Response to an article By Debora Gilbert, August 1, 2006, on the concerns
Columbia County Board of Elections officials have about the Help America
Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA),
It would appear that Officials from the Columbia County Board of elections
are more interested in fermenting dissent among senior citizens and people
with disabilities, rather than taking proper measures to implement HAVA and
maximize voter participation. In particular, Columbia county Officials
question the law itself, its mandate for new voting systems nationwide, and
how these new systems might have a negative impact among older voters and
election workers. These concerns might be understandable if Elected
Officials had taken the time to reach out to their citizens most effected
by HAVA but alas, they did not! Times of change and transition are times of
questioning and doubt, but these times also provide us with opportunities to
grow as individuals and as a society.
Ken Dow and Don Kline, Columbia County's Election Commissioners, worry that
"electronic voting machines may intimidate the county's elderly," but even
before HAVA came into being electronic voting systems were already in use in
the state. Saratoga County election officials have been running elections
with older model Sequoia Voting Systems in the City of Clifton Park for over
12 years. The response has been positive. Bill Fruci, Saratoga County
Election Commissioner, relates he has "never received a complaint from any
voter, even from elderly voters, and the election inspectors, most of whom
are older, have never reported any problems at all."
Aside from voting machine choice, Columbia County's Commissioners raise the
issue of voter's rights, or more to the point, whose votes are more right.
Mr. Kline and Mr. Dow declared, "Any benefit that new machines might provide
to disabled voters may be more than offset by the disenfranchisement of
older voters and the risk of degrading the integrity of the electoral
process." So older voter's votes are more important than ballots cast by
voters with disabilities? Are they proposing we should continue to
marginalize voters with disabilities and deny their right to exercise a core
civil right along with their peers? Haven't those acts of denial been
degrading the electoral process for over two hundred years?
Some other questions must be asked of the Commissioners. Do some older
voters ever have arthritis, severely limiting their hand and arm dexterity?
Do older voters ever develop cataracts and/or other types of visual
deterioration thereby decreasing their ability to see or perhaps leading to
a complete loss of sight altogether? Do older voters ever develop age
related mobility difficulties necessitating the use of mobility devices such
as scooters, wheelchairs, or walkers? Could it be said that some older
voters are, in fact, voters with disabilities? Just as important, who
declared that electronic voting systems are only for the use of citizens
with disabilities? According to the Columbia County Commissioners, the
answer to that question is - what is "dubious". On the one hand, will this
system be utilized only by the "nine" disabled citizens of Columbia county
or will it also be used by the few older voters who are not intimidated by
electronic voting? When citizens wishing to exercise the right to vote and
are unable to utilize the non-electronic voting system, should they simply
not vote at all?
According to Messrs. Dow and Kline, "Elections must not only be honest, they
must be believed to be honest." In light of our nation's recent election
history how are the Commissioners defining "honest"? How about this for
baseline honesty in elections: when everyone who is eligible to vote and can
exercise that fundamental right privately and independently - as our
Democratic Republic - inherently stands for: that, is the baseline!