In Search of a Perfect Election.

After the election of 2000, calls for reforming how we vote are ringing throughout state legislatures.

Just when you thought you had seen it all, the never-ending 2000 election took place. The vocabulary of average Americans expanded to include new terms like dimpled chad, butterfly ballot and Votomatic. Pundits were actually at a loss for words to sum it all up, but TV made them keep talking. And Americans began to scratch their heads and ask, "Is there a better way?"

States are now in a period of intense post-election evaluation like never before. Calls for reform are resounding in just about every single state capitol. What can be done to halt the decline in voter turnout? Should we vote on a different day? Is it possible to conduct a perfect election?

Curtis Gans of the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate is also sounding the alarm. The 2000 voter turnout was only 50.7 percent of the eligible voters, he says, up slightly from the woeful 49.1 percent turnout in 1996. Voter turnout numbers have been on the decline for more than 40 years. It will be some time before a state-by-state report is completed, but early indications are that turnout declined in most states despite the overheated (though still lackluster) sprint for the White House. Only in the "battleground" states that received numerous presidential candidate visits did turnout actually improve markedly. And all of this was notwithstanding a massive get-out-the-vote effort by unions, the National Association of Colored People and GOP groups. The 50 percent also included Oregon where the convenience of vote by mail resulted in more than 80 percent of registered voters casting ballots. Gans bemoans the fact that half of American voters continue to stay at home on Election Day.

As blue ribbon task forces and special commissions are forming around the country to examine the elections process, they have plenty to consider. From voting early at the supermarket to voting on Saturday, legislators and reformers have some innovative options.

But the election reform that is perhaps the most provocative is Internet voting. The Internet is far past the novelty stage and is beginning to permeate all aspects of society. Many Americans now routinely turn to it to shop or find out how to cure common ailments. Forrester Research estimates that more than 20 million households did their holiday gift buying online last year. Other estimates are that nearly 60 percent of American households are connected to the 'Net. Does that mean that making the Election Day pilgrimage to the local school or VFW hall may soon be a remnant of the past?

Many legislators around the country think that cyber voting is the wave of the future. California Assembly Majority Floor Leader Kevin Shelley has introduced legislation dubbed the Voting and Modernization Act. It will require the California secretary of state to implement modern voting technology including on-line voting.

"The events in Florida have placed our current voting systems under a mathematical microscope," he says. "What we've learned is that paper ballots and vote recounts equal fuzzy math."

Colorado Representative Lauri Clapp says she will introduce legislation to allow smaller jurisdictions to experiment with binding Internet voting. The New York Senate has a new task force to review voting procedures and methods including Web-based elections. And in Michigan, Senator Dave Jaye has been quoted as saying, "The Florida debacle crystallized the reform. People make major purchases and investments online with confidentiality--people should be able to vote online as well."

Congress is also getting in the act. Senator Barbara Boxer from California has asked the General Accounting Office to study the feasibility of on-line voting. New York Senator Charles Schumer and Kansas Senator Sam Brownback are asking for funding to allow the Federal Elections Commission to study various issues including Internet voting.

"Despite over 200 years of elections, we vote as if we still lived in the 19th century," Schumer says.

Internet voting is getting so much attention because proponents believe it could solve the vexing problem of declining voter turnout by making voting more convenient. Some polls seem to back that up. In three counties in Arizona and California, a nonbinding test of Internet voting was conducted in conjunction with last year's presidential election. An exit poll of people who voted using computers found that 65 percent would vote from home if the state would let them. Fifteen percent said they would vote from their office, and 19 percent reported that they would still go to the polling place. Another survey in October of 539 on-line consumers found that 82 percent of them would vote online if possible. And although not glitch free, the Democratic presidential primary in Arizona was actually conducted using the Internet in March 2000. Voter turnout increased more than seven times over 1996 numbers with nearly 40,000 ballots being submitted through the ether of cyberspace.

Those pushing Internet voting also believe that it will attract young, tech-savvy voters to the process. The 18- to 30-year-old voters are substantially less likely to cast a ballot than any other age group. Another potential benefit from cyber voting would be the instant gratification of having immediate results and not having to wait for hours, or days, of vote tabulation.

But the barriers to Internet voting may prove to be daunting. One huge obstacle is the threat of hackers and orchestrated fraud. The California Internet' Voting Task Force was convened by Secretary of State Bill Jones in 1999 and delivered the most comprehensive study to date on the issue in January 2000. The task force essentially recommended a go-slow approach that involves more study.

"For the foreseeable future, Internet voting should be viewed only as a supplement to, not a replacement of, traditional paperbased voting," its report concluded. On the specific issue of security, the task force said, "Potential criminal electronic attacks on computer software, such as destructive 'viruses' or 'Trojan Horse' software, create a serious threat to Internet voting."

Another serious hurdle is proving that the person voting on the other end of the World Wide Web is indeed who he says she is. And perhaps the biggest obstacle is the "digital divide" that exists between more affluent Americans who are more likely to be connected to the Web than poor Americans. The digital divide could also present problems under the Voting Rights Act that was passed in 1965 to ensure that minority voters had fair and equal access to the polls.

Internet voting may still be on the distant horizon, but it is sure to be high on the list when legislators start to talk about ways to bring voting technology into the 21st century. One thing is fairly certain. Punch card machines with their hanging chads are probably not going to be around much longer. Except in museums.

Tim Storey is NCSL's elections expert.

NCSL TASK FORCE WILL WORK ON ELECTION REFORM

A special NCSL task force on election reforms will provide bipartisan guidance and consulting services to legislatures as they move to enact voting reforms and restore public faith in the election process.

"Any state reforms in election procedures have to begin with the legislature," said NCSL President Jim Costa, a state senator from California. "The new task force will ensure that states have the tools and information they need to undertake this critical effort."

Among other things, task force members will seek to identify and recommend best practices on election laws, study the effect of recent changes in voting, such as early voting and mail-in ballots, and provide technical assistance to states on implementing state election reforms. They were to be appointed and begin public hearings early this year.