'Secret' is out amid ballot woes

New York Post ^ | September 15, 2010 | By SALLY GOLDENBERG and JENNIFER FERMINO

[NoExpectations]

Civic-minded New Yorkers yesterday came face to face for the first time with the future of voting, but glitches and gaffes -- and a shocking lack of privacy that left many ballots not so secret -- had many mourning the loss of the lever. The debut of the city's optical-scan voting machines -- the first change in the system in 80 years -- featured long lines, delays in opening polling places, clueless election workers and some brand-new machines on the fritz. "What are they going to do for a presidential election?" groused one Manhattan voter after casting her ballot at a nearly empty polling site and enduring delays. GOING PUBLIC: Poll workers yesterday assist a voter whose ballot was visible for all to see. Paul Martinka GOING PUBLIC: Poll workers yesterday assist a voter whose ballot was visible for all to see. The snafus and hiccups left Mayor Bloomberg fuming. "This is a royal screw-up and completely unacceptable," he said. Turnout was light -- some estimates said 10 percent of registered voters participated -- but that didn't make it easier for those who cast ballots. The most startling change was the absence of the old voting machines with levers and cozy curtains that ensured privacy. Voters yesterday were handed paper ballots and directed to cubicles with low dividers to mark their choices. Then they carried their ballots to scanning machines. The scanners took the ballots -- as poll workers looked on -- and electronically recorded the votes. "Filling it out was fine, but there should be more privacy in the place where you put it in the machine," said 74-year-old Manhattan voter Bernard Seigel. Polling places were supposed to open at 6 a.m., but many voters showed up later and found their sites not in operation.

[NoExpectations]

I'm sure many of you have used these scanners before but I was not happy. When I walked into my polling place I instantly felt zero privacy. I had to declare my party in order to get the paper ballot. I live in a very Dem district so that alone sets me apart. When it came time to scan, the poll worker basically walked right up to the machine and could easily see all my choices. Talk about voter intimidation!

[rex regnum insanit]

As I recall, one of the poll workers always told our party registration to whoever was setting the machine in the old system so the other parties names could be locked. That being said, the old system was a lot easier and probably no more secure than this gizmo. I found the lack of privacy hilarious. The poll worker was surprised that I put the ballot inside the “privacy sleeve” before proceeding to the scanner. My wife went to the poll later in the afternoon and when I asked about the privacy sleeve she said, “What sleeve. There was no sleeve.” They were lucky this was a relatively short ballot. The general election should be quite interesting.

[McGavin999]

Nah, you’d have to be a savant to read those things that quickly. We’ve been using them for ages here in Arizona and they’re fine. Quick, accurate and you get to put the ballot in the scanner yourself and see the count. As to the workers getting too close, just complain about that to the PTB and it will be stopped. There should be someone standing by the machine but well back and only observe.

[miss marmelstein]

As if this was the first and only time New York screwed up the voting, lol! I voted for 25 years in the city and it was a nightmare each and every time. Dumb and lazy poll workers, ridiculously old-fashioned write-in ballets, huge, unwieldy register logs, dirty polling stations, confusion, chaos, the list goes on and on.

[Yo-Yo]

When it came time to scan, the poll worker basically walked right up to the machine and could easily see all my choices. Talk about voter intimidation!

This is not a problem with optical scan ballots. This is a problem with the proceedures at your precinct.

I think the optical scan ballot is the best way to vote. You have the speed of electronic voting, with a paper trail for manual recounts.

In my polling place (in Michigan,) the optical scan ballot is held inside of a manilla folder-like sleeve. You go to your voting station, open the folder, vote, then close the folder again.

Just enough of the top of the ballot sticks up out of the sleeve that the optical reader can grab the ballot and suck it into the machine out of the sleeve. Nobody sees the ballot after you leave your voting station.

[NoExpectations]

OK so that is how it is supposed to work. The poll worker TOOK MY BALLOT and put it into the scanner completely exposed. There was a sleeve but no instructions on it for feeding it into the machine. Just the title “Ballot Sleeve”. I thought that was a freaking joke considering this guy took the ballot out of my hand. That makes a lot more sense now.

[kittymyrib]

What strange optical scanners NY must have. The ones we’ve used in Texas for the past three elections don’t require anyone to scan the ballot in. The machine does that and then gives you a tape verifying your ballot.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

The snafus and hiccups left Mayor Bloomberg fuming. "This is a royal screw-up and completely unacceptable"

So who runs elections? Government? Or the private sector?

Anytime you read about a giant fuster-cluck, it is ALWAYS government. The competitive market place weeds out non-performers in the private sector. Incompetence gets promoted in government.

[faucetman]

There is a learning curve here. I found the system mostly good. I agree that having to declare your party was a little unnerving, but it is after all a primary. The privacy issue for me was a non issue. I live in a small town. All of the stations had a wall behind them. No one can see your ballot from the side or front. I did not see any privacy sleeve. The man at the scanner did tell me how to insert the ballot. He could see my choices, but this was due to my ignorance, voting for the first time this way.
Now I know that I can turn the ballot over so the back (reverse)is face up and in this case it was a blank page. Had I known I could do this the poll worker would have seen nothing. Now I know.

If you let a poll worker touch your ballot, you did not read or follow the directions plainly posted in the cubicle.

It was easier and faster. I had my apprehensions, but they were unfounded.

[SandRat]

Ever wonder why.. all these Sooo-Fist-Tea-K-ted Easterners have all these problems; while us Western Flyover Country Unsophisticated/Uncultured Cowboys vote just fine this way with no problems?

[rex regnum insanit]

You’ve got that right! I’m convinced that the State of New York could break a steel ball with a rubber hammer. I lived in the city for 30 years and took for granted that voting was a long, slow process. I never understood the delays, but they seemed built into the system. I’ve lived on Long Island for the last 30 years and its never taken more than 10 minutes to vote even in years with very high turnout. With this new system and in a year where turnout could be high it’s going to be dicey!

[McGavin999]

LOL! Sometimes it’s better to be hicks.

[rex regnum insanit]

Now, now! Be nice! This is New York after all. We’ve managed to elect Hillary!, Schumer and Spitzer. And now you expect us to mark a paper ballot and put it through a scanner too? I think you’re asking too much of us!

[Oatka]

As I recall, one of the poll workers always told our party registration to whoever was setting the machine in the old system so the other parties names could be locked.

I understand that under the old lever system in the coal mining towns, the union guys put coal dust on the opposition's levers, then let it be known they'd inspect the voters' fingers as they left.

I can remember when, under the old system, you could only press the lever for the entire Party's slate and not individuals. Both parties fought like mad to retain that system.

[BfloGuy]

It all worked very smoothly in my little upstate town. Privacy sleeves were provided and one of the poll-watchers helped my mother (who uses a walker) by scanning her ballot for her -- carefully holding it upside down so as not to see her vote.

Given that it was Congress who forced us to change from our beloved lever machines, I think New York made a very good decision with the system it chose. And I don't say that very often about NY's government.

[SandRat]

and you elect Charlie Rangel. lol