To the Editor:

What a disappointment to see the editorial staff of the Inquirer ignoring the dangers of ATM-style voting machines ("Let PA. high court cast decisive ballot", 3/1/06).  ATM-style machines are indeed speedy, but their results cannot be verified.  If a candidate contests an election, there is no meaningful way to recount, since there is no reliable, accountable record of each voter's intent.  If evidence surfaces throwing electoral results into doubt, there is no meaningful way to reassure voters that the government they have is the government that they chose.

Do we sacrifice democracy for the sake of convenience?

Also disappointing is the subtle misrepresentation of the plaintiffs' claims in the suit in Westmoreland County.  Installing the ATM-style machines this year would deprive voters of a right explicitly stated in the Pennsylvania constitution.  In the words of Judge Pellegrini's decision, "nothing justifies non-compliance with the express mandates of the Pennsylvania Constitution."

Do we weaken our Constitution for the sake of convenience?

Fortunately for Pennsylvania voters, election officials and candidates, there is a simple way out of the current mess, allowing compliance with both federal laws and the Pennsylvania Constitution. Counties can easily implement ballot-scanning technology already approved by the Pennsylvania Department of State.  These machines are fast and economical, and the ballots marked by voters are the kind of voter-verified paper record needed to perform a meaningful recount.

 

Stephanie Frank Singer
Philadelphia