If there's anything we learned from the 2000 election it's that our system of election isn't capable of easily or reliably conducting an election where the results are very close. The margin of error simply exceeds the margin of victory and the physical technology (punch cards in this case) are too subject to problems of hanging, pregnant, dimpled and otherwise corrupted chad that can make voter intent difficult or impossible to reliably determine.
Furthermore, the integrity of the ballots seems to degrade the more often they are counted - as evidenced by the quantity of loose chad seen on the floors of the counting room. Each time the ballots are counted, more and more chad are removed either accidentally, through rough handling or by intent.
On this page I'm going to suggest an alternate form of conducting the election utilizing technology available today. I won't be commenting on the possible expense of such a system as I don't have that information handy, but I will try to keep the system as practical as possible.
I believe that ATM-style machines could be used effectively to conduct elections. The machines would ideally be touch-screen, but even the "buttons on the side" systems that most current ATM machines use would be workable.
I envision a number of freestanding ATM-style machines networked together with a local server to collect the votes. Currently all precincts have at least a ballot box that the completed ballots are deposited into, many of them have electronic boxes that accept the ballot and attempt to verify a basic competence in filling it out -- i.e. that you didn't darken the circles for multiple candidates in the same office, and similar. This server would replace those units and could be the size of a standard PC (in fact, it could be simply a powerful PC-based server).
All of the networking could be local - a live connection to a central headquarters would not be necessary, though I'll talk about that later as an interesting option.
Voter check-in could occur as it does now; precinct workers greet the voter, verify the voter's ID and check the voter's name off the list. Currently the voter is then handed a ballot. Under my system the voter would be handed an ATM-style card made from cardstock - we've all seen these temporary cards in common usage.
The user takes this card to the voting machine of their choice and insert the card into the machine. The machine then displays a list of offices the voter can cast ballots for and once selected displays a list of the candidates for that office. The voter touches the screen (or presses a button) to select the approprate candidate. The machine then displays a screen that reads:
You have selected "[Candidate's Name] for the Office of [Office]. Is this the vote you wish to cast?" The voter can then press "Yes" to continue on to vote for another office, or press "No" to back up and select a different candidate if they wish.
A similar process can be conducted for ballot measures.
Once the voter has cast votes for all of the offices they wish to vote for, they can touch "Finished Voting" where the candidates and offices they selected will be displayed for them on the screen, with one more request to confirm that these are the candidates and ballot issues they wish to vote for. If the press "Yes" then their vote will be electronically submitted to the server and a hardcopy, human readable will be printed for them.
The human readable hardcopy is an important part of this system. It can simply be a plain text table listing the offices down the left side and the selected candidates and ballot issues voted for listed down the right side. The voter could easily look at the page and verify that the machine has properly recorded their votes. If the voter wishes, a second copy could be printed for their records.
As they leave the polling place they will deposit the primary hardcopy in a "ballot box." These hardcopies will only be used in the case a recount is necessary or to spot check the results the server has counted.
In order to ensure that multiple hardcopy don't get deposited for the same voter the additional copy the voter requests can be prominently watermarked with "Voter copy" so that in a recount such pages can be readily discarded.
A human readable hardcopy takes a lot of the error out of recounts. No more guessing about which chad is punched, the words "Al Gore" or "George W. Bush" will be printed right on the page in a easily readable font.
The card functions as the voter's "ticket to vote". At any time during the process the voter can press "Cancel" and have the ATM card returned to them from the machine. Any votes they have cast thus far will be automatically discarded. The voter can then leave (to go to the restroom, for example) and come back later to restart the voting process.
Once the voter submits their ballot by touching "Finish Voting" and confirming their choices, the ATM machine will keep the card. At the end of the day the number of cards should exactly match the number of votes and should exactly match the number of voters given cards by the precinct workers at the table.
At the end of the day the server and ballot box will be physically carried to the election headquarters just as the ballot boxes are currently. At the election headquarters the votes can be uploaded into the main server where they can be almost instantly counted/tabulated. Election results will be much faster, unless a recount is needed.
Spot checks can be conducted via the human-readable hardcopy to verify that the voting server is reporting the proper votes.
If we're comfortable with the security and budgetary issues involved an electronic connection to Election HQ could be established allowing the local servers to transmit voter results to election headquarters even as the vote proceeds. The physical server would still be transported to HQ and the hardcopy would still be there to verify the integrity of the votes cast, of course.
Voting hours...currently the country uses staggered voting hours that aren't always convenient and lead to races being concluded in eastern states while western states are still voting. I suggest a new system whereby the polls are open for 24 hours, beginning at midnight, Eastern Standard Time on election day, and ending at midnight, Eastern Standard Time, the following day. That way everybody has the same 24 hours to vote. That means that the polls will open in Hawaii at around 6PM the day before election day and close at 6PM on election day, but no matter, those of us here in Hawaii can vote that evening or the next day...at the same time that night-owls in New York, Chicago or California are voting.
Every citizen should be able to find some time during that 24-hour period when they can go to vote, certainly it's more convenient than the current voting hours - people who've always voted in the morning still can. For those who'd rather vote at 11PM, they can.
Internet voting. My concern with voting from the comfort of your own home is one of safety/security. Currently we all go to a public place with precinct workers where we can all feel safe conducting our votes. If the votes are conducted from home, what's to stop gangs of thugs from intimidating voters, even standing over their shoulder to force them to vote in a certain manner? By having the polling places in public areas people can feel safe to vote their conscience.
Taking it even further...how about a day when touching the name of a candidate or a ballot measure provides online, onscreen, information about that candidate or ballot measure. Voters who are unsure could get more information to help them make an informed, albeit last-minute, choice.
Accessibility. Voters with poor eyesight could be able to press a button to get a larger font on screen, or perhaps another color scheme. Blind voters could use an audio system that prompts them for their votes with voice and Braille coded buttons. It could read back their voting selections to them (through headsets for privacy) for confirmation.