County Clerk
VII. Conclusion
The 1999 Travis County Election Study Group performed a comprehensive review of the policies, procedures, and equipment related to the administration of the Travis County election system. During that process, the group determined that an essential part of an election system is the timely release of election returns. The group also believes that the established community standard of providing completed or substantially completed election returns by 10:00 PM is reasonable and will promote public trust. While the current voting system has served Travis County well, it can no longer meet this standard of timely returns.
The following factors have strained the capacity of our voting system, including Travis County's ability to provide timely election results:
- present policy regarding the mandated intent of the voter audit,
- the time required for election judge ballot box delivery,
- the rapidly growing and changing community population and political environment,
- the positive trend towards joint elections, and
- additional requirements of pending ADA legislation and current lawsuits.
While each of the above factors contributes to the system's problem, the study group found that probably the largest obstacle to the release of timely return is the policy of performing ballot audits at the central counting station. State regulations require election officials to examine every voted ballot individually to ensure that the scanning machine will count a voter's ballot choices accurately. When the current optical scan system was implemented, the voted ballots were audited in the precinct by the precinct pollworkers during election day voting. That preparation included conducting the mandated intent of the voter audit and sort as well as straightening and aligning the ballots for counting.
About five years ago, the precinct audit procedure came under fire by some members of the community concerned about the security of the voted ballots if the ballots are audited in the precinct. Although no incident of inappropriate handling of ballots at the precinct was ever substantiated, in 1996 the county clerk reluctantly chose to audit the ballots at the end of the day and only at central counting station. The ballots were not straightened, sorted or audited until they arrived at the central counting station for processing. Due to the change, field resources are no longer available to perform this task, so resources have been added to the central counting station. However, 75 to 100 people cannot do in two hours what previously close to 1,000 people had twelve hours to complete. This change in policy created severe constraints on Travis County's ability to quickly process the voted ballots at central counting.
In addition, the study group supports the right of all voters to a secret ballot. Travis County's current system does not comply with this standard. Pending federal legislation may require all voting systems to comply with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) by December 31, 2000.
How Can We Solve These Challenges?
In the study group's review of current election procedures, we found no changes that would resolve all issues identified in the problem statement. Although returning to the precinct audit would significantly address the time issue, it is equally important that voters trust the process. The study group gives little support to the idea of returning the ballot audit back to the precinct and therefore recognizes that the most efficient approach is unavailable to Travis County. Therefore, the study group concludes that late returns are inevitable under the current system and no procedural changes will address all factors outlined above. We further conclude that an upgraded technology is paramount to ensure trust and confidence in our electoral system.
Is Election Technology Available That Will Improve Efficiency and Maintain Voter Trust?
The study group found that election system technology has progressed dramatically in the last ten years, since Travis County purchased the current optical scan system. Advancements in technology and changes in law in the last three years are among the factors in this evolution. Recent legislation allows for electronic transfer of election results from the precinct to the central counting station. This change addresses the problem of late returns resulting from delay in election judges' deliveries of voted ballots for central processing. Election law now also allows more than one voting system to be used in a given election. Therefore, more solutions are available to address the issues of the Americans with Disabilities Act and any future statutory requirements.
The study group understands that an election industry standard calls for a substantial upgrade or total replacement of ballot counting technology about every ten years. Our current optical scan voting system was a replacement for the previous punch card voting system. Purchased for approximately $680,000, Travis County's optical scan ballot counting has served the voters of our communities well over the last decade, but our communities are expanding. Travis County's registered voter population has more than doubled over the last decade, with no signs of slowing down.
Likewise, technology has advanced and will continue to do so. While the election profession does not seek to be on the cutting edge of technology, the accuracy and efficiency brought by updated automation cannot be ignored. Counties such as Dallas, Tarrant, and El Paso have made the change employing direct record electronic and/or precinct ballot counting systems with exciting results -- voters and election judges alike have embraced the technology. El Paso County is seriously investigating the prospect of phasing in an all-DRE system. Harris, Bexar, and Hidalgo counties are also investigating the prospect of updating their voting systems to include the latest technology.
Where Do We Go From Here?
The study group concludes that Travis County, similar to other urban Texas counties, has reached the point in time to address a change in the way we cast our ballots, the way these ballots are counted, and the method by which returns are reported. We further conclude that, like the purchase of the current optical scan system, Travis County should pursue the solution that most addresses our problems efficiently, completely, and economically. Travis County is considered a leader in the world of high technology. The system by which Travis County voters cast their ballots should be more representative of our rising high tech industry.
- return to Available Systems
- continue on to Recommendation
