed for Security?
While we agree in theory with those who call for voter verification provisions, United Spinal strongly opposes any type of voter verification legislation. As a disability rights organization, we are fully aware and support the need for people with disabilities to be able to vote independently and confidentially, with assurance that their vote has been counted. Unfortunately, no state has certified an accessible voter-verified paper ballot touch screen, nor are any states in the process of certifying one. Requiring the federal certification and implementation of such a system would delay the realization of HAVA, which affords people with disabilities 100% access to polling places and voting machines.
For people with disabilities, the issue has always been the accessibility of polling places and voting machines. It is important to realize that, regardless of how secure that voting technology may be, an individual with a disability will never be able to exercise his or her right to vote if they cannot access the polling place or voting machine due to architectural and systemic barriers. The
implementation of HAVA is an opportunity for the disability community to finally implement election reforms that will improve access to the electoral process. These reforms must not be delayed to wait for the creation of viable voter verification technology.
Furthermore, under HAVA, there was the creation of the Election Assistance Commission (EAC). The EAC was created to review procedures of the administration of federal elections, as well as distribute federal election reform funding to each state. Another major role of the EAC is to set the standard system for voting machines. With the EAC confirmation and procedural process up and running, voter verification legislation is no longer necessary. HAVA’s implementation, including the security of all voting machines and the accessibility of all polling places, is the commission’s responsibility.
While most people agree that the right to vote independently should be enjoyed by everyone, this issue has already become divisive. There are arguments that voter verification is unnecessary because methods can be employed to either prevent, or detect, tampering. Some argue that voter verification itself is subject to tampering and that requiring it will cause delays in obtaining accessible machines. Nevertheless, it is important that advocates and disability organizations remain committed to ensuring that the focus remain on access to polling sites and voting systems that are usable by everyone.
HAVA contains many important provisions that could have already been implemented were it not for the issue of voter verification. HAVA implementation must move forward now so that people with disabilities can exercise their right to vote.
Dan Anderson is Assistant Director of Legislation. John Rooney is a Senior Regional Advocate.
