If you are blind and intend to vote using an adaptive voting machine like the ES&S InkaVote Plus (right), journalist Brad Friedman warns that your votes may be counted incorrectly. Friedman, who is sighted, voted using an InkaVote Plus device in Los Angeles County during a primary election, in order to see for himself the accuracy of the machine designed for voters who are blind.
The results were shocking: Four of his votes were flipped, resulting in a ballot printout giving his votes to candidates for whom he did not vote. With twelve contests and initiatives on the ballot, one third of Friedman's votes were flipped.
Friedman was able to have his ballot voided and the machine sequestered for examination. However, a blind voter or voter with low vision would be unlikely to see the incorrectly printed paper ballot, with bubbles filled in for the wrong candidates. According to Friedman's blog, the following errors occurred:
- "Office No. 72: I chose to vote for Harvey A. Silberman (bubble #117), ES&S InkaVote Plus selected Serena Raquel Murillo (bubble #118) for me instead.
- Office No. 84: I chose to vote for Lori-Ann C. Jones (bubble #135), ES&S InkaVote Plus marked Pat Connolly (bubble #132) for me instead.
- Office No. 95: I chose to vote for Patricia D. Nieto (bubble #141), ES&S InkaVote Plus printed my choice as Lance E. Winters (bubble #142) for me instead.
- Office No. 125: I chose to vote for James N. Bianco (bubble #159), ES&S InkaVote Plus filled-in Bill Johnson (bubble #158) for me instead."
A number of other flaws in the voter accessibility system were also observed. Notably, the only accessible voting machine in the precinct had never been used, despite enormous voter turnout in the February presidential primaries. In fact, the scanner portion of the machine was out of order when Friedman used it to vote, resulting in an increased possibility of errors like overvotes. Poll workers said that they had called the county for a replacement, but none had arrived. Strikingly, in February of 2007, in the same precinct, the InkaVote Plus machine was completely unusable due to exposed wires and no replacement was delivered by the county.
In addition, Friedman observed that the only accessible voting machine was designed for individuals with visual impairments, and that no machine adapted for voters with mobility or dexterity impairments was available. According to the journalist's observations, this appears to violate the 2002 Help America Vote Act, or HAVA. The law requires that voters with disabilities be permitted to vote in a "private and independent" manner. Had Friedman been a voter with a disability preventing him from independently pressing the buttons of the InkaVote machine, he would have been required to ask a poll worker for assistance.
When Friedman inquired about this apparent failure to meet federal standards, he was told that no machines were available using sip and puff or other adaptive technology for voters with disabilities. This is untrue: AutoMark, as Friedman points out in his blog, manufactures a voting device that can be used through a sip and puff tube, and it is certified for use in California. This device is distributed by ES&S, like the InkaVote Plus in use at Friedman's precinct. Below, a diagram displays features of the AutoMark device:
Have you used an accessible voting machine? Were you able to vote privately and independently as required by HAVA? If you are visually impaired, what steps will you take to ensure that your votes are not flipped if you must use an electronic voting machine this November? Leave a comment, or talk about it in Discussions.
