E-vote tab adds up to big trouble

Salt Lake Tribune by Matt Canham | Dec. 17, 2006 (News Analysis)

Democracy isn't cheap, but it sure used to be less expen- sive.
Switching from punch cards to touch-screen voting machines doubled the cost of this year's election.
And taxpayers will continue to hand over millions of dollars to machine-maker Diebold as long as the state uses the equipment.
"I'm not sure any of us realized how much it is going to cost to own and operate this system," said Michael Cragun, elections director for the ... Full Story »

Posted by Mike LaBonte

More Info

Tags Help
Subjects: Politics
Topics: Election Reform
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Mike LaBonte - Dec 19, 2006 - 2:56 PM PST
Reviewed by: Fabrice Florin (review), Laura Perkins (review), Mike LaBonte (review)
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Like | | | Comments

To:


Separate email addresses with commas.
25 recipients max.

Note:

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Silhouette_sml
2.5
 by Laura Perkins - Dec. 19, 2006

A discussion of the financial costs of moving to a Diebold system without any discussion of the parallel cost to election integrity seems flawed. What's likely to happen is that local areas will pay the huge financial cost, then new federal rules will make them change their systems again because of the accuracy problems.

See Full Review » (8 answers)
Member_photo_thumb
3.3
 by Mike LaBonte - Dec. 20, 2006

This article completely avoids the usual discussion about touch-screen voting machines - whether or not they can be trusted - and instead focuses on the high cost and difficulties administering them. It doesn't quite get all the relevant facts about touch-screen and optical scan costs, but it does provide a good view into the election cost problem.

Mike posted this story.
See Full Review » (12 answers)
Fabportrait_smallsquare_180x180_thumb
3.0
 by Fabrice Florin - Dec. 19, 2006
See Full Review » (1 answer)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

Sort by: Oldest | Newest Hide All Replies
NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

2.9

Average
from 3 reviews (30% confidence)
Quality
2.9
Facts
3.0
Fairness
4.0
Information
3.0
Sourcing
3.0
Style
3.0
Accuracy
3.5
Balance
3.0
Context
2.5
Popularity
2.9
Recommendation
3.0
# Reviews
1.5
# Views
3.2
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!